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

7 Impact of networked learning on staffing and collaboration

Networked learning brings the potential for changing existing roles, creating new roles and offering new opportunities for collaboration; however, it may also impact on workloads and on attitudes to this form of learning. The technology also allows for new forms of communication to emerge. There is evidence of these effects of networked learning within this institution.

Staffing – change of role and new staff

Little was said about changes in the roles of existing staff, although two respondents noted changes of role within the Learning Technology Unit. The role of the Head of the unit appears to have changed from one of raising awareness to one of providing and managing a central service; this has been formally acknowledged by a re grading of the post. Technical support staff also appear to have become involved in different work, probably as a result of the need for increased integrated of the VLE with other university systems.

Well it got re graded. I think when [name] came it was very much one of awareness raising and just basically letting people know what was there and making sure they knew where to go to get subject specific information … So it was very much kind of not providing a central service in the way that [name] is now. (H5I2)

Initially [name] never did any of this linking to central systems or data base work or anything like that. (H5I5)

The questionnaire responses indicate that new staff have been recruited. In interview two respondents commented on the appointment of new staff in the Learning Technology Unit, and one person mentioned the recruitment of further IT support staff within faculties.

So they created a post, they thought one person could do … they created [name’s] post … Well I mean the fact that it is not just [name] now, there is a team of four [which] is some indication that they’ve kind of acknowledged that it needs more support. (H5I2)

[Name’s] group needed further support so they’ve had additions to their staffing really over the last four, five years, … However there have been quite a lot of support staff put into faculties, they’re described as IT support staff… (H5I4)

Staffing – workload

The questionnaire responses indicate that workload has increased for academic, technical and administrative staff, but that the increase in workload may be less for support staff. Written responses to the questionnaire support that view.

Increased for central admin, student registry and CIS. More use of data leads to a requirement for greater accuracy and completeness… not clear cut for all support staff outside the LT support group. Marginal increase at times. (H5I5 questionnaire)

Four of the respondents in interview spoke about the changes in workload, and their comments support the view emerging from the questionnaires that there has been an increase in workload for academics and support staff, but there does not appear to have been any major increase for registry staff.

… in terms of the student registry… I don’t think it has increased or decreased the workload, I think it has just changed the nature of the problem. (H5I1/6)

Well there is certainly a bigger workload in [the Learning Technology Unit]… as far as academic staff are concerned quite a few of them do spend quite a lot of their time on this. On the whole we don’t know in truth what that amount is but I would have thought it was beginning to be quite substantial so that staff development time, that cost is really absorbed by departments in recognition of presumably the benefit to the university as a whole. (H5I4)

Staffing – research

Three respondents spoke about the research activities of the university. Two respondents indicated that a great deal of high quality research into networked learning has taken place, and that this research has promoted the use of networked learning in teaching and learning. The current VLE system was introduced as a result of a research project.

I would say a lot of our research has been very applied so … that project [X] was a very applied project. Yes we were looking at the ways that we could improve access to higher education but we spent a lot of time talking with staff about how they might adopt these approaches to their teaching and learning. (H5I3)

I suppose there are some obvious successes in the ways in which individuals, groups rather, have developed schemes which utilise network learning in particular ways, that’s most obvious in the [Department X and Department Y] [which] have got national reputations … in their research expertise, … because we encourage enthusiasts and then think ok what have they got to teach the rest of us. (H5I4)

One respondent was concerned about the tension between research and teaching, and wondered, given the competing pressures on time, if staff in a research led university would find the time to develop networked learning skills.

… it’s very difficult to know how best to do that when you’ve got a university that is research led, where people have got lots of competing pressures on their time, demands on their time, are they going to come to a workshop on how to promote e learning or use e learning to the best advantage or are they going to go away and do some research. It’s a difficult one. (H5I2)

Staff attitudes

Comments made by the respondents about staff attitudes suggest that there is a very positive attitude to networked learning across the university. There was agreement among the three who spoke about attitudes that the number of people using networked learning is growing, that more people are asking to use it, and that the comments of users are generally positive.

I think other than that the real success … is the fact that the number of enthusiasts, the number of trials, innovations, experiments, has steadily increased … (H5I4)

Well it’s gratifying that the systems we support are used by a wide proportion of the university. I think that is good and most of the comments we get are positive. (H5I5)

There was very little comment at all about staff with negative attitudes. It was suggested by one respondent that some academic staff might take a rather conservative attitude, or have concerns about the amount of developmental work needed for networked learning and this might have resulted in a certain amount of reluctance, but this was the only negative comment about attitudes.

I mean the problems are things like the conservatism of academic staff who …have to be persuaded, have to see the light, so a lot has depended on them. The fact that people feel incredibly pressured and reluctant to overcome … the learning hump that is necessary, the development work they are going to have to do. Once they are embarked on this, they often don’t realise that the road leads very quickly down hill, they gather speed and they start to want to do, they realise the potentialities so they might start off putting notes up on the web but they soon realise that’s not doing anything. They soon realise that their students are going to want to interact, they already know that because their students email them a lot anyway, so they think couldn’t students email each other, couldn’t we all put it together in a discussion space and things like that. They may see people around them getting carried away by this and feel reluctant to commit the time. (H5I4)

Collaboration

Networked learning offers opportunities for collaboration. The questionnaire responses suggest that there has been increased collaboration both internally and externally. All five respondents spoke of improved interactions between departments and of closer working relationships.

