The SAULT Forum Logo

The SAULT Forum logo has recently been finalised. It was designed by Gift Masaiti of the University of Zambia, in consultation with members of the SAULT Forum.

SAULT Forum First Annual Conference - 15 February 2018

The Southern African Universities Learning and Teaching (SAULT) Forum is please to announce its first annual Teaching and Learning Conference, which will be held at the Eduardo Mondlane University, Maputo, on Thursday 15 February 2018. A call for offers for research papers and interactive sessions focusing on the enhancement of teaching and learning in higher education, will become available in the second semester of 2017.

Professor Francisco Januario

The conference will be followed by a business meeting and meeting of the Rurality in Education Research Team on Friday 16 February  2018.


The conference convenor is Professor Francisco Januario in the Faculty of Education at Universidade Eduardo Mondlane. For enquiries contact: januariofm90@gmail.com

Faculty of Education

SAULT 2017 - my experience of the forum

Lemmy and Gift from Zambia, at the Boma

The 2017 SAULT forum in Botswana was held from 16th to 17th February at the University  of Botswana (UB). While the focus of SAULT for now is the joint research on rurality, a number of other pertinent issues were discussed. Members of the  host  country gave an overview of programmes affered from their different faculties and the Deputy Vice chancellor gave a keynote  speech.

While all presentations were good, I had particular interest in the two on Education Technology and Ethno - Mathematics, as I have some affinity for Technplogy in Education and in Mathematics (of course being Math teacher). Hope to network more with the colleagues who made these presentation- Chris and Pitso

Brenda   gave an overview of SAULT especially for the benefit of colleagues attending for the first time. She pointed out that one purpose of  SAULT was to help people conduct academic development in individual countries, by sharing and learning from each othera and to support university teaching and learning.

As we sat in the lecture theatre at UB,  one phrase that caught my eye on one of the placards was: 

     "Vision without action is simply dreaming. Action without vision is mere activity. Vision with   

        action - you can change the world (Joel Becker)

Indeed with our joint research on Rurality, we may in some way bring about some positive change 

A number of issues on way forward on rurality were discusssed and committies formed to enhance the work. I look forward  to the our Technology group headed by Thula to work harmoniuosly.

Despite the formal nature of the activity, the hosts found it fitting to take the participants for an outing to view game at Mokolodi and treat us to a sumptuous dinner in a "Rurality setting"

I would be failing in my duties if I do not state that I really enjoyed the  2017 SAULT.

I  sincerlery thank all the  people who contributed in various ways, too numerous to mention to make 2017 SAULT forum a success

Lemmy

Theoretical orientation for classroom-based assessment

 Prof. Doutor Francisco Januário

januariofm90@gmail.com

Faculty of Education, Eduardo Mondlane University

Maputo, Mozambique

(This is the text that accompanied an interactive workshop session at the SAULT Forum meeting on 16-17 February 2017.)

Xavier, Francisco, Dixie, Maria and Kavenna at the SAULT Forum

I.                   Introduction

According to the literature (Bell and Cowie, 2001; Black, 1998; Black et al., 2003, Kathy & Burke, 2003; Lin & Gronlund, 2000; McMillan, 2001; Race et al., 2005) three aspects are regarded as being relevant for providing a theoretical orientation in classroom-based assessment. The aspects are: (i) the objective of assessment and the process of giving feedback to students; (ii) the need for teachers to conduct effective assessment for learning; and (iii) the teachers’ preparedness on conducting assessment that can generate evidence of authentic learning.

In terms of the first aspect and according to several authors (Black, 1998; Black et al., 2003, Kathy & Burke, 2003; Lin & Gronlund, 2000), assessment may be conducted to serve different purposes, such as assessment to satisfy demands for public accountability; assessment to report an individual’s achievements; and assessment to support learning. The focus of assessment in this paper falls within the latter purpose (supporting learning). The rationale of focusing on this purpose is that the main aim of schools is to promote student learning and the teacher needs constant information about what the students know. Ideally, assessment should provide short-term feedback so that obstacles can be identified and tackled at an early stage in the learning process. This is particularly important where the learning plan is such that progress with one week’s work depends on a grasp of the ideas discussed in the previous week. This type of assessment aims at improving learning, and is called formative assessment or assessment for learning.

