6.6 Specific Recommendations:
1
That the researchers work with institutions that have expressed an interest in dialogical teaching to: a. Develop a guide on dialogical teaching; b. Design workshops to support the development of dialogical teaching approaches appropriate to the institution; c.
Explore with the institutional management, potential ongoing support mechanisms for educators;
d. Explore with the institutional management, how to recognise individual educator agency in trialling/implementing dialogical approaches; e. Discuss with quality assurance teams how their systems can best support dialogical teaching approaches; f.
Design workshops for institutional managers on dialogical teaching, specifically in relation to c, d, and e; and
g. Work with like-minded educators who can take on the delivery of the workshops to ensure sustainability. 2.
Data collection through course accreditation and student evaluation forms (e.g. TRAQOM), for example, could be designed to encourage dialogical teaching approaches by valuing learner engagement, authenticity, development of meta-cognition, holistic learning design and inquiry processes. Valuing these characteristics often means a redesign of such forms.
3.
Assessment to be integrated into learning design and not separated from the learning and from the educator facilitating learning.
4.
Design of new programs requires a team approach rather than contracting out to individual adult educators who are not brought together.
5.
IAL could build in the principles of design of dialogical teaching into the courses that develop curriculum designers and across their programs.
84
