Evaluating Learning Technologies at University of Worcester

1. Evaluating Learning Technologies atUniversity of Worcester Review Meeting October 4th, 2006 John Colvin

2. HEA Pathway Pilot • Initial results publication co-incided with start of project • Trialled e-Learning benchmarking in a number of HEI’s • Feb 2007 Pathfinder bid!! • eLearning cannot be assessed in isolation from • L&T • ICT • HR • Estates • e-Learning data often not recorded • Results confidential • Blogging review culture is considered appropriate

3. HEA Pathway Pilot (Cont…) • The 5 benchmark tools piloted • all “fit for purpose”.  • All Available for Feb 2007 Bid • Customisation appropriate • ELTI • “Pick ‘n Mix” • eMM • OBHE • MIT90 • JC Decision: Adopt one of benchmarking tools - avoid re-inventing the wheel • As the report says the “the precise nature of the method is much less important than starting …. to ask penetrating questions”

4. Choice of Benchmarking Tool • Adapted version ELTI • Pathfinder summary • did not favour any tool • deemed them all fit-for-purpose • All available Feb 2007 bid • Why ELTI • Pilot supported by external consultants • Availability of associated support documentation was considered crucial.   • Materials for elti and ‘Pick and Mix’ were appropriate and readily available • Accessing materials for other tools was less successful • Extent and relevance of ELTI audit questions are, IMO, impressive • Pathfinder summary suggests that participation is the crucial issue

5. ELTI audits (Evidence + Assessment) • Profile of learning and teaching • Profile of learning technologies • Recognition and reward • e.g. There are specific professional rewards for LT innovation (e.g. additional funding, progression points, teaching fellowships) • Research and/or development • ICT infrastructure • Learning technology support (Cont…)

6. ELTI audits (Cont….) • Learning Technology funding • Administrative infrastructure • Staff ICT skills • All teaching staff have basic WebCT skills (putting lectures and discussion forums online) • Student ICT skills • Digital/ multimedia resources • Networks and collaborations

7. Some Jobs Completed / Underway • Selection of Benchmarking Tool • Data Collection / Analysis • L&T: • e.g. Strategies, quality enhancement, support, innovations • LT Profile • e.g. University initiatives, integration at course level • LT Recognition & Reward • e.g. Innovation support, Progression

8. Some Jobs Completed / Underway • R&D • e.g. RAE, specialist units • Staff Skills • e.g. ICT skills, WebCT skills, skills support • Student Skills • e.g. audit procedures, support • LT Support • Effectiveness of h/ware & s/ware support

9. Selection of Major ‘Jobs’ Outstanding • Audit of WebCT Usage • Audit use of Learning Technologies in classroom • Audit of Learning Technologies at UW • Review Dept AMR’s & L&T strategies • Benchmarking with other HEI’s

10. Audit of WebCT usage • After Learning week - Fair snapshot • Inspection of WebCT courses • ‘Health Warning’ Everyone email circulated • Access Strategy under discussion • Level of Audit • No WebCT course set up • WebCT course set up, not used • General course data • Course Materials • Discussion Groups • Other use e.g. Assessment Tool

11. Use of Learning Technologies in Classroom • Clip Board Survey?? • Learning week • Contingency Plan: email survey • Ask questions about last classroom lesson taught • LT in class • IWB, projector, MP3… • LT to support learning outside classroom • WebCT, blogs, eBooks • Ask about their own most innovative LT use • How, if at all has LT changed the way you teach? • Ask: Single most important support that UW could offer to encourage/improve your use of LT?

12. Other HEI’s • Benchmark data from 2000/1 • Selection of new and some pre-92 HEI’s • Contacts? • Particularly Pathfinder Trial participants • December / January • Large body of our data available • Some analysis completed • Organise late October