Benchmarking Pilot: update

1. Benchmarking Pilot: update Derek Morrison – Associate Head of e-Learning, The Higher Education Academy HeLF London South Bank University 21 February 2006

2. The story so far

3. Chronology (as of Jan 2006) • Announced at ALT-C (5-8 Sep 2005) • EOI call (open 5 Oct 2005 close 30 Nov 2005) • Consultants ITT call (open 26 Oct 2005 close 24 Nov 2005) • Town Meeting/Workshop (York, 9 Nov 2005) • Revised original project plan (Nov 2005) • Consultants selected (12 December 2005) • Revision accepted by HEFCE (Dec 2005) • Selected and notified pilot institutions (16 Dec 2005) • Launch meeting for pilot institutions (Royal Society, 20 Jan 2006) • 23 consultants responded to the ITT to support the benchmarking exercise • 3 were invited to join the pilot phase • 56 institutions expressed an interest in participating in the pilot or phase 1 of the benchmarking exercise. • 12 were invited to join the pilot phase

4. Pilot institutions and consultants ACU/OBHE Team (Svava Bjarnason, John Fielden, Allan Schofield) • Oxford Brookes University • Coventry University with Warwickshire College • The Institute of Education • The University of Warwick Professor Paul Bacsich • The University of Leicester • The University of Manchester * • The University of Staffordshire • The University of Chester Professor Peter Chatterton • The University of Bristol • The University of Hertfordshire • The University of Strathclyde * (also member of the Scottish Benchmarking ‘club’) • The University of Wales Institute, Cardiff *

5. Who else is involved?

6. Who else is involved? Academy: e-Learning Team Derek Morrison: Associate Head of e-Learning Liz Pearce: Projects Co-ordinator Eddie Gulc: Senior Adviser (e-Learning) Academy: Research and Evaluation Directorate Dr Nick Hammond – Senior Adviser (Research) Professor Terry Mayes JISC: e-Learning Programme Paul Bailey: Programme Director e-Learning Sarah Davies: Programme Manager Craig Wentworth: Development Director (User Environments)

7. Project Plan update

8. Project plan update - 2006

9. Project plan update - 2007

10. Project plan update - 2008

11. Benchmarking pilot – the outcomes?

12. Expected outcomes - 1 • The results will inform later phases of e-learning benchmarking for the sector Although the benchmarking pilot is not a research project the sector will, nevertheless, expect us to come up with some concrete recommendations, based on institutional experiences and outcomes, from taking part in the various approaches to benchmarking. Each institution's benchmarking experiences 'story' is, therefore, as important as any benchmarking quantitative and qualitative data that is gathered.

13. Expected outcomes - 2 • The results will inform later phases of e-learning benchmarking for the sector • Participating institutions will have gained an insight into where they are with regard to e-learning and be able to plan more effectively and efficiently where they wish to be. • Institutions in the pilot will benefit from knowledge of the work of other participants. • Informed by the benchmarking activity, institutions will be prepared, and able, to submit a proposal to participate in the Pathfinder Programme. • Institutions will think ‘beyond the VLE’, beyond innovation, and take an holistic view. “ I’m all for progress. It’s change I don’t like.” (Mark Twain)

14. Possible outcomes? • The experience of one set of pilot institutions is so overwhelmingly positive or negative that the approach becomes a 'must do' or 'must drop'. • The limited diversity approach is found to be the most appropriate for a diverse sector. • We end up with just one recommended approach or perhaps two. • A benchmarking approach cannot create a critical mass of users beyond the institution that pilots it. • We identify a unifying framework that can incorporate different approaches to e-learning benchmarking.

15. Communications & information?

16. Communications and information? Consider how we can facilitate restricted and public dissemination of the experiences of the pilot institutions both as 'works-in-progress' (to each other) and at the conclusion of the pilot. • JISCMail list www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/benchmarking-elearning.html • Weblog(s), i.e.simply authored, chronologically organised, thematically categorized, and commented postings. • Wiki – editable web page

17. Communications and information: the weblog “ Email is where knowledge goes to die” http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/weblogs/benchmarking/

18. Communications and information: the weblog “ Email is where knowledge goes to die” http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/weblogs/benchmarking/

19. Communications and information: the weblog “ Email is where knowledge goes to die” http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/weblogs/benchmarking/

20. Communications and information: weblog authoring

21. Aggregated syndicated feed example http://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/?page_id=140

22. Aggregated syndicated feed example http://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/?page_id=162

23. Blog aggregation examples • http://www.auricle.org/auriclewp/ • http://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/?page_id=140 (recent entries example) • http://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/?page_id=162 (feeds by site long version example) • http://www.ozpolitics.info/blog/?page_id=151 (feeds by site short version example)