This section reports on the findings relating to the impact of
networked learning on institutional development, including strategies
and structures.
The documentary, questionnaire and interview data
were also used to look for any structural changes that had occurred
as a result
of the implementation of networked learning. These are outlined
briefly in Figure 4-8 below.
More FE than HE institutions referred to structural changes; seven
FE and four HE institutions referred to changes in management structures.
In five of the HE institutions there was limited 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 three instances, although major restructuring
had occurred, this was not a direct result of the introduction
of networked learning. For example in H8, it was noted that the
institution had undergone major restructuring and that within that
restructuring new responsibilities were being created for certain
members of staff in order to give more prominence to the development
of e-learning. F9 and F10 had also undergone major structural changes
that were unrelated to the introduction of networked learning.
There is also a suggestion that change may be occurring in different
ways that may affect future structuring. For example, Section 6
- Impact on staffing and collaboration suggests that there has
been an increase in cross-college collaboration and that new teams
have been created in response to the development of networked learning.
Overall a picture is emerging of 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.
| CS |
Structural Changes resulting from NL |
Details |
| |
Major |
Minor |
|
| H1 |
|
_ |
No major structural changes at institutional level; some
new working groups have been formed as a direct result of
e-learning. |
| H2 |
_ |
|
New formal groups have been developed to support the introduction
of networked learning: the e-Learning Information Support
Group, the Registration Technical Group, and a new Learning
Services Committee, which deals with systems and expenditure. |
| H3 |
|
_ |
No major structural changes at institutional level, although
a few new sub-committees have been set up. |
| H4 |
_ |
|
Major structural changes include a new Institute of Lifelong
Learning that has some overall management responsibilities,
and a new central e-learning unit that has been created specifically
to create new teaching materials for faculties. The committee
structure has changed to reflect the new strategic direction
of the university; there is a new e-learning committee, which
includes representatives from each faculty, and reports to
the teaching and learning committee. |
| H5 |
_ |
|
There has been a reorganisation of the management structure
in which the new group supporting leaning technology was
moved from within Information Systems Services to become
part of the Centre for the Enhancement of Learning and Teaching,
responsible for student learning and development. |
| H6 |
|
_ |
Structural change was discussed in relation to the need
to incorporate decision-making procedures for the development
of networked learning - this was specifically mentioned in
relation to the decision to adopt the VLE. Note that this
institution is very devolved. |
| H7 |
|
_ |
No structural changes to accommodate networked learning,
except perhaps within Schools where there have been changes
to technical/admin work. |
| H8 |
|
_ |
No changes due to networked learning but the institution
has restructured into schools and in that restructuring created
a new role of Dean which has responsibilities in terms of
developing e-learning - will write strategy for own schools. |
| H9 |
|
_ |
Minor changes, changes in terms of admin and technical
support for the VLE. |
| H10 |
_ |
|
New multi-disciplinary teams (e-learning advisory group);
Heads of School have less freedom (move towards centralisation)
and also new committees; refers to a more corporate approach.
But also one person held the view that there was not much
change. |
| F1 |
_ |
|
The overall structure was altered to facilitate the development
of e-learning. The main development is the formation of the
Internet group to manage the administrative and learning
intranets - this team is comprised of senior members of staff.
These systems were developed in-house. |
| F2 |
_ |
|
The ILT strategy document set out various changes to the
management structure. The main structural changes appear
to involve a reorganisation of some Divisions; the creation
of an e-learning team, led by the e-learning manager, in
a newly created management post; and the creation of a multimedia
group. There also appears to be a new meeting structure in
place, to accommodate these changes. IT, Estates, Libraries
and Learning Centres have been merged and became part of
the same Division, making service provision stronger and
easier to arrange. |
| F3 |
_ |
|
Management restructuring to facilitate e-learning by putting
IT services and ILT development together within the same
division under the same director. This restructuring was
preceded by the creation of the new post ILT Development
manager and a new ILT department, a new IT services department
was created and an IT Services manager was appointed plus
team members. Some new committees and teams appear to have
been set up. |
| F4 |
_ |
|
Major changes were the introduction of a central e-learning
team and a change in management structure, with the assistant
director having joint responsibilities for ILT academic and
for IT infrastructure areas. |
| F5 |
_ |
|
Major changes in the decision-making committees, central
support units, and infrastructure planning. There was a rationalisation
with support to be provided within one central department.
This department also provides multimedia support and curriculum
development support. Changes to committee structures were
mentioned in a way that suggested they had been minor. |
| F6 |
_ |
|
Structural changes include a more integrated approach,
more teams; to some extent driven by external agenda to a
focus on learners' needs.
Changed from a vertical to a more horizontal management
structure with more team working. This is seen as being driven
by putting learners in the centre - and thus developing Integrated
Learning Centre. |
| F7 |
|
_ |
Minor only - creating some new roles.
Anticipation that there may be changes with appointment
of a new Principal. |
| F8 |
_ |
|
Senior management noted that there have been changes including
a new unit for development of materials; and the introduction
of teaching 'clusters' - groupings of subject areas. |
| F9 |
|
_ |
Restructured - but not impacted on networked learning. |
| F10 |
|
_ |
Restructuring to make institution less hierarchical; whilst
not due to networked learning, networked learning is having
an impact, as it requires cross college working. |
Figure 4-8: Structural changes
resulting from the implementation of networked learning