Obviously in terms of within the institution we clearly work closely with the Learning Technology Group. (H5I3)

So I find out a lot in that way that I wouldn’t otherwise have found out about, just because I was actually involved in a dialogue with lots of different departments and the way they approached it. And that was actually kind of fascinating to find out the different kind of things that were happening. … I think where people are working across subject boundaries or with other institutions, the technology there has helped enormously because it just makes it so much easier doesn’t it to be able to exchange views. (H5I1/6)

Yes, I think it has made inter departmental collaboration easier. It’s used on research projects as well as on teaching and learning and for certain administrative tasks as well. (H5I5)

The impact of networked learning on external collaboration was apparent and was mentioned by three respondents. The collaborations seem to have arisen in part from the university’s research interest in networked learning. One respondent spoke about the university’s international networked learning research collaborations, and also described many other collaborative research projects with Educational Institutions across the UK.

… yes we’ve always worked on European projects, we’ve always worked with European partners with cognate groups in Europe.…Continuously since the late ‘80s, always had research projects. Those are the main collaborations. Obviously collaborations within the UK, a number of collaborations … (H5I3)

Another respondent mentioned a wide range of other collaborative projects being undertaken by the university, suggesting that networked learning had enabled these.

So we have… collaborations with partner institutions, which take [our] degrees, I’ve mentioned what are in effect collaborations with employers … and schools…. So there are all sorts of things which we would have to provide separately and on site that we now realise can be provided for us very simply by [networked learning]… one of these wonderful rooms which … allow, I can never remember how it’s done but it’s not like video conferencing but it’s like superb video conferencing….it means that it is much easier to manage real interaction... (H5I4)

A third respondent noted the effect of a National Award on external collaboration.

… [x] won a National Teaching Fellowship prize … and this year [x] used some of the funding…to bring together some … peers, … a small group … meet, or have met and are going to meet again in [date], really just to say what are your main issues now and how are you doing with them as a kind of informal talking shop really, so that network [of people] is definitely as a result of the money obviously but also as a result of everyone been involved in learning technology and network learning. (H5I2)

These suggest that a range of university collaborations have been affected in one-way or another by the development of networked learning.

Communication

All five respondents felt that communication had changed as a result of the changing technology. The growth in use of e mail was mentioned but also the increased use of web based activity, for example sharing resources, and the use of online bulletin boards and chat rooms.

… all departments now probably have some online presence, some use of network learning, at a minimum for sharing of resources, that has been one of the big changes… Well I think the massive take up of email has clearly influenced the way that people are communicating with each other. (H5I3)

Increasingly I think people would expect that your website had some sort of interactivity as well so that … you would be notified when anything new appears in it or you can make comments or you can put files in or something. They don’t just want to go there, read a page and go away again. (H5I5)

There’s a lot of informal bulletin boards in chat rooms that students increasingly use now to communicate with one another, I think has been quite a significant change over the last two or three years. And communicating with staff, in fact academic staff say there’s a lot of student queries whereas the students used to call in to see them, they are all bombarded with emails… (H5I1/6)

One respondent also commented on a change in the nature of discourse and the way that the technology has changed the nature of how they interacted with each other.

… it’s probably also changed the nature of the discourse as well because I know academic colleagues have said to me that they often get … not abusive emails but much more trenchantly worded emails because its easier to do it. So whereas the student might be much more diffident or deferential in a face to face contact, the emails can often be quite harshly worded and I think … some academics feel under attack and feel the stress, so it has kind of changed the nature of the discourse as well… They would expect an instantaneous response but they are also couching the requests or the phrases in a different way. Now that is not e learning but that is how the technology has actually changed the nature of how we interact with each other… and I think it’s partly because…in email we tend to use the spoken vernacular don’t we whereas when you are writing a letter you tend to use more formal language and in an email you don’t have the visual signals or hear the tone of the voice on the phone, so the scope for misunderstanding is greater and also somehow or other because you are at one removed people loose their inhibitions… actually I do think it has changed the nature of a lot of interactions around the university. (H5I1/6)

Only one respondent mentioned a possible reduction in face to face interaction as a result of the greater use of e mail.

Personally I think it is complementary, I think you need both. I think there is a danger that email can and has replaced some of the face to face contact and it can change the nature of the relationship. (H5I1/6)

There certainly 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 that the nature of the communication between tutor and student may be changing with students becoming more direct and possibly more confrontational.

Summary

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 staff appear to have become involved in different work, probably as a result of the need for more integrated 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 this 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 is 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.

There has been increased collaboration both internally and externally. All respondents spoke of improved interactions between departments and of closer working relationships. The impact of networked learning on external collaboration was apparent; a wide range of collaborative projects undertaken by the university have been enabled by networked learning or have arisen from the university’s research into 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 we interact with each other, staff with each other, and students with staff.