II.                The need for teachers to conduct effective assessment for learning

It is clear that this assessment is the responsibility of the classroom teacher, but others, inside and outside the school might support this work by providing appropriate training and methods for conducting such an assessment. Let us consider as an example a science subject like Physics. For this subject, however, evidence that a formative assessment is really improving learning must be accompanied by a type of assessment where students are asked to perform real-world tasks and demonstrate the meaningful application of knowledge and skills. This leads to what McMillan (2001) calls authentic assessment and its success depends very much on support that the teacher must receive from various educational stakeholders inside and outside the school. Therefore, in providing such support to teachers, Nuttall (cited in Kathy & Burke, 2003), argues that it is relevant for teachers to know how to generate evidence of authentic learning. Authentic learning is crucial for learning science and specifically experimental subjects like Physics. Nuttall (1987) also describes a number of criteria for tasks that validly assess learning, namely: (i) tasks that are concrete and within the experience of the individual; (ii) tasks that are presented clearly; and (iii) tasks that are perceived as relevant to the current concerns of the student. The value of these tasks, in our opinion, allows students to demonstrate good performance because they promote interaction between students and the teacher. In addition, they allow the teacher to get into the students’ thinking and reasoning and to evaluate their potential.

Bell and Cowie (2001) distinguish between two types of formative assessment, namely planned formative assessment and interactive formative assessment. These authors suggest that planned formative assessment is used to elicit permanent evidence of students’ thinking, and such assessment occasions are semi-formal and may occur at the beginning and end of a topic. A specific assessment activity is set for the purpose of providing evidence that is used to improve learning. All the information is elicited through the task set and the teacher and the student act on this information with reference to the topic itself, with reference to the students’ previous performance, and with reference to how the students and the teacher are proposing to take learning forward. Interactive formative assessment is described by Bell and Cowie (2001) as taking place during student-teacher interaction. This refers to the incidental or ongoing formative assessment that arises out of learning activity and cannot be anticipated.

As is the case with planned assessment, in interactive formative assessment the purpose is to improve learning by mediating the student learning. The process involves the teachers noticing, recognizing and responding to students’ thinking and it is more teacher- and student-driven than curriculum-driven. Unlike the kind of permanent information that accrues from planned assessment, this kind of assessment generates information that is ephemeral. The latter kind of formative assessment is crucial for the purpose of this paper because it is important for enhancing student learning, and therefore, the teacher must be supported in knowing how to react in relation to what is deemed at the time to be worth noticing in the student. Unlike in the planned formative assessment where there is a longer time gap in responding, in the interactive formative assessment, the teacher’s response is immediate, and the kind of planning that can still be made is on how to facilitate dialogue and tasks between him/her and the students. In an interactive assessment, students are given opportunity to argue about the assessment tasks and to challenge teachers’ responses to their questions.

As for the importance of immediate and ongoing feedback, Race et al., (2005) elaborate on how quality feedback can best be given to students. Among the several aspects of quality feedback referred to by these authors, they mention the following aspects of quality feedback: (i) time - the sooner the feedback is given the better; (ii) personality - it needs to fit each students’ achievement; (iii) expressed - whether congratulatory or critical; and (iv) empowerment - both congratulatory and critical feedback must not dampen learning, but rather strengthen and consolidate it.

In conclusion, for the assessment objectives and feedback, three major aspects provide orientation to the review on assessment proposed by this paper. Firstly, the assessment is carried out to support learning; therefore, the provision of feedback should be on a short-time basis so that obstacles in the learning process can be tackled in good time (Black, 1998; Race et al., 2005). Secondly, teachers need to have at their disposal certain students’ tasks that can validly assess particular learning and generate evidence of authentic learning (Kathy & Burke, 2003; Lin & Gronlund, 2000; Popham, 2002). Thirdly, immediate and ongoing feedback is crucial to facilitate student-teacher interaction (Bell & Cowie, 2001; Race et al., 2005).

III.             The theories of learning and their implications for assessment practice

With reference to carrying out an effective assessment for learning, it is worth mentioning that it requires having students actively engaged in finding solutions to problems they face and developing the ability to construct knowledge. In this process, the role of the teachers as facilitators is crucial in monitoring the assessment practice. James (2006), on the relationship between assessment practice and the ways in which the processes and outcomes of learning are understood, argues that three theories of learning and their implications for assessment practice can be distinguished. These are discussed below.

