2019 teaching portfolioelearn.uzulu.ac.za/neilevans/docs/ndevansteaching... · 2019-09-10 ·...

VICE CHANCELLOR’S EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AWARDS

2019

TEACHING PORTFOLIO

Dr Neil Davies Evans

Department of Information Studies

Faculty of Arts

Category: Developed academic

Contact details: [email protected]

Tel: 035 9026169

Web: http://elearn.uzulu.ac.za/neilevans/

mailto:[email protected]

http://elearn.uzulu.ac.za/neilevans/

2

Table of Contents Motivation ................................................................................................................... 4

Synopsis ..................................................................................................................... 4

Teaching philosophy .................................................................................................. 5

1. Teaching and learning practice ..................................................................... 7

2. Assessment practices ................................................................................. 10

(a) My current assessment methods ............................................................. 11

(b) Areas for development ............................................................................. 11

3. Curriculum and course development ........................................................... 12

4. Peer and student evaluations ...................................................................... 15

(a) Peer evaluation of assessment types ...................................................... 15

(b) Moderation ............................................................................................... 21

(c) External examiners .................................................................................. 21

(d) Student evaluations ................................................................................. 22

(e) Teaching and Learning Centre ................................................................ 27

(f) Improving my assessment and moderation practices .............................. 27

5. Scholarly teaching and learning .................................................................. 29

(a) Peer Refereed / DHET accredited Articles ............................................... 30

(b) Peer reviewing for DHET accredited journals .......................................... 31

(c) Seminar, Workshop and Conference Presentations ................................ 31

(d) Understanding at risk students ................................................................ 31

(e) Achievements and Awards ...................................................................... 32

6. Leadership roles .......................................................................................... 32

(a) Committees .............................................................................................. 33

References ............................................................................................................... 34

ANNEXURE 1 .......................................................................................................... 36

ANNEXURE 2 ............................................................................................................ 0

ANNEXURE 3 ............................................................................................................ 1

ANNEXURE 4 ............................................................................................................ 3

ANNEXURE 5 .......................................................................................................... 17

ANNEXURE 6 .......................................................................................................... 18

ANNEXURE 7 .......................................................................................................... 19

ANNEXURE 8 .......................................................................................................... 20

ANNEXURE 9 .......................................................................................................... 21

ANNEXURE 10 ........................................................................................................ 22

ANNEXURE 11 ........................................................................................................ 23

3

ANNEXURE 12 ........................................................................................................ 24

ANNEXURE 13 ........................................................................................................ 26

ANNEXURE 14 ........................................................................................................ 27

ANNEXURE 15 ........................................................................................................ 28

ANNEXURE 16 ........................................................................................................ 29

ANNEXURE 17 .......................................................................................................... 0

4

Motivation I acknowledge that one of the core missions of higher education (HE) institutions is to teach and train, and, specifically, to add to the sustainable development and holistic improvement of society (UNESCO, 1998). To reflect on how I fulfil this core mission, I have presented my teaching philosophy and practices, my assessment practices, my curriculum development initiatives, my peer and student evaluations, my thoughts on scholarly teaching and learning and, finally, my leadership roles in HE and society. Through this self-reflection, I recognised that, by constructing a teaching portfolio, it will provide me with a framework and way forward for professional development by understanding:

1. What I do (in my teaching and learning and leadership roles)? 2. Why I do it (in context of UNIZULU’s mission and vision)? 3. How I do it (delivery and assessment)? 4. Why I do it in this way (theoretical perspective)? 5. How well I do it (feedback and evaluation)? 6. How I could do it better (self-reflection for improvement)?

This evidence gathering and self-reflection exercise could then be used to support the future students that I teach and contribute to the vision of the University of Zululand:

“…to be a leading comprehensive University providing quality education. Its mission is to provide globally competitive graduates, relevant for the human capital needs of South Africa, by providing quality education which upholds high standards of research and academic excellence”.

Synopsis Dr Evans is currently a senior lecturer and HOD in the Department of Information Studies at the University of Zululand. He has over a decade of higher education teaching experience in the fields of chemistry, communication science and information studies, where he now specialises in teaching multimedia and information and communication technology related courses at both under- and post-graduate levels. His research interests encompass the fields of the scholarship of teaching and learning, blended learning, predicting the acceptance of e-learning technologies, cloud computing, multi-media, clinical informatics and school libraries. His community engagement has been well established within school libraries and the Mtunzini Conservancy. Dr Evans has made a significant contribution to the promotion of e-learning at the University of Zululand which has been acknowledged by the Teaching and Learning Centre (annexure 3) and CHE-HELTASA National Excellence in Teaching and Learning Awards committee. He received the Vice Chancellor’s Excellence in Teaching award in the emerging academic category in 2017 (annexure 1)and received the Teaching Advancement at Universities (TAU) fellowship in 2019 (annexure 2).

Qualifications

Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education, UKZN - 2018

PhD, Library and Information Science, University of Zululand - 2013

MA, Communication Science, University of Zululand - 2006

B.Sc. majoring in Biochemistry and Chemistry, University of Port Elizabeth – 1994

5

Senior Certificate with a University Exemption, English, Afrikaans, Biology, Science, Mathematics and Geography (all HG), Woodridge Preparatory School & College - 1978 – 1989

Skills Matrix

I am currently HOD and senior lecturer in the Department of Information Studies where I provide leadership in the three pillars of academia (teaching and learning, research and community engagement). I also coordinated departmental administration, stand on university committees, counsel students, act as mentor and appraiser to colleagues, advising on their personal development. I have completed the following short skills programs for middle managers: Employee Motivation, Coaching and Mentorship Skills, Employee Relations Management - Handling employee discipline and Grievances, Employee Management - Line Management Functions and Conflict Resolution in the Workplace. I link my research with what I teach and have contributed to ten DHET accredited articles in the last nine years (annexure 4). I have contributed to the promotion of e-learning at UNIZULU by administrating the front ends of the four faculty instances of the Moodle Learning Management System (LMS). I am a competent webmaster for various departmental (www.lis.uzulu.ac.za), e-learning portal (http://elearn.uzulu.ac.za), journal (http://www.inkanyiso.uzulu.ac.za) and conference (http://mbali.unizulu.ac.za) websites. I have maintained my Internet Service Provider business with web, email and domain name servers (www.satcom.co.za) — as I feel it is important to have practical knowledge in the technology-related fields in which I teach. As a conservationist, community developer and a director and treasurer of the Mtunzini Conservancy, I have conducted various surveys and written proposals for projects which incorporated environmental education, recycling and waste management, permaculture and small-scale enterprises for businesses and rural communities (annexure 5).

Personal Attributes I consider myself a highly proficient, dynamic and dedicated individual with good interpersonal, organisational, administrative, analytical, verbal and written communication skills. I have excellent ICT skills that facilitate the use of technology to aid teaching and learning and improve the lives of the people I teach and work with (annexure 2).

Teaching philosophy As an academic in higher education (HE) I take cognisance of the fact that although I am required to be an expert in the discipline of information studies, unless I have the appropriate pedagogy and technological tools to communicate and facilitate my knowledge and experience to my learners, this expertise is inadequate. I believe based on past experiences and prior learning in HE that a good teacher needs to understand the diversity of one’s students — how they develop and learn and that most learners actively construct and transform their own knowledge. I have therefore conceptualised and adapted the pedagogy connectivism (figure 1), in which technology together with language and media act as conduits of information, promoting greater student participation, collaboration and interaction between networked learners, who socially construct an active learning experience within different learning networks (Siemens, 2004a in Evans, 2013). I believe that within a

6

HE context, well-rounded learning outcomes are achieved through blended multi-threaded networks of face-to-face, e-learning, research, community outreach, experiential learning, mentoring and self-learning. I have therefore implemented resources like Moodle, which was specifically designed around the pedagogical concept of social constructivism of which the theoretical foundations were laid by Jean Piaget during the first half of the 20th century (Atherton, 2011 in Evans, 2013). Broadly speaking, I believe that social constructivism refers to the concept or understanding that learning and teaching is a collective process in which we are both teachers and learners at the same time and are thus better able to understand the information we have constructed by ourselves.

Figure 1: Connectivism: process of creating a learning network applied within the University of Zululand’s learning ecology (adapted from Siemens, 2004a in Evans, 2013:44)

Within my department of Information Studies at the University of Zululand this blend should include:

Face-to-face transfer of information through theory and practical lectures; mentoring by senior or more experienced students both informally and though the Teaching and Learning Grant tutorial support programme.

7

Experiential learning, where students volunteer for work experience during their holidays, and their resulting portfolios are examined for a practical course work mark. This is a compulsory module in the department; however, some students do not always find positions in their primary fields of interest.

Research, which is an essential component of any academic programme. There is a module called research methods, which is a compulsory 3rd year module within the department and the outcome is a mini-dissertation.

Community outreach, which allow some students to work as research assistants within sponsored community outreach projects.

E-learning, which uses ICTs and ISs within teaching and learning. The department has two of its own computer labs and many of its modules are offered on the Learning Management System (LMS) Moodle.

Mentoring has long been regarded as an important addition to teaching within HE (Daloz, 1986 in Darwin and Palmer, 2009:125) which, according to the authors, is a process of influencing and nurturing the intellectual development of students and career goals of staff. Mentoring in my modules is facilitated by either me or senior students as well as through the Teaching and Learning Grant tutorial support programme — which has the right intentions but, without an official timetable, often has unmeasurable outcomes. Our department schedules its own tutorial timetable to overcome this problem.

Self-learning and informal learning, which are self-explanatory. Vital to the success of the blended learning process is the learner’s intent to learn, while the outcomes of the module or course should be validated by a positive change or transformation in the learner. Both the intent at the beginning of the programme and transformation of learners at the end of the programme are not currently tested, which I believe should be diagnostically tested to facilitate and validate a programmes exit level learning outcomes.

