Experiential and Simulated Learning: An

Experiential and Simulated Learning: An Interdisciplinary Approach D. Gan, D. Chadwick, D. Gresty, T. Vuong

E.Phillips

Dept. of Computing and Information Systems University of Greenwich London, UK e-mail: [email protected]

Dept. of Law University of Greenwich London, UK

Abstract — This paper describes a collaborative initiative of lecturing staff in a Computing and Information Systems Department working together with lecturing staff from a Law Department in the same university. It involved their combined efforts to construct an experiential and simulated learning experience for students from both departments in which both sets could use their different discipline-based skills practically in a simulated real-life scenario of professional interest to both sets of students. Educators must provide reflective real-life practice to facilitate the transition from university to the work place, producing graduates with the skills that employers value requiring minimal further training.

coursework which were then mapped onto the course results.

Keywords—collaborative learning, experiential learning, simulated learning, PBL, peer-group learning

INTRODUCTION Transitioning from higher education to the workplace is often problematic. Educators must provide reflective real-life practice to facilitate this transition and produce graduates with the skills that employers value thereby requiring minimal further training. The research questions posed are does experiential and simulated learning assist in the preparation of students for the workplace and does an interdisciplinary approach offer meaningful advantages which enhance the student experience. This paper describes a collaborative initiative of lecturing staff in a Computing and Information Systems Department working together with lecturing staff from the Law Department in the same university. It involved their combined efforts to construct a learning experience for students from both departments in which both sets could use their different discipline-based skills in practical involvement through the use of a simulated real-life scenario which was of professional interest to both sets of students. Mechanisms were explored by which both sets of students could engage in a collaborative learning exercise to enhance their experience of higher education. This also provides opportunities for peer-learning. The lecturers wished to confirm their hypothesis that such collaboration would enhance practical, critical and analytical skills, satisfy the relevant academic benchmark standards and increase the employability of both sets of graduates. A mixed quantitative and qualitative approach was taken. Research was carried out into the theoretical underpinnings of experiential and simulated learning, in addition to the project leaders’ previous research and publications in this area of education pedagogy [1][2]. Post exercise the students were required to complete an evaluative questionnaire and submit a piece of reflective

PEDAGOGIC RATIONALE There were several pedagogic issues to be addressed: the need for a simulation of real-life practice that would meet the needs of students from both disciplines; the need to emphasize experiential learning (as opposed to straightforward didactic learning); and the need to address the professional skills required for both sets of students to make them more ‘employment-ready’. Firstly, the need for a simulation was researched and it was found that simulation-learning was well-practiced within clinical, medical [3] and engineering teaching and learning where it is used, not just to provide a closer-toreality learning experience with the possible use of roleplay but also to allow students to confront their anxieties within a safe environment. Fry, Ketteridge and Marshall (2009) identified that the same also provides the educator with a regulated, reproducible teaching arena [4]. Simulations of real-world events are also known to be more successful when prior theory explaining an underlying concept of some topic is then replicated in a practical simulation in which the learner sees the ‘theory’ put to use in a ‘practical’ reality. Such repeated learning in a different context is known to enhance learning generally. Secondly, the need for experiential learning was addressed by consideration of Kolb’s Learning cycle [5] which is based around not just learning about something but having an experience or ‘doing’ something and then reflecting, processing, thinking and further understanding it for improvement the next time something is encountered. To learn from experience we have to ‘reflect’ or examine and analyze the experience [6]. ‘Reflection on practice’ is a central theme of learning and development in many of the professions e.g. medicine, nursing, engineering [7]. Such practical professionalism cannot be learned solely through conventional teaching methods – it requires (amongst other things) role models, observation of practitioners, self-practice and personal experience of carrying out tasks of one’s job, or future job, with reflection upon that practice [4]. Thirdly, this exercise forms part of the manner in which experiential and simulated learning is utilized in the teaching of both sets of students. For Law students, in particular, this is an essential part of the transition from theory-based learning to professional and vocational understanding and constitutes a key element of the ‘Benchmark Standards for Law’, required by the legal professional bodies [8].

