Skip to main content

Table 6 Charting of focus group data

From: Educational innovation projects in Dutch higher education: bottom-up contextual coping to deal with organizational challenges

 

Coping codes

C10 Primary appraisal

C11 Secondary appraisal

C12 Coping efforts

Thematic Codes (online teaching)

C1 Skills gap for developing OOE

Form and status of materials regarded differently:

- Knowledge about possibilities and appropriate forms missing

- Development of materials seems more definitive and less easy to adjust

- Use and reuse of materials ambiguous and complex

Teacher practices more distributed:

- Involvement of external and multiple stakeholders

- Communication with all stakeholders

Consideration of form, media and learning objectives

- Consider use and reuse possibilities

- Adjust the form of the materials specifically to learning objectives and requirements

Involvement of more stakeholders in the development process:

- Incoporate teachers and their preferences

- Make use of expertise of external bureaus and media parties

- Involvement of library in data management

Sharing of knowledge:

- Platform/central portal or meeting opportunities to gain ideas and knowledge

Planning

- Consider major time investment beforehand

- Consider multiple stakeholders

- Don’t underestimate coordination of tasks and responsibilities

Seeking support:

- Coaching by external expertise

- Supporting tools (e.g. autocue)

- Make use of informal networks to find expertise

Create possibilities to experiment:

- Make use of local/bottum up resources (e.g. budget form local bodies for for example equipment)

- Set up local workshops

C2 Skills gap for teaching in OOE

n/a

n/a

n/a

C3 Lack of awareness of goal and merits of OOE

The commons idea behind OOE is missing:

- Individualistic attitude

- Forced extrinsic motivation âž” no intrinsic value creation âž” ambiguous knowledge of OOE

Not being able to see multiple applications of OOE materials

Management does not pick up on bottom up initiatives

Sharing of knowledge:

- Platform/central portal with a collection of ideas and good practices to get inspired

Incentivise OOE development and teaching innovations

Adapted and personalised training possibilities

Sharing knowledge:

- Share examples with direct colleagues

- Emphazise the gains for others in their contexts

- Project as organizational signal

C4 Reluctance to use/participate in OOE

n/a

n/a

n/a

C5 Time constraints of teachers

n/a

n/a

n/a

C6 Changing role of the teacher

Ownership:

- Of educational material distributed

- Process of producing material distributed

- New requirements for teaching

- Reluctance of teachers accepting a tasks/roles

- Control over choices in the design process distributed

Emphasis on educational design over teaching

Role distribution:

- Make it a collective effort

- Find fitting roles

- Make solid agreements on roles and responsibilities

- Invest time and effort in continuously checking role distribution and expectations

- Involve stakeholders internally to fulfill new roles (e.g. library)

n/a

Thematic Codes (support mechanisms)

C7 Lack of operational support

Basic technical support:

- Decisions on IT on higher level sometimes hinder OOE design

- Not sufficiently adjusted to requirements for OOE (i.e. is one size fits all)

- Hard to find the appropriate support

Central advisory body:

- Strategic choice of institution

- Centrally located

- Adjusted and personal advice

Roles:

- Content and format experts equally important

- Clear distribution of tasks and responsibilities

Professionalization on OOE skills:

- Formal requirement (e.g. part of incentive structure)

- Training (e.g. as part of a BKO)

Involve decision makers:

- Involve decsion makers from higher levels early on

- Find where crucial decisions are being taken

The power of bottom up:

- Find capacity in own circle of influence

- Access to resources at local budgets

- Creation of awareness

C8 Lack of strategic support

Involvement management

- Long term choices taken at higher levels (e.g. infrastructure) âž” hard to influence

- Management not involved throughout the whole process

- Funding during project period, ends after

Role models:

- Chairs in Open Education (professorships)

- Put good work and examples in the spotlight (e.g. rewards)

Incentive structures:

- Rewarding more than just teaching and research

Structural funding:

- Included in institutional budgets of HEIs for experimentation

OOE for non-formal educational purposes to build capacity:

- Pre-master

- Pre-university

- Extra curricular

- Additional materials (complementary to existing curricula)

Informal information sharing

- Source of information for colleagues

- Source of inspiration for colleagues

- Sharing project outcomes

C9 Lack of policy in the organization

Top-down facilitation:

- Overarching commons vision needs overarching stimulation

Strategic choices not fitting operational needs:

- IT choices

Connecting levels within HEI:

- Bottom up enthusiasm goes hand in hand with top-down facilitation (e.g. time given, resources available, experimentation room)

Bottom-up persistence:

- Arrange equipment, studio and funding locally

- Better uptake throughout the organization

Appealing to external professional communities:

- Funding

- Long term sustainability

- Broad uptake outside HEI (legitimization)