Home

Executive Summary

1 Introduction

2 Context

3 Methodology

4 - 9 Findings, Analysis and Discussion

10 Summary of Findings

11 Discussion of Findings

12 References

13 Case Studies

Acknowledgments & Partners

Case Study Map 

Institution H3

9 Impact of networked learning on quality assurance, monitoring and evaluation

The university has a Quality Assurance department that appears aware of the changes required due to the implementation of networked learning, but these have not yet been acted upon.

Monitoring and evaluation

Two respondents suggest that monitoring and evaluation has begun, but that there is still considerable development to be undertaken. One respondent explained that work is ongoing to evaluate the responses of staff and students to the use of the VLE, and also to evaluate a pilot on computer based assessment (CBA).

We’ve just done a survey of all our academic staff asking whether or not they use the VLE, if they do, which of the various tools do they use, and why they don’t use others. If they don’t use the VLE why they don’t use it. It’s a fairly comprehensive survey…we’ve got about 180 responses which is pretty good …I don’t know the answers yet, although I’ve seen some of the early responses. Some of them, they were responses that came in from people, broadly speaking who were enthusiastic so I’m hesitating. What we want [now is] some feedback from students. We have a relatively newly appointed marketing officer at the university and I’m asking her in the autumn to run some focus groups for students and to actually do some fairly in depth chats with a group of students about their experiences… (H3I4)

… as from next September [CAA] will be part of the standard academic desk top. We’ve been piloting for the last 12 months with a group of people …We [also] have an annual learning and teaching and assessment conference, an internal one, every December and what we’ve done for the last two conferences as part of the session we’ve had is had a workshop on the use of the VLE for assessment. (H3I4)

Changes

Most respondents said little about changes in quality assurance, although one respondent explained that changes were imperative, and that the QA department were working towards changes. The responses suggest that while the institution is aware of the need for change, little change has occurred as yet.

What it has lead to in the last 12 months from a quality perspective, is that the more we have looked at the evidence requirements and the accountability requirements the more we have alerted the university of the need to change the way in which we produce documentation and information for students and staff, in that we need a documentation management system which we don’t have. So lots of documents are made up of building blocks and the building blocks are common to two or more documents. All the information or data is common to them so we need a basic underpinning infrastructure that is like a postal box, then a system that will manage that on top and we’re going to have to develop it. We are either going to have to buy it because the requirements and the legislation and the data protection act and freedom of information act means that we have to be able to get at more accurate data and be able to update it more easily than we have in the past…. a number of people are looking at what’s available and what’s possible. But we have to do a feasibility benefit analysis. And with the university being as strapped for cash as they are, then it’s very difficult. A good documentation management system is very expensive. Whether it’s more expensive than trying to keep track of what’s going on is difficult to say. (H3I6)

Summary

Monitoring and evaluation of networked learning was being developed, and the quality assurance department is working towards change. However, the responses suggest that little change had occurred as yet.