1. Teaching and learning practice Quality education requires the right combination of learning events, which constitutes a good learning strategy (Leclercq and Poumay, 2005); blending face-to-face, e-learning, research, experiential learning, tutorship and community outreach within academic modules and programmes will help promote meaningful learning through the acquisition of knowledge or skills obtained by study or experience within these pedagogically connected (Siemens, 2004a) learning networks. Flipping the classroom transforms the lecturer and student face-to-face experience by giving the traditional lecture information to the student in the form of homework and then bringing the creation of projects and assignments that better instill the creation of the required critical thinking and writing skills of the discipline into a leader led classroom environment (Hodges, 2015). The centrally placed “meta-learns” can be seen as self-reflection at the end of a learning process and is vital in converting information into knowledge. “Creates”, as a learning event, involves creating something new such as producing work e.g. essays, projects, etc. Similarly, “experiments” allows the learner to manipulate the environment to test personal hypotheses e.g. lab work, workshops, computer simulations, or problem solving. This typically occurs when troubleshooting either PC or network related problems or optimising the performance of these components. “Practices” on

8

the other hand involves the application of theory and its assessment, to include teacher feedback - e.g. exam, formative quizzes, formative assignments or practical exercises, work-based learning, etc. “Explores” includes personal exploration by a learner - e.g. literature reviews, internet searches, or information handling. “Receives” allows the traditional didactic transmission of information e.g. lecture / content delivery / recommended reading. “Debates” encourages learning through social interactions, collaborative, and challenging discussions - e.g. face-to-face debates, online discussions and wikis in Moodle. Finally, “imitates” is as a learning event which encompasses learning from observation and imitation - e.g. where the teacher models techniques, modeling / simulation, practical work, walk through tutorials, or role plays. Another part of my teaching strategy adopts the idea of flipping the normal classroom events, which transforms the lecturer and student face-to-face experience by giving the traditional lecture information to the student in the form of homework and then bringing the creation of assignments and projects that better instil the required critical thinking and writing skills of the discipline into a leader-led classroom environment (Hodges, 2015). All lecture information and most learning events (excluding the practical lab work) are managed through our LMS Moodle. I have adopted Moodle’s social constructivist approach to support students, whereby the LMS deliberately sets out to enable learners to have control of their learning environments, rather than having ideas imposed from above in a top-down approach, like most teaching based on outdated instructivism. Moodle’s idea is to enable students to have more choice about how they learn. Therefore, I try including a variety of multi-media study units within my modules, which often contain text, animation, sound and video to allow students multiple ways to process the same information or message. See pass rates and lecture load for the last 3 years in the Department of Information Studies (appendix 6). I concur with Delamont et al. (1997:1) that watching a postgraduate student become an independent researcher, conduct a study, write up the results, present them at a conference and see the first publication is a great experience that I have encountered at both Masters and PhD level (annexure 7). The authors’ book not only convey the joys of successful supervision, but also offers advice on how to maximize the chances of my students being successful and warn of problems that can arise, by forewarning me and offering me both preventive and remedial measures (Delamont et al., 1997:1). However, power comes with responsibility and therefore the power to transform an individual within HE research should only be given to suitably qualified individuals who understand the ethical dimensions and responsibilities of applying this power for a mutually beneficial and productive relationship within academia. I argue that distributed leadership models can provide the necessary checks and balances between the power of the faculty, department, supervisor and student. I believe that key to successful supervision relationships is the adoption of student centred learning theories like social cognitive, constructivist and social constructivist approaches that balances the power between the facilitator and the learner — while predominantly behaviourist learning theories of reward and punishment, allocates most of the power to the instructor and would do little to develop independent critical thinking, problem solving and learners with autonomy in their discipline. While I acknowledge each study will be completely unique I propose that it will be beneficial to break the journey down into different time boundaries in which the

9

relationship and balance of power between supervisor and student will inevitably change. For instance, in the beginning stages when the student is exploring literature and discovering the broad and main issues of the study, the supervisor would be expected to maintain their power in order to use a hands on approach to guide or direct the student in a direction that can produce the standard of work required for their level of the study. While during data collection stage this power would shift more towards the student as the supervisor balances a hands on and hands off approach to encourage independence. During the analysis of the findings the power should be equally distributed in order to challenge, inspire and provide feedback while also allowing the student to take ownership of their work. Then during the completion of the work power should be given to the student as the supervisor lets go of the work. Then there is a total power shift that allows external examiners to critique the work and decide whether it meets the standard within the field — some can really enhance the quality of the work while others are merely rubber stamps and some are actually hindrances in the process — like taking too long to examine the work, or not contributing to the quality of the work, or providing extremely strict and hash reviews. Hence the power of the supervisor/s, department and faculty to choose and appoint fair reviewers should be wisely and ethically conducted. Research, including postgraduate supervision, is often regarded as the most lucrative key performance area within academia as it provides much larger returns in investment than undergraduate teaching in terms of position and salary, promotion opportunities, additional revenue from publications and graduates, performance management incentives, travel opportunities and ultimately power within the department and faculty. This power is often abused by senior academics that allocate the majority of the teaching load to junior members of the department while also taking the best postgraduate students with the most potential to supervise. These are examples of power plays that I have personally witnessed in the ‘not so talked about’ art of successful supervision.

I graduated with a Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education at UKZN (annexure 14). I have conceptualised Newman’s holistic view of the utility of HE, which suggested that intellectual knowledge was the start which needed to be combined with physical experience and reflection in order for the knowledge holder to become truly wise, capable and self-empowered in that domain (Barnett, 1990:20). I have been introduced to Jaspers, who identified that the fragmentation of different disciplines in HE required their own academic cultures to validate the truth (Barnett, 1990:21). For example, the humanities and the sciences often use different paradigms as their foundations to research, which create different epistemologies. Jaspers also acknowledged the role of the university to transform graduates into ‘whole’ people who are able to criticise themselves and/or their surroundings in order to contribute to the social, political and economic development of modern society (Barnett, 1990:22). I concur with Habit et al. (2008:147) who believe that linking academic freedom to social accountability is not enough. Rather, they reason that it is necessary to go beyond it and to reform HE by diffusing power. This is because power relations are the unstable foundations upon which universities are built and it is in the contestation of empowered stakeholders — state technocrats, institutional bureaucrats, academics, students and a variety of other cooperatives — that institutional autonomy and academic freedom is built (Habit et al. 2008:148).

10

The ever-changing pedagogical landscape in HE is demanding greater validity in professional development, meta-learning and the assessing of learning events and strategies. Theoretically, the portfolio’s two stage process of, firstly, collecting evidence of academic practice and, secondly, reflecting on it for formative development or summative results have now become mainstream within the academy. However, for some academics and students this is a relatively new tool, and, when tasked with composing a portfolio, will find it difficult to reverse engineer- old or missing-paper trail evidence which has not been diligently filed away. However, those who have maintained digital records stand a better chance of retrieving years of academic development and growth. I would also propose that portfolios used for summative decisions should be evaluated in conjunction with other authentic assessment methods in order to improve their reliability and validity — for example, presenting and defending one’s portfolio in front of a panel during an interview or award process.

2. Assessment practices The assessments in the modules I teach include summative, formative and diagnostic methods that should improve my students’ ability to know, do and be competent in the specified outcomes of the module and the over-arching outcomes of the academic programme in which they are taught. However, some of my module outcomes and assessments methods are more reliable, affordable and usable than valid and are not improving my students’ ability to become high achievers, both in the real world and within the specific discipline being taught. Although I take cognisance of institutional rules on the high weightings of summative exams, I also try to balance the final mark with enough formative methods that allow and encourage learners to make mistakes and show their gap in the knowledge in order to get constructive feedback to improve.

Knight (2001) explains that the distinction between summative and formative purposes calls for an account of four key concepts in assessment, namely, reliability, validity, affordability and usability, which I have reflected on together with my current assessment methods and areas for development. See appendix 3 for pass rates for the last 3 years.

Four assessment problems that worry me and other academics are plagiarism, the assessment of competence, grade inflation and aggregating marks (Knight, 2001). I concur with Knight (2001), who notes that a lecturer’s poor assessment practices invite plagiarism, although even good assessment practices can be compromised by learners in certain circumstances. I try to practice some of the author’s ways to discourage plagiarism in my classes, including preferring formative to summative assessments. Remember, good formative assessment runs on disclosure, not on deceit, such as plagiarism and so I also let students know that they are expected to run all text through Turnitin software formatively before submitting with a final percentage similarity. However, I argue that many assessment problems need to be treated as policy problems, not as problems for individual lecturers to work at in an ad hoc way. An appreciation of this view will help academics concentrate their energies where they can make a difference (Knight, 2001) as I have done including, reconsidering the balance between formative and summative assessment purposes; extending the range of assessment methods; while holding onto the idea that many of the assessment problems one would like to solve are either (i) not solvable or (ii) most sensibly tackled at faculty or institutional levels.

11

(a) My current assessment methods Table 1: My current assessment methods for undergraduate modules in AIDEG1

Assessment Type

Quantity Formative, Summative or Diagnostic

Theoretical / Practical Outcomes

Outcomes and scope are based on:

Weighting of final mark

Comments

Exam paper 1 1 Summative Theoretical Assessments assignments and wikis

30% Weighting too high

Exam paper 2 1 Summative Practical Practicals and quizzes

20% Affordability of resources questionable to improve validity

Assessments 3-4 Summative and formative

Theoretical Assignments and wikis

21% Students only get one chance to write but feedback and the ability to check their papers and improve their marks after the assessment also gives a formative element. Weighting too high.

Assignments 6-8 Formative Theoretical Modules study units

20% Weighting too low. Use Turnitin. Need to introduce more detailed rubrics

Quizzes 1-15 Summative, Formative and diagnostic

Theoretical and practical

Modules study units

9% Used for attendance, post-lecture diagnostic tests, formative quizzes and summative practical exams.

Wiki’s 6-8 Formative and diagnostic

Theoretical Assignments 0% Need to include in the weighting of the final mark. Diagnostic of the classes combined model answers.

(b) Areas for development After tabling the assessment methods that I use in my undergraduate teaching in the AIDEG1 degree (see Table 1 above), my next step will be to identify assessment methods which are best suited to prepare and measure student achievement of my module’s learning outcomes, as well as to table areas for development (see Table 2).

