Cross-Language Collaboration: Perspectives on Development of Distance Course

1. Academic mobility within a department What happens when French and German specialists work on an Italian distance course Elodie Vialleton & DrUwe Baumann, Department of Languages, The Open University

2. Context • UK Higher Education sector: resource constraints • The Department of Languages at the Open University The challenge: widening the curriculum with limited new resources. The approach: cross-language teams to develop new modules in Welsh, Chinese and Italian

3. This paper • is based on feedback from colleagues • describes our Department and how we work • presents a case study: L150 Intermediate Italian • examines outcomes: challenges and benefits

4. The Department of Languages • Founded in 1991 • Modules in Chinese, English for Academic Purposes, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Welsh • from beginners’ to graduate level in French, German, Spanish • Various qualifications, including BA Modern Language Studies • over 11 000 students in 2012 • about 70 members of staff in the Department • about 40 academic staff

5. Distance learning materials • Course website as the hub • Use of VLE

6. Distance learning materials • Course books • Audio-visual materials, DVD-ROMs

7. participants chat microphone whiteboard Distance learning materials • Materials for e-tutorials (virtual whiteboards)

8. Module production • in-house design and production (all stages, from syllabus design to activities on the VLE and assessment materials) • in teams • traditionally: up to 4 years development time

9. Case study: intermediate Italian • L150 Vivace • Standard model: mix of media, in-house design

10. The team • 2 academics specialists of Italian (one experienced in Open Distance Learning or ODL, one novice) • 4 non-specialist academics: 2 specialists of French, 1 specialist of German, 1 specialist responsible for student and tutor support (all experienced in designing and writing language courses for ODL audiences) • 1 administrator • Some consultants

11. The input from non-specialists • Planning the module structure and distribution of materials across different media • Overall syllabus design and design of unit outlines • Planning cultural content and overall focus of videos • Designing the principles of assessment

12. Did it go as far as materials creation? • Yes… • writing up content taught in English based on outlines or items provided by specialists • …but • The bulk of the writing had to be done by specialists

13. The input from specialists • Details of the syllabus (linguistic progression, vocabulary, etc.) • Writing all the content in Italian (designing language and culture activities)… • … and a lot of the content in English (e.g. feedback, grammar teaching points) • Supervision of video production (e.g. what questions to ask to elicit particular language content) and audio recordings • Writing of assessment tasks

14. What worked well in cross-language teams • The combination of the knowledge, skills and experience of the specialists with the transferable skills and previous knowledge and experience of the non-specialists • All team members developed a sense of ownership of the project • Flexibility, open-mindedness, pragmatism, perseverance • Role of administrative support

15. What were the challenges in cross-language teams? • Focus of Italian specialist on writing, less involvement in other tasks and discussions • Negotiating different perspectives and approaches to teaching of language and culture, and different approaches to ODL • Issues due to roles being interpreted differently at the outset (e.g. blurred boundary between generic / specific content) • Dealing with different personalities • Experience of and expectations about team work

16. The benefits? Content • Higher focus on reflection on cultural differences reflected in the development of intercultural competence in the module • A different angle to critical reading, closer to a student’s perspective • Higher standardisation across the module due to writing being shared • Comparability with modules at the same level in different languages

17. The benefits? Personal development • Confrontation of cultures and teaching cultures • Stronger focus on teaching practices, opportunity for self-reflection on pedagogy and teaching methods • New skills and different experience gained • Redefining of identity (professional and individual) • Intercultural communication ‘live’

18. The benefits? For the Department • Cost effectiveness. HR management, deployment of resources and opportunity for more rapid response to market demand • Sharing of practice and expertise • Widening the skills base of staff • Development of a more collaborative approach • Breaking down of ivory towers • Stronger harmonisation across language teams • Stronger sense of community, better integration of members of smaller teams.

19. Internal academic mobility Beyond distance teaching • Fostering collaboration and dialogue outside of individuals’ subject specialism • Exchange of knowledge and practice (embedded staff development) • More integration across related disciplines • Greater comparability of student experience which is a ever greater concern in the sector • Developing a different sense of identity, for individuals and for subject communities

20. uwe.baumann@open.ac.uk elodie.vialleton@open.ac.ukDepartment of LanguagesThe Open UniversityWalton HallMilton KeynesMK7 6AA www.open.ac.uk