11 Discussion of Findings

This section will explore our findings in relation to the key themes within the literature, reviewed in Section 2. The Nicol et al (2004) version of the MIT90 model will be used to help us to present our discussion within a coherent framework.

Their framework assumes that an institution’s effectiveness in the use of ICT for teaching and learning is a function of six inter-related elements:

• "the external environment within which the institution is operating

• the institutional strategy in relation to ICT in teaching and learning

• the way human resources are prepared and deployed (individuals and their roles) to support the implementation of ICT in teaching and learning

• the organisational structures that support the application of ICT to teaching and learning
• the characteristics of the technology being applied.

• the management processes that facilitate the initiation, sustainability and success of the application of ICT in teaching and learning." (Nicol et al, 2004)

These can be summarised as the external environment, the institutional strategy, individuals and their roles; organisational structures; the characteristics of the technology; and the management processes.

11.4 The organisational structures

"the organisational structures that support the application of ICT to teaching and learning." (Nicol et al, 2004)

Overall a picture is emerging of some structural changes occurring within both HE and FE institutions - in some these changes are directly as a result of networked learning, in other cases these changes are in terms of new ways of working which are creating new teams within the institutions. However, the evidence suggests that networked learning may have had more impact upon organisational structures in FE institutions than in HE institutions. The majority of FE institutions have introduced new management structures, put separate ILT strategies in place, have major funding issues and are engaged in developing business links and new markets, whereas in only five of the HE institutions was there reference to structural issues, despite this being the subject of a direct question in interview. Where it was discussed, four institutions suggested that networked learning had only had a minor impact on the institutional structures; however, in some instances major restructuring had occurred as a result of the introduction of networked learning.

There has been a major impact on certain parts of the institutions; technical and support services have been affected because of the demands upon the infrastructure; libraries and learning resource centres have also seen major changes. Centralisation of services, including technical training for staff and students and the provision of basic induction packages, appears to be the rule rather than the exception across the case study institutions. The libraries and learning resource centres have been affected by the increased demand for access to online resources and in the changed role of their staff to facilitators of learning. Three of the HE institutions have developed some level of integration between their library and their VLE. These changes have had a major impact in terms of funding, staffing and staff workload (as noted above) to support and develop this infrastructure. These changes also indicate that all the institutions studied regarded an increasing use of technology in teaching and learning as inevitable, which they must support with an appropriate infrastructure.

In many of the FE institutions and in some of the HE institutions, networked learning has led to a restructuring of support structures into larger units. For example, in F3 management restructuring has occurred to facilitate e-learning by putting IT services and ILT development together within the same division under the same director. In addition, in a number of institutions, special units or teams have been formed to develop materials for networked learning, or to support academic staff in developing these materials. These changes appeared to be, in part, related to the size of the institution; three very small FE colleges have not made structural changes of this nature, and none of the HE institutions where such structural changes had occurred were large. This could perhaps indicate that very small institutions may be unable to support the required structural changes or possibly are too small to feel the need to interact differently. However, for very large institutions, there may be new structures, involving individual faculty development and faculty support units rather than a single centralised support structure.
The difference in emphases observed in these institutions could reflect institutional decisions to focus either on the technological integration of information, learning and administrative systems, or to take a more holistic approach reviewing and redesigning the existing processes and relationships necessary to support the organisational change, as suggested by Boys (2002).

Stiles (2003) suggests that networked learning or e-learning can only have an impact when it becomes fully embedded in institutional policy, practice and culture, and it would appear that this has not yet occurred in many of these institutions, in particular the HE institutions.