LERSIG Survey:

1. LERSIG Survey: VLE Review Results

2. Thank you to … Aberystwyth University BPP University College Capita Learning & Development City University London Durham University Imperial College London Kingston University London Metropolitan University London School of Economics Northumbria University Queen Mary, London Thames Valley University UCL UWIC York St John University Universities of … Bedfordshire Bradford Cambridge Glamorgan Greenwich Hull Nottingham Strathclyde Wales Trinity Saint David Worcester

3. Q2 Which VLEs are used?

4. Q2 Comments about VLEs Moodle used as main VLE and for specific departments / courses – unlike other VLEs “Used for courses that have users not studying for a formal university award” Custom solutions were in-house or open source. Other VLEs mentioned: Kallidus Topyx SIMS

5. Q3 Decision making – why this VLE? • Upgrading existing VLE “One of only two credible alternatives at the time.” • Investment of resources in existing VLE “We have high levels of engagement. There is a fear that a change of VLE would lower the engagement for a period.” • Response to recent review / evaluation • Pedagogical approach fitted institutional vision “Open source meets our pedagogical goals.” • Partner institutions • Functionality and cost “’Free’ - i.e. no upfront payments, although thousands spent in developer time etc - so not actually free at all. A large touch of 'we're special, so no off the shelf solution will work for us'.”

6. Q3 Who made the decision? Drivers: • Learning and teaching • IT driven • Institutional strategy / policy • Lost in mist of time

7. Q4 Possible drivers for a VLE review

8. Q4 Use of the VLE – Staff & student

9. Q5 Review policy outcomes • Changes in business, technical and policy processes “All courses visible to all lecturers.” “Change in point in registration process that students can access VLE” “Integration with other technologies” • Improve pedagogy through enhanced support “Promote the benefits of better engagement by staff and students” • Move to / remain with ... “Move to Moodle as the hub of a set of strategic learning technologies” “Stay with Blackboard and improve it”

10. Q5 Review platform outcomes

11. Q5 Review resource outcomes • Restructuring to reflect new VLE, some new staff, often in Schools / Faculty “Increased expenditure on technical and support staff for implementation” • Budget reallocation “Redirected licensing to platform development and support.” • Funding for move / migration

12. Q7 VLE reviews: most interesting findings • The satisfaction ratings of Blackboard and Moodle are fairly similar • That students and staff tend only to want what they have used before; sometimes you need to let the experts (learning technology team) make the decision. • General satisfaction with much of VLE functionality but desire by teaching staff to be more in control. • The amount of positive attitudes that existed about current provision. • The number of positive benefits in moving.

13. Q7 VLE reviews: more most interesting findings • Staff had no enthusiasm to go to another platform. • Genuine desire to learn more about how technology can enhance student experience. • Lack of knowledge of functionality of existing VLE and support available. • Desire to share across institution. • Focus on course management issues. • Better understanding of where we are across the board.

14. Q7 VLE reviews: most unexpected findings • Moodle was the most popular amongst those with dissatisfaction of WebCT. • Not wanting to use more and more new tools but have tools that can rely on. • Student demand that use should be standardised away from content delivery and towards learning. They could give examples of good learning delivered in Blackboard and wanted that to be mainstreamed. • Staff wanted reinforcement of VLE policies and guidance.

15. Q8 Changing VLE?