Programme Development using the Participatory Action Research Process

One of the considerations for the research was to identify effective ways for individuals to work together to create the programme and identify improvements to the process.

x What are the best ways of working with an in-house team to develop an online programme?

This is very specific to the context of CCL, its organisational structure, and the roles and relationships of individuals within this structure. Two individuals with the same job title, but working at different libraries, may have different expectations

Page 173

and opportunities around how they can be involved in a professional development programme and the amount of time they can commit. The context of the effects of the earthquakes and subsequent recovery also had significant impacts on how the PARG operated. The original pre-earthquake group of library trainers had mainly been based at Central Library (now closed) and the group had been dispersed across the library network in different locations and roles. For some, this meant that they were able to commit significant amounts of time to the development while others were too busy with other work tasks. The work commitments of the different individuals in the group changed as new roles were created and libraries opened or closed.

For example, one member of the group was able to develop an extensive part of the programme early in the development but later, when a library opened, was unable to commit any more time. Another group member, who was involved minimally at the beginning of the project, was relocated to my own team along with someone else who was not part of the original group and both of them went on to make significant contributions to the development and delivery of the programme. Pre-earthquake, trainers were given guidelines relating to their face-to-face training roles, which detailed expectations around hours etc. However, no guidelines were in place with respect to developing online programmes. Those trainers who were enthusiastic about the programme gave what time they could, but were restricted by the demands of their roles and their own team

requirements.

In addition to developing the programme, some trainers also chose to be part of the PARG and were interviewed. Aside from the interview there was no difference in the involvement by trainers who were part of the research and those who were not. The Participatory Action Research methodology however, had unintended consequences as in an effort to maintain the participatory nature, the development work itself was managed from a participatory perspective Phillips, McNaught, & Kennedy (2012) describe the process of developing e-learning programmes as being a project, and subject to the same factors as traditional project management.

Page 174

In this framework I took the roles of both researcher and project manager and as I wanted the group to work collaboratively and take ownership of the training programme themselves, my project management approach was primarily

participatory. Initial difficulties in getting the development work started are likely to stem from this. According to Situational Leadership theories of project

management (Beukmann, 2012), project management leadership styles should adapt as a project progresses starting with an authoritarian style and only becoming more participatory once tasks and roles have been established. My reluctance to dictate to the group delayed the work’s progress and also caused confusion for members of the PARG as to what their role was to be.

I felt somewhat concerned when Angela said she thought the programme was lacking a direction in the instructional design. I thought we had discussed lots of this – but on reflection I realised that a lot of the project structure is in my head and not clearly articulated. I think I needed to set a clearer direction right from the start. The trainers have done huge amounts of work and

achieved lots but she said she felt “like an idiot.” I also think some of this is to do with the technology not being as simple as I thought with the lack of resources and slow computers making things twice as difficult. - Alice – journal entry 19/ 7

I encouraged trainees to choose their own level and type of involvement and create the resources in the style they preferred. This led to a wide variety in the style of resources, a feature commentated on favourably by the pilot group, but also changed the intended problem solving focus of the programme to information giving.

Another issue for the group was the programme development work itself, which for some was more technical than they had anticipated and also more time

consuming. For my own part I had made assumptions about the PARG’s familiarity with IT skills (e.g. I had expected all trainers to know how to save pictures from the internet and how to use a web page editor) that proved to be unfounded.

Page 175

For my own practice, the study provided important lessons and insights into the management of developing an online learning programme at CCL and some guidelines for the future:

x View programme development as a project (Phillips, McNaught, & Kennedy, 2012) whose management may best be addressed by standard project management tools to establish clear working guidelines and avoid delays x Clearly identify the role of online programme developer as opposed to

trainer, and the skills needed to undertake the role, to avoid confusion and make expectations clear

x Make an early a start on the creation of content via working bees to develop motivation and ownership of the project by the group and avoid delays