12

Table 2: Areas for development in my current assessment methods

Assessment Type

Quantity Formative, Summative or Diagnostic

Reliability Validity Affordability Usability

Exam paper 1 1 Summative OK, change questions

Needs development

Good Good

Exam paper 2 1 Summative OK Needs development

Needs development

Needs development

Assessments 4 Summative and formative

OK, need to change questions

Needs development

Good Good

Assignments 6-8 Formative OK Needs development

Good Good

Quizzes 1-15 Summative, Formative and diagnostic

OK, need to build question sets

Need to design higher order questions

Good Good

Wikis 6-8 Formative Needs development

Needs development

Good Good

If I reflect on this table, I can conclude that Exam paper 1 involves assessment of learning and not for learning. I also note that some exams, assessments and assignments do not always lead to appropriate learning. The final summative exams have no feedback except the final mark. Criteria for some assignments are vague and more detailed rubrics are recommended. Insufficient guidelines are provided for some of the practical tasks. Exam paper 1 assesses low-level theoretical outcomes only; while exam paper 2 does not assess all the main practical outcomes. In exam paper 1, assessments and assignments do not motivate students to learn as much as the practicals in exam paper 2. Consequently, many students gravitate towards physical knowledge more than towards logico-mathematical knowledge. Proposed improvement to these assessment methods can be seen under peer evaluation.

3. Curriculum and course development I would agree with the University of Zululand (2013:31–32) that a comprehensive university requires career-focused programmes and exploits the synergy between traditional university programmes and the more vocational courses associated with technical institutions and Colleges of Further Education and Training. The teaching and learning strategy, therefore, recommended are, amongst others:

a closer working relationship between the University and Colleges of Further Education and Training with a view towards developing common programmes and articulation agreements; and

a closer working relationship between the University and area employers, so that new programme outcomes and outputs match employer needs.

By using the conceptual model for programme development shown in figure 2, I have played a significant role in redesigning the Bachelor of Arts in Information Science degree (AIDEG1) (annexure 8) and the professional Library Science degree (AIDEG2) programmes with a better links between its modules in subject streams that run from first year to third year. My undergraduate modules will form part of the technology stream and their outcomes link well with the first two AIDEG1 programmes outcomes, which should provide candidates with knowledge, skills and the correct attitude when

13

working with ICTs, multimedia and computer networks in knowledge economies. An example of one of the undergraduate module templates (annexure 12) show my approach to course development that blends traditional HE and vocational education. The AIDEG1 programme takes a minimum duration of three years and at least 24 modules/384 credits to complete and is aimed at jobs in information fields both within public and corporate sectors. The purpose of the programme is to produce information graduates that can design, develop and utilise information systems (IS) using a variety of technologies for information services. The programme or exit level outcomes of the AIDEG1 degree were all strategically linked to major streams and are to equip students with:

1. Digital literacy skills in information and communication technologies (ICTs), multimedia and computer networks;

2. Appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, organise and retrieve information; 3. Appropriate knowledge of information behaviour and collection development in

a variety of information centres; 4. Appropriate knowledge and skills in general and infopreneurial management; 5. Theoretical research skills; and 6. Information literacy and communication skills.

Figure 2: A programme development model for the macro, meso and micro levels (adapted from North-West University in Boere and Kruger, 2008:5 in Evans, 2013:28) Key to my course development is the integration of digital media into my modules’ LMS curriculum (annexure 9) to deliver and facilitate learning and knowledge. I have considered Stahl’s (2002) in Evans (2013:27) research framework that puts forward theoretical, practical, ethical and moral problems of integrating e-learning at macro, meso and micro levels of an academic programme. At a macro level, the purpose of education programmes and their exit level outcomes are established by the relevant

14

stakeholders including government, the academic institution’s higher governing bodies, faculty boards, departments, professional bodies and workers. Ethical issues, however, arise when choosing the appropriate pedagogies to integrate the selection of media and technologies into the curriculum (Boere and Kruger, 2008 in Evans, 2013:28). For example, a pedagogic shift from teacher-centred Intructivism, adapted for the Industrial Age to learner-centred Constructivism, recommended for the Information Age to Connectivism, for the Digital Age, might be recommended at the macro level, but is not always put into practice at the meso level, because academic staff have not received training in the recommended pedagogy or technologies. Practical problems of providing equitable access to infrastructure, technical training and instructional design, according to recommended theories, will lead to moral dilemmas and digital divides. For example, the University of Zululand has around 720 computers for a student population of 16 582, giving a dire ratio of 1 computer for every 23 students. I have recommended that portable devices, such as tablets and laptops, should be made available in the bookshop at subsidized rates to alleviate the limited access of students to e-learning resources — including the LMS, Turnitin, institutional repository, library journals and e-book resources. This occurred in 2016 and 2017 where students could use their NSFAS bursaries to purchase laptops for around R4 000. A moral dilemma arose when some students resold these for less than they paid in order to get cash in the hand. A NSFAS user agreement should possibly precede the transaction to prevent this practice from occurring.

A theoretical problem at the meso level is to orientate and train academic staff and students to use e-learning resources. Good organisation, management and budgeting to cover and distribute the costs of training are practical problems. Ethical considerations include fulfilling the purpose and exit level outcomes of the programme, which were determined at the macro level, by offering the right combination and quality of teaching and learning methods and events to form a good learning strategy. Another ethical consideration in e-learning environments is good policy to inform and protect the user’s rights. An e-learning strategy was developed by Wayne Muller and myself in 2009 and it was adopted by Faculty and Senate. This year, as vice-chairman of the e-learning task team, I will help spearhead an e-learning policy. Moral problems arise when distributing the costs of expensive infrastructure required to offer and access e-learning resources. Poor legal and regulatory frameworks for ICTs in Africa results in high rates of proprietary software piracy (Zulu, 2008:351 in Evans, 2013:29), which highlights prevalent copyright issues within e-learning environments. Education and training, using open source system and application software (Free Software Foundation, 2013 in Evans, 2013:29) and open- access information (Kahle, 2013 in Evans, 2103:29), can help alleviate some of these immoral practices (Ravjee, 2007:31 in Evans, 2013:29).

A theoretical problem on the micro level involves distributing the higher costs of programmes that integrate e-learning into their curricula to learners and whether their decision to enroll in these programmes proves to be good value for money (Evans, 2013:29). This can also theoretically restrict the opportunities of less advantaged learners to partake in these resource-rich programmes. Practical problems include who to source to train users and whether the use of e-learning is voluntary or not. Other practical problems include user disabilities, technology skills and literacy in the different content formats used to disseminate electronic study units (Evans, 2013:29). Ethical problems arise if users do not agree with the e-learning systems adopted at the meso or macro levels and if they experience hardware and software conflicts. Moral problems for learners include their true and active participation within certain e-

15

learning study units. Ethical questions of whether a username and password on a LMS can validate true identity and participation and whether biometric technology can address these problems need to be investigated within these e-learning systems (Evans, 2013:29).

According to UNESCO (1998), HE is part of a continuous structure, starting with primary, then, secondary and, finally, tertiary education and continuing through life-long learning. HE has an important contribution to the development of this whole education system, while the rearrangement of its relations with all other levels of education, in particular, with secondary education, should be a main concern, because secondary education should both prepare students for and facilitate access to HE as well as offer wide-ranging training that would prepare students for a productive life (UNESCO, 1998). I would recommend that NQF articulate the gaps between Grade 12 secondary education (NQF level 4) and first year HE (NQF level 5). From my experience, many learners entering HEQSF programmes would be better guided enrolling in NQF levels 1–4 in a GFETQSF or OQSF programmes before attempting HE. Once committed to enroll in HE, students should get clear career guidance on CAO before choosing generic, vocational or professional programmes, depending on their goals and intent in life.

CHE (2014:4) has now acknowledged the under preparedness of students entering HE and recommends a redesign of the undergraduate curriculums of HE to include 120 credits, making 3-year degrees now 4 years to include academic literacy, language functionality and categorised knowledge gaps (CHE, 2014:7). I would argue that this would be highly inefficient and propose that the 120 credits should be non-credit bearing modules done in a blended/ online learning space — covering the basic literacies and allowing prospective students to enrol in them before or during HE in a much cheaper massive open online course (MOOC) approach.

4. Peer and student evaluations

(a) Peer evaluation of assessment types I will begin by using Arthur Webb and Caleb Mandikonza from Rhodes University who evaluated my reflection on the general lack of validity in most of the assessment types listed in Table 2 by facilitating the Higher Education Assessment Development (HEAD) course. To start the reflection process, the following literature will be highlighted:

Knight, P. 2001. A briefing on key concepts. Formative and summative, criterion & norm-referenced assessment. LTSN Generic Centre.

From reading the article above, I would propose that I sacrifice some reliability in my assessment methods in order to improve their validity. For example, instead of setting outcomes that allow learners to simply recall theoretical information, questions should rather test the application and use of this information in a critical and creative manner. For instance, the following question which appears in a summative assessment and exam of my third-year networking course:

Discuss how physical and logical network diagrams are used within networks. (20 marks with max time 36 min.),

could be asked in a way to encourage learners to engage with the learning outcome in a more complex manner, which should then increase the validity of the outcomes, e.g.:

16

Demonstrate how physical and logical network diagrams are used within networks by designing both these diagrams for an Internet café using Microsoft Visio and the product price list provided. Marking criteria requires you to produce an inventory and configuration table designed as a database in Microsoft Access to support your diagrams. All files can be uploaded to their respective links on the Learning Management System (LMS). (40 marks with max time 72 min. means usability decreases but validity should increase)

Setting clear assessment criteria, for example, in a rubric or marking scheme will ensure criterion-referencing of my assessment outcomes which have clear advantages over norm-referencing - such as the possibility of the learner, assessor and moderator making judgements about the quality and quantity of learning.

The following are eight specific areas for development for which literature is also recommended:

1. Exam papers 1 and 2 only involve assessment of learning and not for learning;

Recommended literature:

Biggs, J. 1999b) What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development (18)1: 57 – 75.

From the above article, it becomes clear that my modules’ study units should be designed to encourage the average “non-academic” student to actively engage in deeper learning instead of passive surface learning, which is often the case.

The author says that this can be achieved when my students and I agree on appropriate objectives of study so they take ownership of these while also understanding where to find these objectives in the variety of assessment tasks given. I will provide these details in the module template and distribute at the beginning of the semester through the Learning Management System (LMS).