Collaborative pedagogy indicates that this helps to promote students’ critical thinking and problem solving skills by engaging with their peers from different disciplines [9]. The simulated learning exercise was designed to incorporate as many professional skills as possible [4-3]. Existing research shows that the use of mock trials for training medical professionals has been found to be highly beneficial from the view of the participants [10]. For the computer forensics students, they had to master the skills of conducting a digital forensic investigation, safeguarding the evidence from corruption or alteration of any kind, form opinions about what the evidence implies, write a report according to a given professional template and then be able to defend and explain their findings in an expert-witness court room setting. The law students equally, were required to be able to listen carefully, discern relevancies from irrelevancies in given testimony, take notes, ask pertinent questions and delve into the witness’s testimony to determine the ‘truth’ [11]. EXPERIENTIAL AND SIMULATED LEARNING EXERCISE Experiential learning is based on the notion that understanding is not a fixed or unchangeable element of thought and that experiences can contribute to its forming and reforming [4]. The experiential cycle (Kolb’s cycle) does not simply involve having an experience or ‘doing’ but also reflecting, processing, thinking and further understanding and usually improvement the next time something is encountered [5]. To learn from experience we have to examine and analyze the experience; this is what reflection means. ‘Reflection on practice’ is central to learning and development in the professions. This artistry cannot be learned solely through conventional teaching methods – it requires role models, observation of competent practitioners, self-practice, mentors, experience in carrying out all the tasks of one’s job and reflection upon that practice [4]. In the simulated exercise both sets of the students of each discipline were given a theory-practical approach. Both sets were subjected to a priming lecture (theoretical approach) by their respective tutor a week before the exercise which was followed up with this exercise (practical approach). In the theory lecture, each set of students was taught the common area of expert witness testimony from their discipline-specific viewpoint. This was a normal lecture experience with the lecturer speaking and providing notes, with students also making their own notes. The Law students are in the final year of their degree which includes a course on the Law of Evidence. This covers a range of evidential and procedural issues, including the admissibility and use of expert evidence and legal scrutiny of expert witnesses and constitutes part of the assessment for this course. Additionally, the Law students are required to consider the manner of the forensic investigation from a strict legal perspective, in the context of the presentation of such evidence in legal proceedings, and also to reflect, in a critical manner, on their own understanding of the rules pertaining to the

presentation and admission of expert evidence. They were told about the vagaries of witness evidence, how two witnesses to the same event may have different interpretations and how witnesses may put different emphasis on observed facts and asked to apply this theoretical knowledge in the practical need for careful listening leading to specific cross-questioning. The computer forensic students were briefed on the importance of giving testimony that was jargon-free (non-technical), to be able to explain technical terms in plain English when required, along with the possible need to give an opinion within their area of expertise (expert witnesses are allowed to give this if asked – unlike ordinary witnesses), which fits the collected facts from their forensics investigation. For both sets of students, their discipline-based theory lecture was then followed up a week later with the shared practical exercise which used the theoretical knowledge previously taught. This use of repetition, but with a different perspective in the follow up, is well known in education as being highly beneficial and provides better learning than just theory and a ‘talk and chalk’ approach alone. The actual simulation consisted of an exercise in which postgraduate computer forensics (STEM) students were asked to conduct a practical digital forensic investigation of a given crime scenario which contained hidden evidential artefacts. The students then individually presented their findings from the investigation in front of their forensics lecturer who was accompanied by several law students in a simulated expert witness testimony scenario. The law students were permitted to cross examine the computer forensics students as part of their assessment of the competency of the expert witness testimony and presentation skills given by these students. These peer-assessments were used by the computer forensics lecturer as an aid to assessing the computer forensics students on a formal course assignment. In addition, the law students, were themselves assessed by their own law lecturer on how well they wrote up the experience as part of a formal assignment on the Law of Evidence course, incorporating critical reviews of witness behavior as observed in this exercise. The digital forensic student when transitioning to the role of professional and expert witness must quickly become proficient at being objective, technically accurate, able to present persuasive arguments in both written and oral testimony, and ultimately if all of these skills combine together they appear as credible experts to decision makers. The use of cross-examination, presents an unusual learning experience for the digital forensics students as they are challenged not only on the normal summative assessment factors of an assignment, such as if they did, or did not technically find the correct artefacts but also on their ability to accurately report on this both in writing and oral format, as well as if they can present this material as credible. The law students are able to test them on credibility factors such as if they can objectively present their findings, will they accept alternative explanations for their findings, will the students become upset if accused of being biased or incompetent and so

