This section reports on the findings relating to the impact of
networked learning on access to learning.
Access emerged as an important theme that recurred
throughout certain aspects of the interview data.
It can be seen from the evidence presented in Figure
9-1 below that the majority of institutions felt that the use of
networked
learning increased flexibility for students in terms of access
to learning. Only one college (F9) did not raise the issue of flexibility
in the interviews. Respondents also commented on a range of different
ways of increasing flexibility and of increasing participation;
these included new or improved learning resource centres, longer
opening hours, and network infrastructure being extended to students’ residences.
Some of the institutions also provided laptops on loan, and in
one case, free laptops to students who would otherwise have difficulties
in making use of networked learning. This evidence suggests a considerable
investment in infrastructure by these institutions and aligns with
the evidence in the sections looking at the impact of networked
learning on funding (Section 4.4) and infrastructure (Section 5).
In a few cases, flexibility for staff is also noted
as an advantage along with the ability to deliver training on a
flexible basis
to external organisations. These issues were not examined in
depth in this project; however, they may be worth following up
in future
research.
There was mention of the issues surrounding disability
in relation to the use of networked learning in 14 of the case
studies. In
six institutions, respondents did not raise the issue of disability
explicitly in interview. This could be seen as worrying since
there is now a legal requirement on institutions to meet the needs
of
all learners, including those with a disability (SENDA, 2001).
Five of the institutions stated that they had a special unit
to support students with special needs or learning disabilities;
one
institution stated that it could offer expert advice to academics
developing online resources, and another that materials were
checked to ensure accessibility for all. There are developments
within
both FE and HE institutions to support all types of learners;
however, it appears that provision varies from institution to institution.
In addition, the kind of support provided in some cases seem
to
focus on specific disabilities, eg H2 and H3 mention only support
for visually impaired students. This is of concern since a recent
study (Riddell, Tinklin and Wilson, 2003) shows that the largest
increase in disabled students has been in the category of dyslexia;
in 1999/2000 the number of students in this category had increased
to 32.7% from 17.9% in 1995/96.
| CS |
Flexibility |
Provision for disabled students |
| H1 |
Four respondents stated that networked learning has improved
accessibility and flexibility for students. |
Three respondents noted special support unit as an important
resource for students with a disability or with dyslexia. No
changes due to networked learning. |
| H2 |
Seven respondents commented that access is increasing, through
a new learning centre, increased opening times in the library
and the learning cafˇ, and laptop loans. |
One respondent noted greater awareness within the institution.
Screen readers made suitable for visually impaired students. |
| H3 |
Five respondents commented on upgraded learning centre with
longer opening hours, networking in student residences, and
provision of PCs and laptops via leasing service. |
Two respondents noted that web pages and materials were made
suitable for visually impaired students. Braille versions available. |
| H4 |
All respondents commented on greater accessibility and flexibility,
especially through online registration and remote access for
the wider community through access courses at FE colleges and
local libraries. |
Four respondents mentioned special provision for students
with disabilities and that all new online materials were checked
to ensure accessibility by web development officer. |
| H5 |
Three respondents noted that there is flexible access. |
Two respondents noted that there is greater awareness now. |
| H6 |
Two respondents commented on flexibility of access: both
external access and also halls of residence wired. |
Not commented upon in interviews. |
| H7 |
Three respondents stated that students appreciated flexibility
of access to all resources and flexibility of communication. |
Currently considerable work drawing on strengths of online
access in supporting disabled students. |
| H8 |
Three respondents noted that flexibility of access appreciated
by students of all types. |
Not commented upon in interviews. |
| H9 |
Five respondents commented on the benefits of flexible access
to learning resources. |
Not commented upon in interviews. |
| H10 |
Three respondents noted that flexible access benefited remote
learners and those that cannot attend easily. |
One respondent stated that a disability issues expert could
help academics ensure access to their materials for disabled
students. |
| F1 |
Four respondents noted the availability of the library area
with its wide range of online resources, remote flexible access
centres and that the ability to login from remote locations
increased access. |
Two respondents stated that web pages made accessible to
disabled students and that free support was provided if needed. |
| F2 |
Six respondents noted the increased opening hours of the
Learning Centres, and that the servers available almost all
the time increased access. |
Three respondents noted that there were special courses for
special needs students and special unit for those with visual
difficulties. One member of staff has responsibility for access
and disability issues. |
| F3 |
Seven respondents noted that networked learning through new
ILT suites and outreach centres; laptops provided for certain
students. |
One respondent noted that there was a special department/unit
for students with learning and physical disabilities. |
| F4 |
Five respondents suggested networked learning provides flexible
access, especially for shift workers. |
Not commented upon in interviews. |
| F5 |
Seven respondents noted that networked learning allowed for
flexible working by staff and students; allows for learning
in remote communities and may have contributed towards improved
retention. |
Three respondents noted the institution was a major centre
for support of students with learning and physical disabilities.
The strength of networked learning in supporting a range of
learners in this category noted. |
| F6 |
Two respondents noted advantages of flexible access; though
limited access from outside college is seen currently as a
problem. |
One respondent commented on accessibility of online resources
as an issue currently being dealt with. |
| F7 |
Four respondents noted the value of flexible access as it
leads to decreased need for attendance and MLE acts as a 'store'
- no need to carry everything with them; provides access to
information. |
One respondent noted need for development here and attendance
at external conference to develop this area. |
| F8 |
Three respondents noted benefits of flexible access for students
and one respondent commented on the benefits for staff; also
increased flexibility in delivering training on demand to industry. |
Not commented upon in interviews. |
| F9 |
Flexible access was not commented on. |
Disability issues noted by one as being addressed; difficulties
for disabled students also commented on by same person. |
| F10 |
Three respondents noted flexibility of access as beneficial;
one commented on the benefit to staff. |
Not commented upon in interviews. |
