Institution H1
1 Executive Summary
The case study reported on here forms one element in a set of
twenty studies conducted as part of the JISC funded INLEI study
into the impact of networked learning on FE and HE institutions.
Purpose of the study
The main aim of this project is to explore the impact of the
introduction of (large scale) networked learning on HE and FE institutions
based
on the experiences and perceptions of key members of staff involved
in the development of networked learning. It is intended that this
data can then inform a self evaluation and guidance web resource
for policy makers and educational institutions. In addition, it
aims to provide a web based data bank of case studies that can
be used by institutions involved in developing networked learning.
Context and Participants
Institution H1 is a large, urban, pre 1992 university in England.
It is a research led institution, which in 2002 03 catered for
approximately 19000 students, across eight faculties [1].
Around 2800 modules or units were delivered during the 2002 03
academic year
and, of these, approximately 20% actively used virtual learning
environments (VLEs) during that period. All departments [2] used
VLEs during that same session and it is estimated that around 33%
of
students use VLEs.
This case study is based on evidence gained from nine face to
face interviews with staff in different roles and positions, questionnaire
returns from eight of the nine people, and significant documentary
evidence. The respondents represented the following roles:
• Academic staff implementing networked learning,
• Quality manager,
• Registry staff responsible for student records,
• Senior management with responsibility for networked learning and
academic quality,
• Support for staff providing a range of services for academic staff
and students engaged in networked learning,
• Technical staff with responsibility for infrastructure support
for networked learning.
Institutional development
Until recently the introduction of networked learning has been
bottom up with central support including the provision of a central
VLE and computer assisted assessment (CAA), and support from senior
management. However the arrival of a new Principal in 2002 is introducing
major cultural and organisational changes, with the university
moving from a very devolved culture and structure towards a more
corporate and centralised structure. At the time of this study
H1 was developing a strong central drive towards the development
of networked learning with substantial investment in e learning
seen as an essential part of its teaching, learning and assessment
strategy. The information obtained from the documents, questionnaires
and interviews indicated that the extent of networked learning
in the university was not yet large scale but was growing rapidly.
The university was still in the early stages of development and
strategies were being put in place to take this forward. The university
was also in a period of rapid growth in terms of a restructuring
of its faculties and the introduction of a new management information
system (MIS) system. However, the introduction of networked learning
was seen as being mainly by market driven, although student numbers
and expectations were also mentioned. As yet the impact on management
structures has been fairly small in comparison with other changes,
but some new committees have been formed as a direct result of
e learning issues.
Infrastructure and support
The infrastructure and support aspects that were identified by
the participants in this study explored issues in relation to the
robustness of the system, technological support, centralisation
of the services and support for staff.
Three respondents expressed some concern about
potential systems’ failures
and the impact on the confidence of staff and students in networked
learning. One respondent noted difficulties in scheduling the maintenance
and upgrades necessary to ensure a reliable and robust service
given the increasing demands on the service.
The university has established a single user login for all student
systems and is moving towards developing a managed learning environment
(MLE) after their new MIS has been installed. The university standardised
on a single VLE that is centrally supported to reduce the costs
involved in supporting multiple VLEs. This caused some tension
with staff but the situation has been addressed by the purchase
of CAA software. Services and support for networked learning have
been centralised; Information Systems Services provide central
IT support and the Centre for Learning and Teaching (CLT) provide
support for networked learning.
The university strategy and senior staff recognise that support
for staff and students is central to the development of networked
learning. A broad range of training is provided for staff but it
does not appear to reach those staff that are not yet engaged in,
or are resistant to, networked learning. Some respondents suggested
peer support as one possible method of impacting on staff attitudes
and willingness to embrace networked learning. In contrast, support
for students was not widely discussed by the respondents. However
support for students does seem to be provided through library and
learning resources and the university was in the process of developing
a student portal to improve access to these resources.
A considerable amount of resource has recently been devoted to
improving the infrastructure and support, although there is perhaps
more work to do in supporting both staff and students.
Staffing and collaboration
The university was in a period of growth in
terms of new posts and changing roles. A number of key posts
mentioned within the
university’s e learning strategy documents were created and
filled. Changes in role seem to have had most impact in the library
and on the librarians, while support and technical staff do not
appear to have been affected to the same extent. There also appears
to have been little change in administration as a result of networked
learning, although one respondent suggested that boundaries between
administrative and academic roles are becoming blurred. Workload
has risen in almost all areas.
Staff attitudes were varied and there were
a considerable number of staff who had yet to be ‘converted’ to using networked
learning. This problem was being tackled by ‘evangelising’ and
through informal peer support. There were also references to the
tension between research and teaching in a research led institution,
a factor that could influence the extent and speed of the development
of networked learning.
Despite some perceived negative attitudes to the use of networked
learning there was complete agreement, among those interviewed,
that networked learning had developed closer working relationships
and increased both internal and external collaboration.
Teaching, learning and assessment
Teaching and learning did not seem to have changed much, although
there were signs of more interactive approaches being introduced.
When asked about teaching, learning and assessment the respondents
chose to speak a about assessment, and there seemed to be a major
drive to move summative assessment online with the university providing
central support; this has quality assurance implications, which
are being addressed by a new committee.
Quality assurance, monitoring and evaluation
The impact on quality assurance at this early stage appears to
have been limited; work was in progress to develop the necessary
procedures for computer assisted summative assessment, and a student
evaluation was being piloted. There was recognition that the growth
in networked learning would have an impact on visibility and transparency,
and that this in turn would impact on quality procedures.
Access
There was agreement that networked learning had improved flexibility
for students and could assist disabled students with appropriate
support. However there was little evidence of a major impact on
widening participation.
Summary
At the time of this study institution H1 was engaged in networked
learning but it was not yet large scale, with around a third of
students and a fifth of departments engaged in networked learning
across the institution. This engagement was supported by an institution
wide VLE and the ongoing development of an MLE. Although the VLE
was centrally supported and e learning had support from senior
management, the majority of respondents viewed this development
as being driven from the bottom up. However H1 was undergoing a
major reorganisation at the time of the study and this appeared
to bring with it a shift towards a more top down approach driving
future developments in this area.
H1 has been involved in networked learning for around 10 years
and had an e learning strategy in place as an integral part of
its learning and teaching strategy. H1 does not offer incentives
to staff to engage in networked learning and has not made any structural
changes or appointed Champions to support the development of networked
learning or to support the development of online materials.
Five aspects of the overall findings for this
study: communication; collaboration; overall staff attitudes;
evidence of cultural change;
and evidence of a more interactive and student centred approach
were used to build up an ‘effectiveness score’ for
the case study institutions (Brichno, Higgison and Weedon, 2004).
The findings have been condensed to encapsulate the main changes
(if any) that were noted from the interviews and questionnaires.
These summary words were then given a numerical value and these
were added together for each institution to produce a total effectiveness
score. It must be noted that this is an arbitrary scoring system
at the moment and is used only to give an indication of effectiveness.
H1 scored three (out of a possible eight) for institutional effectiveness.
Although there was no evidence of networked learning being used
to support a more interactive student centred approach there was
some evident to suggest that it was being used to support discussion
and interaction and increase collaboration. Overall the staff appeared
to have a positive attitude towards networked learning and there
was reference to a changing culture.
|