The article also highlights that motivation of learners is key to good teaching, which I believe I do by linking the theoretical and practical objectives within the modules that I teach.


Gibbs, G. 1999. Using Assessment Strategically to Change the Way Students learn. In: Assessment Matters in Higher Education edited by Brown, S. and Glasner, A. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

Gibbs (1999:61) also recommends increased collaboration and communication of leaners with their peers and lecturers about the assessment tasks of the course to facilitate deeper learning. I promote this suggestion by using Moodle’s wikis, forums, chat rooms and email communication and organising tutorials. I also allow students to check and engage with me regarding their summative assessments for “missing marks” that I possibly overlooked.

Gibbs (1999:61) gives two examples of aligned assessment tasks, namely, Problem Based Learning (PBL) and a Learning Portfolio. I believe that I already incorporate some PBL in my modules, but will work on assigning some of the final mark weighting of the summative exams towards a portfolio of learning evidence that students will put

17

together and will consist of the existing theoretical assignments and a new practical submission based on the practical study guide that I am developing at the moment for my modules.

Future Readings (not yet covered):

Brown, S. and Knight, P. 1995. Assessing Learners in Higher Education. London: Kogan Page.

Gibbs, G. 1995. Assessing Student Centred Courses. Oxford: The Oxford Centre for Staff Development. Oxford: Oxford Brookes University.

Ramsden, P. 2000. Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge.

2. Exams, assessments and assignments do not always lead to appropriate learning;


Luckett, K. and Sutherland, L. 2000. Assessment Practices that improve Teaching and Learning. In Makoni, S. (Ed.) (2000). Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: A Handbook for Southern Africa.

I can relate to problems that the above authors say arise from the massification of higher education in South Africa, where the University of Zululand mainly admits previously disadvantaged black and working class communities that are often under-prepared, and adult or part-time learners that require a more open, flexible, transparent and responsive approach to learning.

The authors explain that diagnostic and formative assessments are usually intrinsically motivated, i.e., their purpose is to serve the needs of the students and lecturers while summative assessment tends to be extrinsically motivated, i.e., its purpose is to serve the needs of stakeholders outside the classroom, such as educational managers, parents, employers, governments, etc. Therefore, if the interests of my students are of primary importance, the weighting and number of my assessment methods should be higher for diagnostic and formative types of assessment. Unfortunately, the University Policy of Examinations and Assessments state:

14.2 Not more than 50% of the final mark may be derived from continuous assessment.

This limits me from rewarding more weight to the diagnostic and formative assessments. However, I will build some formative questions into my practical exam paper 2 to compensate for this limitation.

Luckett and Sutherland (2000:5) also note that quality assurance is vital for constructive and formative feedback from peers and students. I will make a concerted effort to assess all my modules this year through the student evaluation exercise. Comments from external examiners and departmental reviews will also be noted.

The authors recommend, in general, that academics in HE should:

show greater accountability to governments, communities and students;

18

cater for a diverse student body who bring different life and learning experiences to their studies, e.g., through assessment which recognises and accredits prior learning;

assess 'relevant' knowledge and generic skills in unfamiliar contexts so that graduates are prepared for the changing, globalised world of work;

assess students' abilities to integrate knowledge and skills from a range of disciplines and discourses;

ensure that students become lifelong learners who can assess themselves and be self-reflexive;

use peer-assessment and group work to ensure that students learn to work in teams;

shift from a content-based to an outcomes-based curriculum;

involve stakeholders outside of the university in the assessment process; and

use a wide range of assessment methods in order to achieve the above.

3. Exams have no feedback except the final mark;



The above author suggests a different way of looking at measurement in education and gives the example of a learner’s understanding being neither ‘right’ nor ‘wrong’. However, ‘wrong’ answers usually reveal partial competence of the problem-solving methods from which they are derived. Additionally, insights into the nature of these wrong conceptions can be gained from the qualities of the answers provided, and these insights can then be used systematically to help students appreciate the differences between the desired conceptions and the ones they currently display.

My proposed solution would be to formatively advance the problem-solving methods of the students before the exams to enable them to apply these rationally and consistently to all problems or questions in the summative exams. Thus, learners are afforded the ability to review their own performance during such an exam. The other suggestion would be to build in a diagnostic assessment (like a quiz) information covering formative questions raised throughout the semester in the summative exam paper 2, which would represent whether a student understands the subject matter or not more deeply. I will also work on the automatic feedback students receive based on the mastery learning model, in which students receive immediate feedback and can repeat or progress at their own pace when completing a question through the online quizzes. At the moment, this feedback includes “that is correct” or “that is not correct”. Richer feedback would allow deeper learning.



4. Assessments and assignments have limited feedback;


19


The above authors recommend the following to enrich my feedback to students:

making links with the learner's goals and intentions rather than our own;

setting criticism in a context of appreciation of and respect for the learner and his/her need for self-confidence and self-esteem;

giving positive comments prior to giving negative comments;

paying careful attention to language use, avoiding negative, abstract, global and value-laden comments;

providing rich, descriptive and detailed comments which are justified in terms of agreed-upon assessment criteria and based on evidence from the student's work;

providing realistic feedback around issues which the student can grasp and act upon for improvement;

providing feedback from a specifically non-judgmental and subjective viewpoint, e.g., 'I feel that your work.. .' , within a relationship of trust ;

responding to substantive issues and being selective about which surface errors are important to correct;

providing feedback in time for it to be meaningful to student learning (late feedback can be a waste of everybody's time); and

avoiding giving a score or grade alone without providing some qualitative justification for giving it.


Assessment and assignment methods considered from the above authors perspective (mentioned in point 3) becomes the servant of good teaching, helping me to intervene to change learners’ conceptions through a greater awareness of their place in a grading of understanding, and, at the same time, representing to students a conception of learning as being about moving from one way of seeing the world to another.

I will develop detailed rubrics for the assignments and the same criteria will be adopted and carried through in the assessments.



5. Criteria for assignments are, sometimes, vague;

Covered above


Knight, P. 2001 A briefing on key concepts. Formative and summative, criterion & norm-referenced assessment. LTSN Generic Centre.

20

6. Insufficient guidelines for some of the practical tasks;

I am committed to produce practical study guides this year that will provide these guidelines to help learners fulfil the practical outcomes in a formative manner while also detailing how to compile a portfolio of evidence that will be used to judge the students’ level of achievement of these practical outcomes.


Knight, P. 2001 A briefing on key concepts. Formative and summative, criterion & norm-referenced assessment. LTSN Generic Centre.

7. Exam paper 1 assesses low-level outcomes only; while exam paper 2 does not assess all the main outcomes;

Portfolio of practical evidence should cover exam paper 2.



I propose changing the criteria in exam paper 1 by designing higher-order questions or tasks which normally would be encountered in work-integrated learning or service learning, while also motivating students to learn real life skills.

Biggs, J. 1999b. What the Student Does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development (18)1: 57 – 75.

Questions in exam paper 1 should get learners to relate, apply and theorise as outcomes and not just memorise. These skills should be developed in a formative manner, for example, in problem-based learning before the summative exam. I will adopt the standards model to mark this exam paper and to assess changes in performance as a result of learning, for the purpose of seeing what, and how well, something has been learned, i.e., make it a criterion-referenced assessment (CRA).

8. The exam paper 1, assessments and assignments do not motivate students to

learn as much as the practicals and exam paper 2.


Gibbs, G. 1999. Using Assessment Strategically to Change the Way Students learn. In: Assessment Matters in Higher Education edited by Brown, S. and Glasner, A. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

Chickering and Gamson (1987) in Gibbs (1999:3) recommend that I follow the ‘Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education’ to help motivate my students:

1. Good practice encourages student-faculty contact;

2. Good practice encourages cooperation among students;

3. Good practice encourages active learning;

21

4. Good practice gives prompt feedback;

5. Good practice emphasizes time on task;

6. Good practice communicates high expectations; and

7. Good practice respects diverse talents and ways of learning.

(b) Moderation There has always been a concerted effort to ensure complete moderation of all our exit-level modules and post-graduate modules. Since attending this assessor/ moderator workshop and giving feedback on the essential role of moderation to my department, I was placed in charge of gathering all exam papers that qualify for moderation and making sure they were submitted to their respective external examiners. In this role, I have encouraged colleagues to ensure that other staff members properly moderate the papers that they have been allocated for internal moderation before sending these to the externals. I have also opened a debate on having a policy for handling electronic exam papers at the University of Zululand. I have served as an external examiner t an undergraduate and postgraduate level (annexure 10).

(c) External examiners “…the assessments in the modules I teach include summative, formative and diagnostic methods that should improve my students’ ability to know, do and be competent in the specified outcomes of the module and the over-arching outcomes of the academic programme in which they are taught. However in reality many of my module outcomes and assessments methods are more reliable, affordable and usable than valid and are not improving my students’ ability to become high achievers both in the real world and within the specific discipline being taught” Evans (2015:16–17).

In order to address this conundrum, I studied the departments’ external examiners report for 2008, which observed that students exhibited inadequate analytical reasoning and language skills in their answers to essay-type questions (Tiamiyu, 2008:63). Tiamiyu (2008:63), however, commends the assessment strategies of the majority of the modules in the department to include a variety of different assessment methods (assignments, written tests, computing practical, final test/examination). He believed that the content and requirements of the formative assessments in the form of written tests, take-home assignments and computing practicals are of high variety and quality, particularly those for the IT-focused modules, which is a reference to my modules. Within the question papers, Tiamiyu (2008:63) reported that the questions were of high quality in terms of clarity and examined content. He also regarded the test, assignment and practical questions for the IT-focused modules (mine) were mostly skill-oriented (as was observed in 2006). Mutula (2011:78) mentions my commitment to teaching in another departmental review:

“There is discernible commitment of your staff to teaching reflected in heavy teaching loads, the several assignments (on average 4-5, e.g. AINF361, AIBEA03,) that staff give to their students, and the practical nature of the courses in spite of low staffing levels”.

22

He also notices that my modules’ practical outcomes seem easier to achieve than the theoretical ones:

“The IT courses have strived successfully and balanced between theory and practice. However, candidates continue to perform well in practical oriented questions than in theory questions”.