• Behaviourism: this is where the environment for learning is the determining factor, the learning is the conditioned response to external stimuli, and rewards and punishments are the powerful ways of forming or eradicating habits. The implications for assessment practice are that the progress is measured by timed tests, performance is interpreted as either correct or incorrect, and poor performance is remedied by more practice in the incorrect items.
• Constructivism: this is where the learning environment is determined by prior knowledge - what goes on in people’s minds - emphasis is on ‘understanding’, and problem solving is the context for knowledge construction through deductive and inductive reasoning. The implications for assessment are that self-monitoring and self-regulation are relevant dimensions of learning, and the role of the teacher is to help ‘novices’ to acquire ‘expert’ understanding of conceptual structures and processing strategies to solve problems. When students are involved in the construction of their own learning through formative assessment, they develop the ability to monitor and regulate their learning agenda.
• Socio-culturalism: this is where learning occurs in an interaction between the individual and the social environment. Thinking is conducted through actions that alter the situation and the situation changes the thinking. The implication is that, prior to learning, there is a need to develop social relationships through language, because it represents the central element to our capacity of thinking.

It has been argued that the latter theory is not yet well worked out in terms of its implications for teaching and assessment (James, 2006). Teaching and learning tasks need to be more collaborative and students need to be involved in the generation of problems and of solutions, because the current perspective of assessment within this perspective is still inadequately conceptualized. For the Mozambican context, for instance, the constructivist theory of learning is recommendable. The reason is that the country teaching system emphasizes the importance of considering children’s prior knowledge before helping them understand other conceptual structures. The implication of this choice for assessment is that this construction of children’s own learning can be easily facilitated through formative assessment.

REFERENCES

Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). Formative assessment and science education. London: Kluwer

Academic Publishers.

Black, P. (1998). Friend or foe? Theory and practice of assessment and testing. London,

Philadelphia: FalmerPress.

Black, P.; Harrison, C.; Lee, C.; Marshall, B.; Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning.

Putting it into practice. London: Open University Press.

James, M., & Pedder, D. (2006). Professional learning as a condition for assessment for learning.

In J. Gardner (Ed.), Assessment and learning (pp. 27-44). London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications.

Kathy, H., & Burke, W. (2003). Making formative assessment work: effective practice in the

primary classroom. London: Open University Press.

Lin, R.L. & Gronlund, N.E. (2000). Measurement and assessment in teaching (8^th ed.).

Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Prentice-Hall.

McMillan, J.H. (2001). Essential assessment concepts for teachers and administrators.

California: Corwin Press.

Popham, W.J. (2002). Classroom assessment. What teachers need to know (3^rd ed.). Boston, MA:

Allyn and Bacon.

Race, P., Brown, S., & Smith, B. (2005). 500 tips on assessment (2^nd ed.). London and

            New York: RoutledgeFalmer.

Some dimensions of difference and similarity in the Rurality and Higher Education Project

Introduction - differences and similarities

One of many possible ways to consider the issues of rurality and higher education is to identify and work with major dimensions of difference and similarity. This will encourage an even-handed approach, reducing the danger of inadvertent presumptions of either deficit or advantage.

A few examples are suggested here. There may well be many more such dimensions. A necessary aim of the study may be identify which of these and other dimensions of difference and similarity are significant, for understanding and for action.

This approach to analysing difference and similarity is intended to offer scaffolding for developing emergent models, and a tool for collecting and analysing data. It is intended to complement other approaches being taken by the project.

Some possible dimensions of difference and similarity

• Above all, rural / urban.

And then:

• Student expectations
• Student needs
• Student experiences
• Experiences of transition
• Family, community and sponsor expectations and needs
• University expectations
• University provision

Each of these dimensions may be used to seek to compare students from rural and urban backgrounds.  Beyond that, as suggested later in this post, they may also form the basis for inter-dimension comparisons.

Context

What are the main relevant elements of the contexts from which students come? These may include:

• Life settings, including geographical, economic and social
• Life practices
• World views and systems of thought and belief
• Pedagogies and pedagogic practices – in rural and and urban schools
• Expectations of other people – family, sponsors, community etc.

Student and family, sponsor, community etc. expectations and needs

• Expectations of school education held by students in rural and and non-rural settings.
• Expectations of higher education held by students in rural and and non-rural settings.

• Needs for school education of students in rural and and non-rural settings.

• Needs for higher education of students in rural and and non-rural settings.

• Family, sponsor, community etc. expectations and needs in rural and urban settings for school education
• Family, sponsor, community etc. expectations and needs in rural and urban settings for higher education

Student experiences

• The experiences of rural and urban students in school education.
• The experiences of rural and urban students in higher education.