on. For the law student this gives them the opportunity to develop and test their skills of evaluation and criticism whilst reviewing the testimony of the peer student, developing what Banks describes as the ‘lawyer-inaction’ skills [12] such as interviewing. EVALUATION To evaluate the performance of the “expert witness” presentations given by the computer forensics students, the law students were given a marking scheme to ensure consistency. This used the Likert scale from 1 (I do not agree) to 5 (I fully agree) for categories such as “Confident; Knowledgeable; Convincing; Sufficient evidence found (to prove the case); Explained the evidence when challenged; Smart and professional”. They also had to grade how confident they felt that the evidence presented had sufficient weight to enable them to clearly identify if the accused was guilty or not guilty. The presiding lecturer had a similar marking scheme that also included the written report evaluation, which graded the technical aspects of the investigation. The final coursework marks for the computer forensics students were derived using all of these sources. After the exercise, both sets of students were asked to fill in questionnaires to gain their feedback on the exercise as a whole as observed from their particular discipline-based viewpoint. Common questions for both sets of students were ‘did you enjoy this exercise?’, ‘do you think it helped in your overall learning of this topic’, ‘do you think the exercise gave insight into the practical nature of the real-world’. The replies from all students were very positive; both sets felt that they had benefitted from the exercise and that it would aid their further studies and professional development in their respective areas. Students in both disciplines benefitted from this academic experience. The computer forensics students had a simulated realistic experience of being a forensics investigator and an expert witness. While the law students were able to act in the role of a barrister or litigator and undertake a cross examination. As a direct result of this exercise the law students had improved exam results for the course Law of Evidence. Anecdotally the computer forensics students who have graduated and now have jobs as forensics analysts’ report that employers are very impressed with this exercise when discussed during interviews. This obviously has an impact on the way that the student is perceived and on their immediate job prospects. This also has the additional benefit of raising the profile of the department within the industry. It is well known that landing their first job in the cyber security or forensics industry can be challenging for students, so anything that we as educators can do to enhance their standing in the job market can only be to the students’ advantage. Below are testimonies from two recent graduates: A. Student 1 “During my time studying and undertaking coursework for my forensics course I found that this helped prepare me for my first job in forensics. I found that the expert witness coursework was a great experience and an insight into what my job may involve

in the future. During my interviews for my first forensic job I mentioned the coursework as I felt that although I had no work experience in this field yet this showed at least we had an understanding on what to expect. My interviewers were very impressed with how much the University of Greenwich offered when it came to computer forensics and how practical it had been made without losing the theory/report writing side.” B. Student 2 “When I first started applying for jobs I was aiming at cyber security and I got head hunted (for a forensics role) purely for some of the aspects mentioned on my C.V e.g. FTK, Encase use and the coursework methods e.g. the coursework where we forensically went through the images of hard drives with the scenario and then demonstrating our findings via documentation and mock court room settings (expert witness scenarios). I even saw one of my interviewers about a month ago and she stopped and said I remember you, your interview stuck in my mind because you gave us such easy examples of why you would be good for this organization.” The inception and use of simulation within clinical teaching and learning has allowed both sets of students to confront their anxieties within a safe environment, while providing the teacher with a regulated, reproducible teaching arena. The use of role play is an extremely useful teaching and learning tool [4]. ‘Tell me and I forget, teach me and I remember, involve me and I will learn’ quote attributed to Benjamin Franklin quoted in [13]. CONCLUSION This approach was devised by staff from both departments to encompass several pertinent pedagogic issues. The results supported the theoretical hypothesis. The interdisciplinary approach towards a computer forensics examination enabled effective peer-group learning and assessment. The computer forensics students acted as investigators and presented expert witness reports in “court”. The law students acted as professional lawyers examining the evidence presented. The simulated exercise enhanced student engagement by developing skills outside of those learnt in the classroom. The student response was very positive, improving theoretical understanding and overall grades for both sets of students. Crucially, it enabled each student to engage with fellow professionals from another discipline as they would face in their professional lives on graduating. It is the opinion of the combined computer forensics and law team that this approach of cross-disciplinary collaboration using experiential and simulated learning, peer-assessment, peer-learning, theory-practical repetition heightens the learning experience for both sets of students and constitutes a useful pedagogic innovation. The lecturers also concluded that the learning outcomes were successful and that there was a sound theoretical basis for this approach. For the future, the team intend to work on improving their approach and extending to other areas of computing-law collaboration. It is possible, also, that, in time, this experience could be extended to build a generic