Lastly Mutula also mentions that “There is commendable trends of weighting of course work higher than that of the final examinations (e.g. AINF361 or AIBEA 03, 60:40)”.

(d) Student evaluations Student evaluations form a key component to reflecting on how well I teach. I feel that, instead of having the evaluations at the end of the semester, when feedback comes too late to reflect and remedy the current issues, evaluations should be extended to improve the static, one shot cross-sectional measurement method. This could be done by using online dynamic longitudinal and multiple time-period measurements that will give instant feedback to lecturers via the LMS or clicker connected application.

The following sections are extracts from some student evaluations, on which I have reflected. What AINF252 students like about my teaching? (Ques. 31)

The lecturer asks learners questions to ensure that they understood the lesson. (10)

He is open to students. (4) He is professional about his job. (3) He has passion for students. (1) The lecturer introduces the new chapter load and clearly. (2) He explains everything clearly. (2) He makes relevant examples. (1) He is always on time in class. (1)

From the following feedback, I appreciate that the majority of learners felt that there was student participation and active learning in the class. I encourage students to use the same questioning strategy to assess what they have learned, i.e., once they have listened and read information, can they understand it in order to communicate or write about their knowledge. I often say to my students that there are no surprises when it comes to my summative assessments, i.e., I openly tell them the required outcomes for these assessments, which we will cover formatively before the assessment so they have a chance to learn from their mistakes or lack of understanding.

What AINF362 students like about my teaching (Ques. 31)

He is a straightforward lecturer. (1) He tries by all means to teach in a way that students understand. (6) He uses information that is available in books and internet. (1) He allows us to say what we think and debate about certain things that form

part of the module. (4) He is always on time in class. (2) Fully prepared for class. (3) He is organised and his teaching is appropriate. (1) The lecturer gives us a chance to consult during consultation hours. (1)

23

He treats all of us equally. (1) The use of Turnitin must continue and encourage other lecturers to use it. (1)

My emphasis on students understanding information within the module and converting the outcomes to knowledge is appreciated by the majority of the respondents, who, as third-year students, are about to enter the knowledge economies of information and ICT-related fields, where life-long learning is required to keep pace with ever changing technologies.

I agree with Garrison and Kanuka (2004:97) about how blended learning is particularly effective in its ability to facilitate a community of inquiry. The authors believe that community provides the stabilizing, cohesive influence that balances the open communication and limitless access to information on the Internet (as mentioned above). Communities also provide the space for free and open dialogue, critical debate, as mentioned by 33% of my third-year respondents above, negotiation and agreement—the hallmark of HE (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004:97). Blended learning has the capabilities through the LMS to facilitate these conditions and adds an important reflective element with multiple forms of communication to meet specific learning requirements (Garrison and Kanuka, 2004:97). For example, sometimes, it may be advantageous to have a face-to-face class to meet and build community when agreeing on assessment dates or model answers. In contrast, discussing a complex issue that requires reflection may be better accomplished through an asynchronous Internet discussion forum where nobody can hide from having to think critically.

The following are the changes the AINF252 students would like to see in my teaching. (Ques. 32)

To explain more on the lesson. (1) Not to be too serious during the class because that sometimes frighten the

students. (1) Nothing to be changed. (1)

Yes, I am quite serious when it comes to topics like plagiarism or assisting other students during assessments. Therefore, the second comment above might have been as a result of such an experience.

I would like the following changes in the module content/outcomes:

Like the module to be extensive to be like what is thought in other universities. (1)

To go deeper with the module sometimes he highlights the work. (1)

I have used the CompTIA A+, CompTIA N+ standards in developing the outcomes for my modules and I would doubt if one would find these modules at other traditional universities, rather than universities of technology. Going deeper would enter the realm of computer science, for which my modules are not designed, but I do take the point that some topics could be expanded if time is available.

Teaching and learning

24

The lecturer uses power point in his lesson presentations.

Assessment

To give us feedback on time. (2)

I do admit that marking can be quite tedious and, on the odd occasion, I do procrastinate and put it off. However, I do normally return my assessments within 7 days if there are no extraordinary circumstances requiring me to attend a contact block week at UKZN or a conference, etc.

The following are the changes the AINF362 students would like to see in my teaching. (Ques. 32)

I would like the following changes in the module content/outcomes: To lower his pace a bit. (1)

My method of flipping the classroom gives learners materials to read through before coming to class and engaging in higher-level activities, like debating or preparing assignments during class. Some students fail to commit to this type of learning preparation and, sometimes, feel like they are being left behind. I have introduced pre- and post-lecture quizzes to gage and encourage students to come to class prepared. Teaching and learning

To teach theory twice a week and practicals for the rest of the week (4) To allow us (students) to use our own knowledge that relates to the course (2) To study modules that are more advanced since we are in the final year (2) To include new trends in technology (1)

The suggestion by 33% of the respondents for more practical learning than theoretical

lectures shows how the students prefer physical knowledge rather than logico‐mathematical knowledge (De Vries, 2000 in Georgescu; 2008:48), which lends itself to the comprehensive nature of our university. Keeping up with the latest trends in technology is a daunting task. However, as I maintain my Internet Service Provider business, I do get exposed to up-to-date web technologies that I bring to class. For example, I emphasise that the core role of networks will always be fulfilled by guided network media as I have witnessed in the laying of the fibre optic cable that goes around the east coast of Africa on Mtunzini Beach. Learner guides and study material

To have a summarized study guide of this module (2) I believe that to be able to make a summary of the content is an outcome that the learner has to master in their assignments. Therefore, this suggestion would probably defeat an important assessment outcome for the module. Assessment

Too many assignments (3) To have enough time to prepare for assignments (1)

25

There will be between 5 and 7 assignments which will cover the scope for both summative exams at the end of the course. By decreasing the number of assignments, I would disadvantage the students in these exams.

THE MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS FOR AINF252 STUDENTS (1-31)

Course/Module content (1-8)

The results in this section have a score range of 3.7 to 4.6 with the mean being 4.3. This appears to show that students are generally happy with the module. The lecturer might, however, need to pay attention to item 4 dealing with appropriate degree of difficulty for level of study.

Recommendation:

The lecturer might wish to attend issues pertaining to module content suitable for level of study.

Response: I do believe that the level of study should increase from 1st to 3rd year, which, sometimes, does not occur in other modules. I do explain to my students that there needs to be some transformation and change on their part as they progress through their studies.

Course/Module presentation (9-19)

The score range for this part of the questionnaire is 3.8 to 4.9 and the mean is 4.5. This means that students are happy with the lecturer’s teaching methods.

Response: Students seem to appreciate the blended methods I have adopted to teach, especially when there are language barriers and these students find that media and technology reinforce the understanding of the message / information.

Assessment methods (20-27)

The score is ranged between 4.0 and 4.7 and the mean is 4.4, which shows that students are generally happy with the assessment methods in this module. However, the lecturer might wish to use the scores together with students’ comments on assessment in question 33 to address areas that appear to need some attention, especially the need to have more assessments.

Response: The number of formative assignments (5-7) I give cover all topics in the exams. However, the number of summative assessments (3-4) will not cover all topics. Therefore, I probably should adopt their suggestion. However, I would not sacrifice the formative assessment methods for more summative ones, if time is limited.

The physical and organisational environment (29-30)

The score range for these items is between 2.9 and 4.3 and the mean is 3.4. Students are not satisfied with the venue used for lecturing. The scores are as follows: 3.1 for lighting facilities and air-conditioners and 2.9 for furniture in the lecture hall. One could interpret these responses as indicating that students generally feel that the physical

26

and organisational environments of the lecture hall are not good for teaching and learning.

Response: Yes, the teaching venues are not always ideal. However, all my lecture venues are equipped with computers and are, therefore, better than most venues on campus. The lab’s computers were, however, breaking down and requiring maintenance at the end of the second semester. Therefore, I presume that the studentsgrievance ’related to computers. My constant requests paid off this year as the ICT department did replace all our computers with better second-hand machines.

THE MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTIONS FOR AINF362 STUDENTS (1-31) Course/Module content (1-8) The results in this section have a score range of 3.4 to 4.8 with the average being 4.0. This appears to show that students are generally happy with the module. The lecturer might, however, need to pay attention to item 6 that deals with providing students with learner guides. Response: I do provide students with a learner guide (see annexure 21). What I think the student was referring to was a summary of the course content, which I have explained above. Course/Module presentation (9-19) The score range for this part of the questionnaire is 3.8 to 4.9 and the mean is 4.4. This means that students are happy with the way the module is presented. However, the lecturer needs to pay special attention to items nos.12 and 17 which deal with the pace in which the module is presented and the opportunity for developing writing skills. Response: I have responded to the pace issue above by saying that I flip the classroom by giving students readings to prepare them for high-level activities in class, like writing their assignments. Assessment methods (20-27) The score is ranged between 2.9 and 4.5 and the mean is 4.0, which is good. The lecturer might wish to use the scores together with students’ comments on assessment in question 33 to address areas that appear to need some attention. Response: Covered in response above on assessments The physical and organisational environment (28-30) The score range for these items is between 3.1 and 4.7 and the mean is 4.2, which is good. The students are seemingly happy with the venue used for lecturing.

We are privileged to teach in our own computer laboratory within the library. However, this might not last forever as the librarian has now mentioned that we need to start looking for another venue for our classroom. This would be a big setback to the blended teaching and learning model adopted by our department and we will have to try strategically to plan for a replacement learning space to maintain this standard of teaching in the future.

27

(e) Teaching and Learning Centre I have received peer recognition as specialist by pioneering the Moodle learning management system (LMS) at the University of Zululand in 2007 and administrating the four faculty instances from 2009. I have made a very significant contribution to the promotion of e-learning at the University of Zululand. I have also been recognised as a specialist in running e-learning workshops and training on Moodle and, compiling the e-learning submission for the University’s Quality Enhancement Project (QEP) in 2014 and 2015 as well as sourcing and evaluating potential e-learning teaching materials (annexure 3).

(f) Improving my assessment and moderation practices The following section will detail how I intend to improve my assessment and moderation practices based on the evaluations and recommendations from internal and external moderation, student evaluations, external examiners’ reports and the assessor and moderator workshop with its recommended literature on contemporary research findings.