Transitions

• Differences and similarities between the experience of transition of students variously from rural and urban schools and settings into higher education. 

Institutional expectations

• University expectations of the capabilities and needs of incoming students from rural and urban settings.

Inter-factor comparisons

It can also be useful to look at relations between dimensions. For example:

Student expectations / needs and experiences

We may also compare expectations / needs with experience:

• Differences and similarities between the expectations / needs, and then the experiences of school education, found by students from rural and and non-rural settings.
• Differences and similarities between the expectations / needs, and then the experiences of higher education, found by students from rural and and non-rural settings.

Provision and need

Finally for now, and moving from expectation to provision, we might look for:

• Differences and similarities between university provision for incoming students, from both rural and and non-rural settings, and, again, what these students actually expect and need from higher education.

Conclusion

A framework is sketched for identifying and working with dimensions of difference and similarity relating to students from rural and urban backgrounds. As with any framework, its utility will emerge through use.

Feedback and suggestions for improvement are very welcome.

David Baume PhD SFSEDA SFHEA

19 February 2017

SAULT Forum Planning Meeting (16 - 17 February 2017)

Delegates from eight southern African countries that constitute the SAULT Forum converged for a two-day planning meeting at the University of Botswana (UB) from 16 to 17 February 2017.  They came from twelve southern African universities that affiliate  to the forum.  These institutions are located in eight countries southern African countries, namely, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland, Zambia and Zimbabwe with each of the last two represented by two universities.

The first day of the meeting began on high note for several significant reasons.  For one thing, the venue for the opening and subsequent morning sessions was a superb "laboratory" of the Department of Tourism and Hospitality within the Faculty of Business at UB.  This high-tech facility truly communicates the focal concern of SAULT forum: to provide space to reflect on their practices towards enhancing teaching and learning in the member universities.  Such high infrastructural investment by the host university visibly attests to the depth of its commitment to academic excellence.  That much was underscored by Professor A.P.N. Thapisa - the Director of the Centre for Academic Development (CAD) in his presentation about the strategy of the centre which was the immediate host of the meeting.  In their respective presentations about the five units within the CAD, Thapisa's team of deputy directors demonstrated that they were conversant with the strategy by which the centre seeks to play it role of enabling UB to fulfill its mission and vision.

Lead researcher, Professor Brenda Leibowitz's overview of the SAULT by addressing the questions of the purpose of the forum, who it is for, how member institutions can individually further its aims and its financial sustainability.  She pointed out the the forum is there to provide support for academic development, including professional growth of academics.  In that respect, SAULT is for those members who want to enhance quality teaching and learning.  Regarding students' issues, the forum is concerned about tapping into the richness they bring, the transition issues they face and how to channel these into the teaching and learning situation.  It is up to each member institution to set up the logistics of how it can address this prime agenda.  The forum is there to provide space for members to share.

At another level, the official opening remarks of the Deputy Vice Chancellor of Academic and Student Affairs (DVC ASA), Professor M.M. Mokgwathi were boon to the first day of the meeting as he honed in on SAULT's integral concern with quality assurance in university teaching and learning. He further expressed keen interest in the concept of "rurality" which is at the centre of the cross-national study that has been undertaken by SAULT by pointing out that he looks forwards to the understandings that the investigation will uncover.

Three afternoon sessions rounded off day one of the meeting.  The first session led by Dr David Baume from the UK took delegates through a reflective group exercise on curriculum development, pedagogy and learning.  The key emphasis was on moving away from teaching as knowledge transmission to concern with crafting teaching and learning activities that lend themselves to assessment hence delegates were asked to come up with hypothetical curricula together with assessment strategies.  Both the group and plenary reports were highly insightful.  The next session was led by Dr F. Januario from Mozambique.  He took the delegates through a brainstorming session on Theoretical Orientation for Classroom-based Assessment.  Through discussions of learning theories, the session proved to have enhanced them with insights form the teaching experiences of delegates.

The day rounded off with a session for adoption of the agenda for day two.  By then, there was a clear evidence that the day ended at the same high note it had begun.  Readers of this blog can expect more inputs from delegates and SAULT invites comments and ideas for future growth of the network.

SAULT Botswana

Technology and rurality CAN work!

Concept Paper on Decolonisation and Rurality Research in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs)

Is rurality determined by geographical location or is it a cognitive perception?
Is it implying a deficit in the Higher Education Institutions' systems?