model of cross-disciplinary collaboration using experiential and simulated learning which may be useful for other discipline areas. The rationale for building such a model is that new knowledge possibly arises between the ‘silos’ of discipline knowledge characterized by current academic teaching practice. These exercises had the computer forensics students engage as participants only and they did not review their fellow peers’ presentations. A future area of investigation may include the use of peers, providing a third-party review of the testimony: acting as a jury. A measurement of witness credibility such as the method proposed in [14] can provide scores and a list of characteristics that the jury believe the expert possessed during their testimony (such as being Self-Assured, Well-Spoken, Confident etc.). Correlating the feedback from the peers with the self-reflection of the participants may provide a useful future learning tool for next set of participants. [1] D. Gan, D. Chadwick, D. Frangiskatos, (2010); Development of Challenging Assessments for Computer Forensics Students;8th Annual Teaching Computer Forensics Workshop(HEA-ICS), Nov, Sunderland University,UK [2] D. Chadwick D. Gan, (2011); An Educational Paradigm (PBL) for Teaching Computer Forensics; HEA-ICS Conference, University of Derby, February 2011 [3] M.L. Sheakley, G.E. Gilbert, K. Leighton, M. Hall, D. Callender, D. Pederson, A brief simulation intervention increasing basic science and clinical knowledge, Medical Education Online Vol. 21, Iss. 1, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/meo.v21.30744 [4] H. Fry, S. Ketteridge, S. Marshall, 2009; Understanding Student Learning; chap 2 in A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education; publ. Routledge ISBN 978-0-415-4346452009 [5] A. Y. Kolb, D.A. Kolb, Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education, Academy of Management Learning and Education, June 1, 2005 vol. 4 no. 2 193-212, doi: 10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566 [6] J.E. Stice., Using Kolb's Learning Cycle to Improve Student Learning. Engineering Education, v77 n5 p291-96 Feb 1987

[7]

L. Caldwell, C.C. Grobbel, The Importance of Reflective Practice in Nursing, International Journal of Caring Sciences; Nicosia 6.3 (Sep-Dec 2013): 319-326. [8] Subject Benchmark Statement: Law (2015), Publication date:Jul2015, http://www.qaa.ac.uk/publications/information-andguidance/publication?PubID=2966, accessed 29th September 2017 [9] S.O. Fakayode, J.P. Mayes, M.I. Kanipes, D. Johnson, E.L. Cuthbertson, Promoting Student Learning in Criminal Justice, STEM, and Forensic Science: Aggie Sleuth Initiative (AggieSI)Guided Inquiry Learning Experience, Journal of Criminal Justice Education Vol. 28 , Iss. 2,2017. [10] W.M. Gilbert, D.E. Fadjo, D.J. Bills, F.K.Morrison, M.P. Sherman, 2003. Teaching malpractice litigation in a mock trial setting: a center for perinatal medicine and law. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 101(3), pp.589-593 [11] D. Chadwick D. Gan, D. Frangiskatos (2015); Teaching Forensics Principles through Legal Case Studies; 11th Annual Teaching Computer Forensics Workshop; 19th November 2015,Sunderland University, UK [12] N. Banks, 1999. Pedagogy and ideology: teaching law as if it matters. Legal Studies 19, no. 4:445–67. [13] U of Waterloo 2017; Experiential Learning; https:P//uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/ accessed th 8 July 2017 [14] S.L. Brodsky, M.P. Griffin, R.J. Cramer, 2010. The witness credibility scale: An outcome measure for expert witness research. Behavioral sciences & the law, 28(6), pp.892-907.