Exam paper 1

Although this is a summative exam, the students encounter similar theoretical outcomes, firstly, in their formative assignments and, secondly, in their summative assessments. Therefore, the preparation and learning of the theory also have a formative nature, which I hope helps in proving feedback to the way students learn the theory.

I have always questioned the validity and weighting (30% of the final mark) for this summative theoretical exam. However, the University of Zululand Assessment and Examination Policy (2014:32) point 14.2 states that not more than 50% of the final mark may be derived from continuous assessment. Therefore, the only choice I have is to increase the weighting of the practical exam and I would only feel comfortable with that if I had the proper resources for individuals to demonstrate their practical abilities to assemble, troubleshoot and repair Information Communication Technology (ICT) and Information Systems (IS) at a second-year level and wired and wireless networks at a third-year level. To improve the reliability of this paper, I need to develop a larger question bank and change or randomly select questions from year to year. I will also use different questions in the re-exam or supplementary paper.

This exam paper only involved assessment of learning and not for learning, with little or no feedback except the final course mark. As Webb (2014) rightly comments that this should never be the intention of exams but, rather, that that lecturers in HE rise to the challenge of producing graduates who demonstrate high-level competences (Luckett and Sutherland, 2000:5). I have to make an effort to display the exam marks on the LMS with some feedback for the students who are interested, especially since my modules are linked as pre-requisites from second to third year.

The fact that this paper assesses low-level outcomes and does not always lead to appropriate learning could be changed by designing higher-order questions or tasks which normally would be encountered in work-integrated learning or service learning, while also motivating students to learn real life skills.

28

The theoretical summative exam could then assess the students’ engagement and depth of learning within the VPA processes completed in class.

Exam paper 2

The inability to assess all the practical outcomes of my module questions the validity of this assessment method, while not having enough resources like one computer or network component per student to work with during practical learning highlights characteristics of usability and affordability that are not ideal. A possible solution which I have implemented is to encourage students to create practical portfolios and databases throughout the semester to provide evidence of engagement with the practical outcomes and these can then be used as an open book resource to take into the practical exam to help answer problem-based questions based on their own experience. This approach could also alleviate the insufficient guidelines currently given (verbal) for some of the practical tasks.

Assessments

I will need to align the theoretical outcomes of the assessments with those of the summative exam paper 1, as described above. This semester, I have begun to experiment by decreasing the weighting of the assessments from 40% of the final mark to 22%. In future, I should, perhaps, also provide a second chance for students who failed to re-write in order to achieve a maximum of 50%, i.e., change the method from summative to semi-formative. As mentioned previously, after writing the summative assessment, I do give formative feedback on what I would consider the model answers to the assessment questions, while also giving the students the ability to check for unallocated marks within their own answers. I will also do my best to return these assessments back to the students ASAP after they have written.

Assignments

I will also align the theoretical outcomes of the theory assignments with those of the assessments and exam paper 1 and the practical assignments with the practical outcomes of exam paper 2. This semester, I hope to decrease the summative assessment weighting of the final mark, as discussed above, and increasie the weighting of the formative assignments to 20%. In so doing, I will encourage a deeper learning with a more formative engagement with the syllabus. I have also started to check the originality through Turnitin (annexure 11) and provide access to the respective reports to the students to enable them to improve their writing styles. The students also have four chances to re-submit their assignments, based on general feedback in tutorials. I now need to find the time to give more detailed personal feedback to individual students, which Ramsden (2000:189) believes is critical to learning. I also intend to provide students with a detailed rubric (annexure 11) in order for them to understand the marking criteria for the assignments.

Quizzes

I need to increase the question bank and randomly select questions from the different sections for pre-lecture quizzes. I also need to design questions that can test higher-order learning, like incorporating mind maps and detailed diagrams into the questions. The quizzes have also been used for diagnostic testing like before or after lectures in the form a pre- or post-lecture quiz. The diagnostic capabilities should be extended to

29

all learning units and handled in a formative manner. I also use the quiz to monitor the 80% attendance rule in order to write the exams.

Wikis

At the moment the wikis are not used extensively but rather showcase model answers for assignment/ assessment/ exam questions. The idea is to allocate a weighting of the final mark for the class to work as a team to create the wiki while allowing peer assessment to allocate individual student marks based on their contributions to the final product, also captured within the history records of the LMS. In 2015, I was found to be highly competent in the assessor/moderator certification that was facilitated by Rhodes University (annexure 13).

5. Scholarly teaching and learning I believe that most students adopt a surface approach rather than a deep approach to learning theoretical outcomes and research problems (Marton and Saljo, 1976 in Biggs, 1999). Biggs (1999:58) recommends problem-based learning as a solution to engage the students in deeper learning and research activities where they need to ask relevant questions and come up with answers in order to solve the problem/ question/ statement. One problem-based learning approach that I am familiar with is Visual Problem Appraisal (VPA). Witteveen and Enserink (2007:278) describe VPA as a film-based methodology that aims to encourage and support professionals and students engaged in the facilitation of processes of change within communities and to sharpen their analytical competencies by actively observing the explicit communication of the various problem and or solution perceptions encapsulated in filmed interviews of the stakeholders concerned. The authors note that disagreement among today’s analysts in modern societies not only about solutions but also about the nature of problems is typical for “wicked problems” (Mason & Mitroff, 1981; Radford, 1977 in Witteveen and Enserink, 2007:278). As a consequence, traditional methods of dealing with problems (i.e., where complex issues are often considered an intellectual design question and are approached by giving research and science a central role) no longer suffice (Koppenjan & Klijn, 2004 in Witteveen and Enserink, 2007:278). Confronting professionals and students with the unknown and providing them with tools to discuss and analyze these situations, therefore, could be considered a first step in coping with complexity. This complexity, which is natural in multi-stakeholder settings and can either, be substantive, where stakeholders do not agree on the character and cause of the problem; strategic, where stakeholders do not agree on the definition of the problem; institutional, where they do not agree on who is responsible for solving the problem; or any combination of the three. Consequently, VPA guides professionals and students through a three-tiered programme, from problem exploration through a simulated field trip to proposed recommendations for action (figure 3) (Witteveen, 1999 in Witteveen and Enserink, 2007:279). Another part of my teaching strategy adopts the idea of flipping the normal classroom events, which transforms the lecturer and student face-to-face experience by giving the traditional lecture information to the student in the form of homework and then bringing the creation of assignments and projects that better instill the required critical thinking and writing skills of the discipline into a leader-led classroom environment (Hodges, 2015). All lecture information and most learning events (excluding the practical lab work) are managed through our LMS Moodle. I have adopted Moodle’s social constructivist approach to support students, whereby the LMS deliberately sets

30

out to enable learners to have control of their learning environments, rather than having ideas imposed from above in a top-down approach, like most teaching based on outdated instructivism. Moodle’s idea is to enable students to have more choice about how they learn. Therefore, I try including a variety of multi-media study units within my modules, which often contain text, animation, sound and video to allow students multiple ways to process the same information or message.

Figure 3: Flow chart of VPA activities

(a) Peer Refereed / DHET accredited Articles I have contributed to ten DHET accredited articles in the last nine years. The latest three papers have involved modelling clinical informatics research with my first PhD student. Two have covered fields of electronic learning and predicting its acceptance in higher education. Two propose using cloud computing within secondary education to breach the digital divide and another two involve promoting literacies and school librarianship in primary and secondary education. Another examins the multimedia capabilities of the web markup language HTML5.

I believe the link between my research and my teaching is very important as one feeds into and informs the other. Thus, my research has covered mostly technology-related topics that I can then use in my teaching. The school librarianship research emanated for the period when I was academic co-ordinator for the diploma in specialized education: school librarianship (annexure 4).

31

My first book chapter was published in 2018 and dedicated to our late dean Professor Gregory Kamwendo for his encouragment and motivation in the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Evans, ND. 2019. Connecting Higher Education Learning Spaces in a Blended Zululand Teaching and Learning Ecology. Handbook of Research on Blended Learning Pedagogies and Professional Development in Higher Education (annexure 4).

(b) Peer reviewing for DHET accredited journals I have been requested to review articles by:

Mousaion South African journal of information studies (annexure 15),

South African Journal of Libraries and Information Science (SAJLIS),

Innovation journal of appropriate librarianship and information work in Southern Africa

African Journal of Library, Archives and Information Science.

(c) Seminar, Workshop and Conference Presentations I have presented 19 topical papers at a variety of seminars, workshops and conferences, which I believe have contributed to both academic discourse in my field and scholarship within higher educaion. I have attended a number of Research Writing Retreat Workshops facilitated by Dr Graham Baker, who has a D.Phil. in the physical sciences from Oxford University and has spent four decades in academic publishing, and Dr Elisabeth Lickindorf, who has a D.Phil. from Oxford University and 20 years of teaching experience at South African universities. I have found retreating from the normal HE responsibilities to solely concentrate on writing a paper together with instant feedback from professional reviewers very productive. Each workshop has produced a DHET accredited article.

(d) Understanding at risk students At the South Africa – Sweden Research & Innovation Week (2018) I presented a conceptual tracking and monitoring model that will utilise both big and small data from a higher education (HE) ecology. Macro, meso and micro data sources will generate diagnostic information and knowledge on how to minimise the risks of students completing their qualifications while also doing so on time. Although Sub-Sahara Africa has consistently had the lowest participation rates within HE in the world the pseudo massification of HE in the continent has been driven by neoliberal transformation agendas. The increased and broadened participation within South African HE to progress social equity and meet economic and social development needs requires both sufficient public funding and academic development initiatives to support many underprepared students. The initial findings show that governments mandate to address the quality of learning at an institutional level by stabilising student intake and filling vacant academic posts has not been fully realised and thus pose the biggest risks for the quality of teaching and learning. Providing pedagogical, technological and diagnostic knowledge to teach and support large classes is therefore recommended. Social wellbeing of the students and their families cannot be underestimated when predicting success or failure and this data needs special ethical considerations before disclosure, analysis and action. It is envisaged that inferential data analysis from the predictive model can assist the institution identify and reduce risks that are

32

compromising the production of quality graduates with the necessary knowledge, capabilities and skills to drive sustainable development in South Africa.

