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 H5

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 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. For the purpose of this project we define networked learning as

Learning in which Information and Communications Technology (ICT) is used to promote connections: between one learner and other learners, between learners and tutors; between a learning community and its learning resources. (Networked Learning in Higher Education Project, 2001)

The findings from this project, along with the case studies, provide a set of recommendations and resources for policy makers and institutions that are involved in developing networked learning and e learning.

Context and Participants

Institution H5 is an urban, pre 1992 university in England. It caters for approximately 10,000 students with over 600 staff across five faculties that offer more than 500 different programmes, and it has a thriving postgraduate programme. It has been particularly successful in attracting overseas students. It has achieved an international reputation for research.

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 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

The documentation, questionnaire responses and interviews provide considerable evidence of a university that is actively engaged in the use of technology to support learning and teaching, primarily for on campus students.

All respondents agreed that the university was involved in quite large scale networked learning, but that there was still room for some development and they did not yet have 100% take up. In interviews, all respondents agreed that networked learning began at the university as a result of activities by individuals and in a small number of departments, and that it has continued to develop in that way. There does not appear to have been a central drive; the most commonly mentioned drivers were specific individuals and departments, and student expectations.

In the past the strategy seems to have been limited to learning technology rather than an institution wide e learning strategy. Individuals have been allowed to experiment with different ideas and software, with support from the Learning Technology Group and central Computer Services. In 1996 central support for a platform supporting computer mediated communication was agreed. This platform has continued to be developed into a more fully featured virtual learning environment (VLE).

The growth in networked learning led to the formation of a new Learning Technology Unit, concerned with learning technology development. The management structure has been reorganised to relocate the Learning technology unit from Information Systems Services to become part of the Centre for the Enhancement of Learning and Teaching (CELT). It was suggested that these structural changes were introduced to support learning and teaching, and to allow the Unit to focus more on pedagogical support. No new committees seem to have resulted from the growth in networked learning, but a new central review group has been created by the Vice Chancellor to inform strategic institutional decisions about future networked learning developments.

Infrastructure and support services

The university’s virtual learning environment (VLE) was introduced when networked learning was initiated at the university and has been in use for the last 10 years. However, there appears to have been a variety of different types of software in use as well as the current centrally supported VLE. There is also growing interest among staff in other commercially available packages such as WebCT and Blackboard. There seem to be a range of views about which system might best support the needs of the university. The other major issue discussed was the integration of systems. It was clear that the Learning Technology Group had worked very hard to integrate the current VLE with university systems, but that this was only a partial solution since it was not yet fully integrated. The university has some way to go before achieving full interoperability and the choice of software is an important factor in that process.

The Faculties and Computing Services provide a range of training for members of staff engaging with the provision of online learning, but this is not a priority for the Learning Technology Unit, which focuses more on support and development. The university regards staff development as very important, and set up the Learning Technology Unit to provide support, advice and expertise for networked learning, focussing particularly on helping staff to understand the pedagogical potential of networked learning. Training courses are available for all students, on a voluntary basis, but students do not appear to feel a particular need for these courses and it was suggested that a web site and help desk are probably enough support for most students.

It is clear that the infrastructure – both in terms of technology and support to staff – has been affected by the introduction of networked learning. Support for staff and students has increased.

Staffing and collaboration

New staff have been recruited in support of the Learning Technology Unit and there has also been recruitment of further IT support staff within faculties.

A few changes of role were mentioned; the role of the Head of the Learning Technology Unit appears to have changed from raising awareness to providing a central service, and technical support staff appear to have become involved in different work, probably as a result of the need for a greater integration of systems. Workload has increased for academic, technical and administrative staff, but for support staff the increase in workload may be less, which is perhaps due to the new appointments.

A great deal of high quality research into networked learning takes place, and the research has promoted the use of networked learning in teaching and learning. There may be a tension between research and teaching, and given the competing pressures on time, staff in a research led university might find it difficult to devote time to the development of the skills necessary to exploit networked learning.

There was a very positive attitude to networked learning across the university; the comments of users were generally positive, and there was very little comment at all about staff having negative attitudes.

Collaboration has increased both internally and externally, and all respondents spoke of improved interactions between departments and of closer working relationships. The impact of networked learning on external collaboration is apparent; a wide range of collaborative projects being undertaken by the university have been enabled by networked learning or have arisen from the university’s research into aspects of networked learning.
There appears to have been a considerable change in methods of communication at this university, with more emphasis on both e mail and web based communication. There is also a suggestion of a change in the nature of discourse and the way that the technology has changed the nature of how people interact with each other, across the university, and between students and staff.

Teaching, learning and assessment

The teacher’s role does not appear to have changed as a result of the growth in networked learning; student centred, interactive learning always seems to have been a part of the university’s approach to learning and teaching, as exemplified by a current project to improve assessment. The development of teaching materials for networked learning seems to be an individual responsibility; the great increase in the number of courses making use of networked learning suggests this has not deterred people from producing new materials.

The student experience was thought to be enhanced by the easier access to teaching materials and lecture notes, greater opportunities for interaction with tutors and peers, and increasing familiarity with skills that would improve their later employment opportunities. It was very clear from all respondents that the university had a strong commitment to collaborative and interactive work, and that networked learning was seen as a way of supporting such work.

The growth of networked learning is seen as a natural extension of the university’s emphasis on collaborative and interactive approach to learning and teaching. The lack of emphasis on the development of teaching materials could be seen as a consequence of this approach, where particular teaching materials are less important than discussion space. Blended learning appears to be viewed as the most appropriate approach for the campus based focus of this university.

Quality assurance, monitoring and evaluation

Networked learning does not appear to have had a major impact on quality assurance issues, although a good deal of evaluation and monitoring was ongoing.

Access

Flexible access did not feature strongly in the discussions, but there were references to access in the context of disabled students. In addition, networked learning is enabling widening participation through, for example, links with remote community groups via outreach centres and schools, and ethnic minority groups.

Summary

At the time of the study institution H5 was engaged in large-scale networked learning, with a high percentage of usage by students and fairly high usage by departments across the institution. This engagement was supported by an institution-wide VLE and the ongoing development of an MLE. Although the VLE is centrally supported and e-learning has support from senior management, the majority of respondents viewed the development of networked learning as occurring from the bottom-up.

H5 has been involved in networked learning for over 10 years; it has an e-learning strategy in place as an integral part of its learning and teaching strategy and offers incentives to staff who engage in networked learning. H5 has made structural changes and appointed champions to support the development of networked learning, and offers some limited support to staff in developing 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. H5 scored a fairly high score of five (out of a possible eight) for institutional effectiveness. There was evidence of networked learning being used to support a more interactive student centred approach and particularly to support discussion and interaction. Overall the staff appeared to have a positive attitude towards networked learning, although there was no reference to a changing culture, and there was evidence of increased collaboration and closer working relationships.