V Morning Symposium at ESUP/DTIC
V Morning Symposium at ESUP/DTIC
Wednesday, 11th March 2018, the V Symposium on Teaching Innovation and Quality at STIC/ESUP was celebrated. It was organized by the Teaching Quality and Innovation Support Unit ESUP/DTIC. The event was attended by almost 30 people, including members of the DTIC/ESUP teaching staff, teaching interns at the Department and some members of the CLIK UPF. In the spirit of previous meetings (please find here the summaries of the first, second, third and fourth editions), the Symposium aimed to favour debating and reflexion based on own experience as well as share concerns; all of it in relation to teaching, innovation and quality.
The Symposium took place from 9.30 to 13.00h approximately, and was moderated by Davinia Hernández-Leo, Deputy Director for Teaching of the UCA ESUP/DTIC and Director of the USQUID. The event comprised the following five sessions: “Quality Teaching and Innovation at our UCA”, “The New UPF Teaching Model”, “Redefining Classroom-Workshops”, “Actions in Courses: Methods and Tools to Facilitate Learning”, and “Joint Discussion and Reflection”. The attendants contributed to the discussions many times during the sessions.
Before starting with the sessions, Enric Peig, Director of the ESUP, stated that the indicators encourage us to analyse and consider the situation positively and optimistically.
Session 1: “Quality Teaching and Innovation at our UCA”
This first session was presented by Davinia Hernández-Leo and Verónica Moreno (USQUID ESUP/DTIC). It focused on stating the USQUID tasks and the studies conducted this year, such as the introduction of Gender Perspective in Undergraduate Degrees, the study about TFGs, HackLAB, the teaching staff’s reports on satisfaction, etc. Please remember that you can find all these data and reports on the USQUID web.
Results of the PDI survey on teaching:
Regarding the survey provided to teachers, the turnout was 30% (75 out of 244) —the proportion was similar among the students. This survey has been reviewed considering the comments and suggestions made by the teachers. Concerning results, every item reaches at least 3 out of 5. The lowest major indicator is the mentorship model, which the whole institution (UPF) is already trying to change.
Some figures about undergraduate, Master and PhD students’ satisfaction
Both at undergraduate and Master levels, the figures are rather positive. Mentorship and coordination between different subjects were the lowest-rated items, even though they have increased compared to last year.
At the level of PhD, the results are very positive and the rating concerning PhD scholarships was especially analysed. Davinia Hernández-Leo openly asked the attendant PhD students about the training actions during the PhD. Some answers referred to the improvement of activities so that they can fit better both in terms of timing and contents as facilitators for teaching.
Evolution of teaching satisfaction indicators
In this session some students’ satisfaction figures were shown; these were collected through different tools provided to students.
Students’ teaching satisfaction ranks between 6.75 and 8, approximately. Although the situation has improved compared to last year, there are many fluctuations. Students tend to rate higher lecturers than subjects. On this point, some lecturers shared their impressions concerning the students’ perception of the academic curriculum. They consider that students rate lower a subject whenever they cannot find how its syllabus is related to the tasks that they are to carry out in their future careers.
Then, there was a reflection on the results that correlate satisfaction with importance. Concerning ICTs degrees, a low satisfaction rate with mentorships was highlighted again, although these are considered, at the same time, the least important factor. In some cases, the respondents also highlighted that there is room for improvement in coordination between subjects. However, a change has been made in the tool from this year to specify which aspect regarding coordination should specifically be improved. In the Bachelor’s degree in Biomedicine, results are broadly positive: there is only one divergence in coordination, which is deemed the most important item, yet having obtained the lowest rate.
The OSWALDO project, already launched last year, was also discussed. The project consists in peer observation between teachers using specific tools. It was also reminded that the project is still going on and efforts are being made so that the CLIK can implement it.
In compliance with the ECTS system, 36% of the academic workload should consist of face-to-face activities and the rest of it should be autonomous work. However, the survey results show that these rates are not being reached. Therefore, redesigning some aspects is being considered as a means of improving teaching and meeting the students’ real needs.
Session 2: “The New UPF Teaching Model”
Davinia Hernández-Leo briefly presented this topic, since the project is at an early stage: reflections and how to approach the different aspects concerned are still going on. She said that intense meetings are being held fortnightly. Yet the topic of face-to-face learning was specifically mentioned and a debate on it was opened. The feedback gathered will be sent to the working groups.
Session 3: “Redefining Classroom-Workshops”
Vanesa Daza, Davinia Hernández-Leo and Enric Peig presented the proposal offered by the University to virtualize and restructure the classroom-workshops, especially concerning connectivity quality. Other contributions were to install sliding partitions, plugs on the floor, mobile projectors and more screens, to adapt the classrooms to connect several computers and to allow clearance in computer rooms for people working with their laptops.
Session 4: “Actions in Courses: Methods and Tools to Facilitate Learning”
In this session, Coloma Ballester, Patricia Vitoria and Adrià Arbués presented the experience resulting from the subject Image Processing. They stated that they use tools such as Debates, Kahoot! and sometimes Quizz. They also presented PearDeck, an application that they mainly use in laboratories. It is a paid application and they mentioned Nearpod as a similar application; it is free alternative for groups up to 30 students. Although they have introduced new tools, their impact on performance cannot be assessed, since the subject has historically obtained very good results. In any case, they stated that the class-attendance rate has increased.
Following this contribution a debate was opened on how relevant these resources can be in the classroom. It was concluded that it all depends on making good use of them, not overusing them and pursuing a coherent approach in each subject.
Next, Narcís Parés presented the changes made in the subject Communication in Technical English, where goal setting has tried to instil in students how necessary and useful this subject is. Moreover, there has been an attempt to clearly specify the methodology and timing of the sessions. Thanks to these readjustments, the class-attendance rate has increased, although the subject rating in AVALDO has not significantly increased.
Session 5: “Joint Discussion and Reflection”
The Symposium ended with a recapitulation of some topics that had arisen throughout the sessions. Several attendants took part in a brainstorming and contributed with impressions about topics dealt with in the event. The most important topic was the implementation of new tools and resources in the classroom and their correct application. Another relevant topic was face-to-face learning and the organisation of working time outside the classroom.
Finally, it was reminded that the USQUID ESUP/DTIC is available to anyone needing help with innovation and teaching quality.
At the end of the event, the attendants were thanked for their participation.