Figure 4: Red cross tracking, monitoring and alert system for undergraduate at risk students enrolled at the University of Zululand

(e) Achievements and Awards It was an honour to win the Vice Chancellor’s Excellence in Teaching award for the emerging academic in 2017 (annexure 1). I was also awarded the Best curriculum and academic leadership paper of the International Higher Education Curriculum Design & Academic Leadership Symposia Programme. 6-8 December 2017 (annexure 17). At our Faculty academic awards ceremony in 2018 I was awarded a certificate in recognition of the outstanding contribution in the Faculty of Arts and a certificate in recognition of the outstanding contribution in the Faculty of Arts and University of Zululand (annexure 16). In 2011, I received a long-service certificate for 10 years of uninterrupted, satisfactory and devoted service.

6. Leadership roles “The Wise leave the road and find the Way; fools cling to the Way and lose the road”— from The Masters of Huainan.

My interpretation of this ancient Chinese saying would be that academic leadership clinging to the righteousness of HE policy instead of the spirit of the policy end up disadvantaging the ethos and relevance of HE because they are so caught up in dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s within the individual trends and pronouncements. The ‘wise’ find and live the spirit of the academy, while ‘fools’ cling to the semantics of the

33

academy and lose sight of its holistic continuum through life. I believe in developing and sustaining a shared distributed leadership between management, academia and students in order to provide checks and balances in HE, which is also very necessary when teaching. I also followed this principle as the chair of the Mtunzini Conservancy (2015-2018), where I supported the portfolio leaders and their sub-committees in the various activities and projects that we have undertaken in our conservancy.

I have been appointed HOD in the Department of Information Studies, where, as a strategic planner, I take cognisance of the fact that all our lecturers are recommended to register for a Postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education in order to learn how to teach their knowledge and experience to our students, as well as to do and link their research and community engagement within a blended learning ecology. I have over a decade's experience in student administration, including registration, mark capturing and backup, time tabling, communicating and working with class representatives and student societies. I will endeavour to instil quality assurance and enhancement by balancing the number of assessments in the modules we teach to include summative, formative and diagnostic methods that should improve our students’ ability to know, do and be competent in the specified outcomes of the module as well as the over-arching outcomes of the academic programme in which they are taught. Good literacy skills in Excel and Access will facilitate the financial management of the department, while attending the project management workshop last year gives me a good foundation to infrastructure and project management including defining, planning, executing and closing projects within a defined project life cycle. Introducing a performance management system within the department by negotiating key performance indicators with colleagues and filling vacant positions in the department will test my human resource management skills.

(a) Committees My organisational leadership work has included being acting HOD in 2017 and HOD from 2018, serving on Senate since 2017, Faculty Board since 2005 and the faculty of Arts EXCO since 2017. From 2014 – 2019 I have been on the. Faculty of Arts Teaching and Learning Committee. In 2017 I was chair of the E-learning task team. I have also serve on the Teaching and Learning (http://tlc.unizulu.ac.za), Faculty of Arts (http://www.arts.uzulu.ac.za/conference) and the Department of Information Studies conference (http://www.lis.uzulu.ac.za/conference) organising committees, being conference chair on the latter one. I previously served on the management, business, administration and legal initiatives (MBALI) (http://mbali.unizulu.ac.za) organising committee and still maintain their website. In 2018 and 2019 I have been the local organiser for a Colloquium in the Theme 6: Digital technologies, big data, and cyber-security for the University of Zululand in the South Africa-Sweden University Forum (SASUF).

http://www.arts.uzulu.ac.za/conference

http://www.lis.uzulu.ac.za/conference

http://mbali.unizulu.ac.za/

34

References

Barnett, R. 1990. The idea of higher education, McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

(Reading chapter 2: contested concept?) (pp: 16-28).

Biggs, J. 1999. What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher

education research & development, 18, 57-75.

Darwin, A. and Palmer, E. 2009. Mentoring circles in higher education. Higher

Education Research & Development, 28, 125-136.

Evans, N.D. 2015. Higher Education Assessment Development

(HEAD) course assignment. (Unpublished)

Evans, N.D. 2013. Predicting User Acceptance of Electronic Learning at the

University of Zululand. Available: http://uzspace.uzulu.ac.za/handle/10530/1317 [10 April 2016].

Garrison, D. R. and Kanuka, H. 2004. Blended learning: Uncovering its

transformative potential in higher education. The internet and higher education, 7, 95-105.

Georgescu, D. 2008. Philosophical “Paradigms” of Education: How Philosophy

Impacts on Learning. WCP 2008 Proceedings Vol.37 Philosophy of Education (pp: 43-55).

Gibbs, G. 1999. Using Assessment Strategically to Change the Way Students learn.

In: Assessment Matters in Higher Education edited by Brown, S. and Glasner, A. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

Hodges, L.C. 2015. Making our Teaching Efficient: Flipping the Classroom.

National Teaching and Learning Forum, Volume 25, Number 5, September 2015. Reprinted with permission in Tomorrow's Teaching and Learning by Rick Reis. Email 11 February 2016.

Knight, P. 2001. A briefing on key concepts. Formative and summative, criterion &

norm-referenced assessment. LTSN Generic Centre.

Leclercq, D. and Poumay, M. 2005. The 8 Learning Events Model and its

Principles. Release 2005-1. LabSET. University of Liège. Available:

http://www.labset.net/media/prod/8LEM.pdf [12 September 2016].

Luckett, K. and Sutherland, L. 2000. Assessment Practices that improve Teaching

35

and Learning. In Makoni, S. (Ed.) (2000). Teaching and Learning in Higher Education: A Handbook for Southern Africa.

Mutula, S.M. 2011.External Examiner’s Draft Report for 2010 Examinations at

DLIS, University of Zululand. 21 – 25 February 2011. (Unpublished)


Tiamiyu, M.A. 2008. Visitation for Externalization of BA Information Science

Examinations, 2007. Department Of Library And Information Science, University of Zululand. 15-19th January, 2008. (Unpublished)

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 1998.

World declaration on higher education for the twenty-first century: vision and action and Framework for priority action for change and development in higher education. Available: http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/declaration_eng.htm. [03 October 2016].

University of Zululand. 2014. Assessment and Examination Policy.

University of Zululand. 2013.Teaching and Learning Strategy. Teaching

and Learning Committee. September 2013.

Witteveen, L., and Enserink, B. (2007). Cultural Issues in Making and Using the

Visual Problem Appraisal “Kerala’s Coast”. Knowledge, Technology, & Policy, Winter 2007, 19(4), (pp. 94-118).

36

ANNEXURE 1

0

ANNEXURE 2

1

ANNEXURE 3

3

ANNEXURE 4 1. Owolabi, KA, Evans, ND, Ocholla, DN (2018). Use of clinical informatics tools among

medical doctors in selected teaching hospitals in Nigeria and South Africa. Innovation: journal of appropriate librarianship and information work in Southern Africa. Issue 57,

2. Owolabi, KA, Evans, ND, Ocholla, DN (2017). Factors that Influence Medical Doctors’ Behavioural Intention to Use Clinical Informatics. Mousaion ISSN 0027-2639. Vol. 1, 130-154

3. Owolabi, KA, Evans, ND and Mhlongo, PT (2016). Applying UTAUT in Clinical Informatics Research. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). ISSN 1522-0222.

4. Evans, ND and le Roux, J (2015). Modeling the acceptance and use of electronic learning at the University of Zululand. South African Journal of Library and Information Science. 81 (2) 2015.

5. Evans, ND and Mutula, S (2015). Predicting the acceptance of electronic learning by academic staff at the University of Zululand, South Africa. Mousaion ISSN 0027-2639. 33 (2) 2015.

6. Evans, ND (2014). Training Teacher-Librarians to Establish And Manage School Libraries In Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa: An Empirical Study. Mousaion ISSN 0027-2639. 32 (2) 2014. [Online]. Available: http://reference.sabinet.co.za/webx/access/electronic_journals/mousaion/mousaion_v32_n2_a7.pdf

7. Shandu, L, Evans, ND and Mostert, J (2014). Challenges in the Provision of School Library Services in Katlehong’s Secondary Schools. Mousaion ISSN 0027-2639. 32 (4) 2014. [Online]. Available: http://reference.sabinet.co.za/webx/access/electronic_journals/mousaion/mousaion_v32_n4_a2.pdf

8. Le Roux, CJB and Evans, ND (2012). An Examination Of The Multimedia Capabilities of HTML5. 14th Annual Conference On WWW Applications. Mangosuthu University of Technology (MUT) Durban. [Online]. Available: http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2012/paper/viewFile/572/175

9. Le Roux, CJB and Evans, ND (2011). Can cloud computing bridge the digital divide in South African secondary education? Journal Information Development, Vol. 27, no. 2, May 2011.

10. Le Roux, CJB and Evans, ND (2010). Cloud computing: can it Help to Breach the Digital Divide in Africa, with special reference to South Africa. WWW conference. [Online]. Available: http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2010/paper/view/210/103.

