Project impact assessment of e-learning in the Extended Studies Academy

1. Project impact assessment of e-learning in the Extended Studies Academy Presented by Rose Masha: CLTD Walter Sisulu University

2. Extended Studies Academy • Unit goals, objectives and strategies, encompass designing, developing and implementing an effective and efficient system-wide approach to student access and retention by assisting faculties and cooperating with related institutional units. • The implementation of e-learning guided by the e-learning strategy 2009-2011/2012 within: • Tracking & Monitoring section • Writing Centres • Lifeskills • Academic Literacy • Computer literacy • Extended Programmes

3. NUFFIC Project • The main objectives of the Netherlands Organisation for International Cooperation in Higher Education (NUFFIC) funded NPT Project centred around: - curriculum innovation at WSU, with the Schools of Engineering and Information Technology as pilots • conducting institutional research in the form of throughput and employer studies • the establishment and implementation of e-learning • Staff development for improvement of throughputs • the review and development of the institutional quality policy as the main system and structure for managing throughputs Dwayi: 2011

4. Nuffic project terms of reference: ESA • In 2009, four ESA staff members visited the Netherlands. • become team leaders • develop e-learning materials informed by e-pedagogy and assessment practices • to cascade (through training) the concept of e-learning and e-assessment to colleagues in their respective sections. • Make follow-ups on their sections’ e-implementation plans and write reports for submission to the ETIU and ESA • Present at Grassroots events and e-learning conferences

5. WHAT IS A PROJECT? • “An endevour in which human (or machine) material and financial resources are organized so as to undertake a unique scope of work of given specification, within constraints of costs and time, so as to deliver beneficial change by quantitative and qualitative objectives”, (Turner: 1996).

6. THE PROJECT LIFE CYCLE Design Implementation Conceptualisation Closure Resources 0 Time

7. WHO ARE THE STAKEHOLDERS? • Students • e-learning team leaders & lecturers (ESA & Extended Programmes) • Departments • CLTD • HEMIS • ICT • Funders

8. METHODOLOGY • Primary data • Structured questionnaires sent to 4 e-learning team leaders and 32 active (and non active) lecturers • Structured questionnaires to 289 students • Interview with 2 HEMIS officers • Secondary data • Video clip of an e-learning class • E-learning team term reports

9. 7 ROLES OF THE e- learning EDUCATOR Learning area/subject/discipline specialist Leader, administrator Interpreter and designer of e-learning programmes and materials Competent e-Assessor Community, citizenship and pastoral role E-Learning mediator Scholar, researcher and lifelong learner and manager (McGrath: 2007)

10. FACEBOOK

12. PROJECT STAKEHOLDER – SHOWS A RANGE OF PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS [BURKE, 2010] PROJECT ENVIRONMENT Client Project Manager Project Team Directly involved stakeholders Supportive and non-supportive stakeholders External stakeholders

13. SWOT ANALYSIS • Strengths • Unlimited Internet access • 1 on 1 consultations • Already existing e-learning labs and assistants • Efficiency of ETIU in training implementation and support • Opportunities • Utilization e-learning during class disruptions • Facilitate lessons in different campuses • Students having cellphones • Weaknesses • Unreliable network • Development of initial material • Insufficient lab space for big classes • Threats • Fear of computers • Unwillingness of lecturers to ditch traditional practices • Lack of funding to sustain the project External Environment Internal Environment

14. ESA e-learning implementation A. Students + 1 B. Lecturers C. ICT, HEMIS D. Project Team: CLTD 1 2 1 + + + Throughput and retention, self-dev • IT support as part of dept strategies • Project success Stakeholder Table Importance Influence / Importance Matrix Influence Participation Matrix

15. Project’s alignment to objectives • Were the objectives of the project achieved in ESA? • Yes (67 lecturers and 743 students) • and not completely- staff do not use WiSeUp as much as they should: • Infrastructure • Time to develop materials • Not competent enough to use Respondus for e-assessment • Attitude change

16. Need to polish-up existing skills • Although 67 lecturers were trained, 53% never put these skills in practice fully, citing reasons around infrastructural issues… contradiction at times, especially with the BC staff members.

17. GAP BETWEEN STRATEGY AND EXECUTION • The lack of integration between WiSeUp and ITS and HEMIS continue to pose structural challenges for effective management of the online learning management system and the optimal use of this system for such important activities as tracking and monitoring of student performance (Dwayi: 2011)

18. Conclusion: project phaseout • By definition, projects (and even life cycle phase) have an end point. Closing out is a very important phase in the project life cycle, which should follow particular disciplines and procedures with the objective of: • Effectively bringing the project to closure according to agreed-on contractual requirements. • Analysing overall project performance with regard to financial data, objectives, and technical efforts. • Identifying and pursuing follow-up or sustainability activities

19. Recommendations • Continued Grassroots events • E-learning interest groups • Use of OpenCourseWare • Improvement of ICT support infrastructure • Establishment of common shared folder on WiSeUp • The appointment of e-Learning specialists for Potsdam and Zamukulungisa sites • More lecturers to be trained in Respondus • Incorporating e-learning as part of curriculum innovation

20. End of presentationThank you