Representations of Practice

Activity name	Representations of Practice
Participants	Leeds Met	Aims Covered: ALL
Timescales	June 2007 to April 2010
Background	Central to Phase 2 of ALiC is the facilitation of the adoption of excellent practice beyond the CETL ALiC consortium. This can partly be achieved through traditional dissemination methods such as workshops, publications and consultancy (Activity I). However, transfer of practice is a complex process. The Fund for the Development of Teaching and Learning (FDTL) project Effective Projectwork in Computer Science (EPCoS) found that transfer of practice involves transformation and tailoring of ideas [Fincher, Petre & Clark, 2001]. The EPCoS project used a representational form inspired by patterns and pattern languages [Alexander, 1979], termed “bundles”, which was initially adopted as a core element of ALiC’s dissemination model. However, deriving appropriate and effective representations of practice, whether using the “bundle” or some other form, is not easy. It can be hard to abstract what it is about a single case that is responsible for its success; a body of evidence is needed to establish not only that a particular practice is repeatably excellent, but also to identify the factors which lead to this quality. In addition, practitioners find it difficult to identify and articulate the processes through which they actually assimilate good practice into their work, making it harder to identify the sources of transferable practice to build such a body of evidence, and indeed to represent practice effectively. The systematic sharing of and recording of practice is therefore critical. ALiC has to date adopted the research approach initiated in the EPCoS project for sharing practice within the consortium but the use of “bundles” as representations of this shared practice has been more limited across the consortium. This may be for a number of reasons and this activity will therefore evaluate the bundles from alongside other possible representational candidates such as patterns and portfolios [Hutchings, 1998] in order to ensure we have an approach which enables practitioners both to represent their own practice and to make use of that of others. To extend the experience and evidence of shared practice available to this activity and to widen the discussion on appropriate representations beyond CETL partners, we are supporting and collaborating in a second instantiation of the Disciplinary Commons (DC) [Tenenburg & Fincher, 2007]. This will be facilitated through collaboration between CETL ALiC at Leeds Met and the model’s initiator, Fincher, and will focus on the core computing area of human-computer interaction. It will particularly seek to explore the issue of how practitioners actually identify and incorporate excellent practice into their own work, and what characteristics are needed in representations that support this process.
Activity	The work package entails three main activities: Collaboration in a Disciplinary Commons activity focused on human-computer interaction, with a specific focus on how educators inform their own practice. Human-computer interaction is chosen as it is a core area of computing curriculum in which Leeds Met has strong expertise. The abstraction of examples of successful practice from CETL ALiC and the Disciplinary Commons into a number of representational forms, in collaboration with CETL partners and participants in the Disciplinary Commons. An evaluation of these forms of representations of practice (for example patterns, portfolios and bundles) to establish both how easily practitioners can use them to represent their own practice and how effectively they actually facilitate transfer of excellent practice.
Evaluation	Through involvement in a cycle of the Disciplinary Commons, this package will develop outputs in close consultation with practitioners both within and beyond the CETL. This participatory approach will involve ongoing evaluation, through questionnaires, interviews, focus groups and observation, focusing on both production and consumption of representations of practice. Specific activities where different representations are evaluated by practitioners will be used as well as longitudinal studies of their actual impact on practice.
Expected outcomes	Better understanding of existing practice in core areas of computing education such as human-computer interaction and introductory programming through sharing the outputs of Disciplinary Commons activities. More use of appropriate representational forms to share excellent practice both within the CETL and beyond. Wider adoption of the outputs of CETL ALiC activities through effective representations that enable practice to be transferred. Enhanced student experience through the facilitation of adoption of excellent practice.
Expected outputs	A model for effective representation of practice that is appropriate for CETL ALiC. A collection of examples of excellent practice represented in an appropriate form. Recommendations on the effective creation and use of different representational forms.
Risks	Examples of excellent practice may not be made available. Human-computer interaction practitioners may not engage effectively with the disciplinary commons. It may not be possible to develop appropriate and effective representations of practice.