Book Chapters

My first book chapter was published in 2019 and dedicated to our late dean Professor Gregory Kamwendo for his encouragment and motivation in the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Evans, ND. 2019. Connecting Higher Education Learning Spaces in a Blended Zululand Teaching and Learning Ecology. Handbook of Research on Blended Learning Pedagogies and Professional Development in Higher Education. I currently have R 174 314.52 in my research account

http://reference.sabinet.co.za/webx/access/electronic_journals/mousaion/mousaion_v32_n2_a7.pdf




http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2012/paper/viewFile/572/175

http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2012/paper/viewFile/572/175

http://www.zaw3.co.za/index.php/ZA-WWW/2010/paper/view/210/103

17

ANNEXURE 5

18

ANNEXURE 6 2018 Pass rates for Dr Neil Evans Modules

SUBECT CODE SUBJECT NAME SEMESTER

NO IN EXAMS

NO PASSES

AVERAGE MARK

PASSRATE (%)

AINF251 Assembling and upgrading of computers 1 25 20 53 80

AINF361 Networks and Networking 1 18 18 63 100

SHMI111 Hospitality Information Systems I 1 31 30 69 97

AINF252 Computer troubleshooting and repairs 2 24 18 53 75

AINF362 Networks and Computer Centre Management

2 18 18 65 100

SHMI112 Hospitality Information Systems II 2 31 28 58 90

AIS508 Honours Multimedia 1&2 5 4 55 80

2017 Pass rates for Dr Neil Evans Modules


NO IN EXAMS

NO PASSES

AVERAGE MARK

PASSRATE (%)






2 14 14 59 100

SHMI112 Hospitality Information Systems II 2 31 30 60 97


2016 Pass rates for Dr Neil Evans Modules


NO IN EXAMS

NO PASSES

AVERAGE MARK

PASSRATE (%)






2 24 23 58 96


19

ANNEXURE 7 Doctorate Key= *Main Supervisor

201451451. Male. Owolabi, Kehinde Abayomi. Access and Use of Clinical Informatics among Medical Doctors in Selected Teaching Hospitals in Nigeria and South Africa

Graduated 2017 *

201753715. Female. Ovwasa, Diodemise Ese. Availability and use of nursing informatics resources among nurses in selected teaching hospital in Nigeria and South Africa

2017 *

201760023. Female. Hadebe, Zanele. Framework to embed social media in the marketing of information products and services in three academic libraries in KwaZulu Natal

2017 *

201827096. Male. Ireri, John. Information literacy skills of students in public secondary schools in Tharaka nithi country

2018 *

201860932. Female. Nkanata, Mercy Gacheri. Evaluating Huduma Centres E-government Initiatives for Sustainable Delivery of Services in Public Organizations in Kenya

2018

Masters Key= *Main Supervisor

201200064 Female. Shandu, Lindiwe. Challenges in the Utilisation and Provision of School Library Services in Katlehong Secondary Schools (Gauteng Province, South Africa)

Graduated 2015

201061851. Male. Nxumalo, Bhekani Cyril Status of Information and Communication Technologies Diffusion in Public Secondary Schools at UMkhanyakude District -

2016 * At risk

201078350 Male Jalubane, Joyfull Bongumusa. The Attitude towards the Adoption of a Virtual Library for Rural Schools within Ray Nkonyeni Municipality, KwaZulu-Natal

2018

201311246. Male. Mdunge, Eric Njabulo. Factors influencing the usage of information systems in local clinics at the uMgungundlovu district in the uMsunduzi municipality

2018 *

201134490. Female. Kheswa, Mbali Valentine. Access and utilization of Public Library Services by the disabled: a case study

2018 *

201126608. Male. Sibiya, Qiniso. Adoption and application of ICT for knowledge management practices by special libraries at KZN

2018 *

201414145. Male. Mthembu, Zibonele Siphamandla. Status of school libraries and role in meeting the curricular needs of learners in uMkhanyakude district, KwaZulu Natal. South Africa.

2018

20

ANNEXURE 8 BA Information Science (AIDEG1)

Programme or exit level outcomes of the AIDEG1 degree are to equip students with:

1. Digital literacy skills in Information Communication Technologies (ICTs), multimedia

and computer networks.

2. Appropriate knowledge and skills to identify, organise and retrieve information.

3. Appropriate knowledge of information behaviour and collection development in a

variety of information centres.

4. Appropriate knowledge and skills in general and infopreneurial management.

5. Theoretical research skills.

6. Information literacy and communication skills

132%

215%

317%

48%

515%

613%

Programme or exit level outcomes of the AIDEG1 degree

The purpose of the programme is to produce information graduates that can design, develop and utilise Information Systems (IS) using a variety of

technologies for information services in the private and public sector.

21

ANNEXURE 9

22

ANNEXURE 10 a. 2019: External examiner for Masters candidate at University of Cape Town -

An investigation into the preparedness of the Namibia University of Science

and Technology (NUST) Library on the implementation and usage of mobile

phone technologies in the delivery of library and information services by Liina

Ndinelago Kamenye

b. 2018: External examiner for DTech: Informatics at Cape Peninsula University

of Technology - Information and knowledge flow within virtual communities of

practice by Hermon Ogbamichael.

c. 2017: External examiner for Masters, Information Science at the University of

South Africa - A study on the adoption of, views about and use of e-books at

the University of Namibia by Anna Leonard.

d. 2015: External examiner for Masters candidate at University of South Africa -

Elementary school children’s acceptance and use of digital school libraries at

Crawford Preparatory Pretoria School in Gauteng, South Africa by Sharon

Moyo.

e. 2019 - 2021: INF411 (ICTs in LIS) and INF412 (WWW) – University of

Western Cape (UWC)

f. 2019 - 2021: PG Diploma (ICTs and WWW in LIS) –UWC

g. 2019 - 2021: MLIS Web 2.0/ Lib2.0, Digital Curation (including Digital

Humanities, Research Data Management), Social media, Metrics, Open

scholarship and website creation – UWC

h. 2019: UKZN E-Commerce and E-Deployment (ISTN3EC) - UKZN

i. 2018: Technology Enablers for Digital Curation course in UCT’s MPhil

specialising in Digital Curation programme.

j. 2018: UKZN E-Commerce and E-Deployment (ISTN3EC) - UKZN

k. 2011-2013: UKZN – Information Literacy (LIIS110)

l. 2012: UKZN – Digital Libraries (LIIS672)

m. 2009-2011: UKZN – Information and Communication Technologies (LIIS671)

n. 2009-2011: UKZN – Web based Information Systems (LIIS713/813)

o. 2008-2010: UKZN – Automation of Information Centres (LIIS670)

p. 2008-2010: UKZN – Internet Expertise (LIIS120)

23

ANNEXURE 11 Rubric

Turnitin

24

ANNEXURE 12

Title Multimedia

Code AIS508 Department Information Studies

Faculty Arts Creation Date 11th February 2006

Field Library and Information Science

Programmes Bachelor of Library and Information Science Honours (AHON13)

Credits 15 Notional Hours 150

Year Level 4 Semester 1&2

Core or elective Elective NQF Level 8

Prerequisites Co-requisites

Aim and purpose This module guided by the NQF level (8) principles (see http://www.nqf.org.za/download_files/level_descriptors.pdf) requirements. The course offers an overview of the integrated use and application of multimedia within twenty-first century digital information and communication models. The purpose of this course is to enable the students to effectively apply multimedia concepts, applications and projects within an electronic portfolio of evidence.

Content This course is made up of two parts. Part one focuses on the theoretical integration of multimedia in digital information and communication models while part two focuses on the application of this theory within the practical development of portfolio of evidence including a multimedia video and website.

Part one: Theory

Multimedia information and communication environment and its related digital technologies

Multimedia for personal computers and mobile devices on the world wide web (WWW)

Multimedia portfolios of evidence

Students are expected to conduct research and produce a portfolio of evidence consisting of 5 assignments in AIS 508

Part two: Practical

Planning a multimedia website

Installing and configuring Joomla content management system (CMS)

Designing a multimedia portfolio of evidence using Joomla CMS

Storyboarding a multimedia video production

Capturing the video and sound elements

Editing the video and sound elements in appropriate software applications

Publishing the video to the web

http://www.nqf.org.za/download_files/level_descriptors.pdf

25

Critical Cross Field Outcomes

Specific outcomes

Students must be able to:

identify and solve problems

work in a team

organize and manage themselves

collect, analyse and evaluate information

communicate effectively

use science and technology

participate as a responsible citizen

be culturally and aesthetically sensitive

At the end of this module, the student will be able to:

Analyze, interpret and apply information and communication theories and models to multimedia projects

Develop and present variety of multimedia projects and assignments that utilize the core technologies and applications to apply the principles and ethical considerations of multimedia

Evaluate and reflect on the completed multimedia projects within the personal portfolio of evidence

Assessment Tasks The student will be assessed in his /her ability to:

Evaluate and critique sources of research information on information and communication theories and models.

Develop and reflect on a multimedia portfolio of evidence

Produce a multimedia video and website

Ethically compose essays on topical areas in multimedia

Present and defend essays orally

Search, retrieve and evaluate research information on relevant topics

The complete beginners guide to Joomla by Taty Sena. [Online]. Available: http://www2.unibas.it/cisit/uploads/documenti/Joomla-Guide-Final.pdf

DP Requirement 50%

Contact Study Notional Hours Self-Study Notional Hours

Lectures 20 Lecture related 10

Practicals 40 Practical related 20

Fieldwork Assignments 20

Tutorials Revision 30

Guided Revision Presentations 10

Total 60 Total 90

http://www2.unibas.it/cisit/uploads/documenti/Joomla-Guide-Final.pdf

26

ANNEXURE 13

27

ANNEXURE 14

28

ANNEXURE 15 Dr Neil Evans: I believe that you would serve as an excellent reviewer of the manuscript, "#5275 Realizing Rehabilitation and Social Inclusion through Correctional Service Libraries in South Africa," which has been submitted to Mousaion: South African Journal of Information Studies. The submission's abstract is inserted below, and I hope that you will consider undertaking this important task for us. Please log into the journal web site by 2019-03-17 to indicate whether you will undertake the review or not, as well as to access the submission and to record your review and recommendation. The review itself is due 2019-04-04. Submission URL: https://upjournals.co.za/index.php/LIS/reviewer/submission/6450?key=mHxv5Str Thank you for considering this request. Thomas van der Walt Mousaion: South African Journal of Information Studies -----Original Message----- From: Dr Neil Evans [mailto:[email protected]]

Sent: 11 March 2019 9:32 AM To: Van der Walt, Thomas <[email protected]> Subject: [Mousaion] Able to Review Thomas Van der Walt: I am able and willing to review the submission, "#5275 Realizing Rehabilitation and Social Inclusion through Correctional Service Libraries in South Africa," for Mousaion: South African Journal of Information Studies. Thank you for thinking of me, and I plan to have the review completed by its due date, 2019-04-04, if not before. Dr Neil Evans ________________________________________________________________________ Mousaion http://www.upjournals.co.za/index.php/LIS Thank you very much Neil!

Thomas

https://upjournals.co.za/index.php/LIS/reviewer/submission/6450?key=mHxv5Str



http://www.upjournals.co.za/index.php/LIS

29

ANNEXURE 16

0

ANNEXURE 17

2019 teaching portfolioelearn.uzulu.ac.za/neilevans/docs/ndevansteaching... · 2019-09-10 ·...

Documents