1. The Higher Education Academy
enhancing the student
learning experience
Lawrence Hamburg
Associate Director and
Head of (e)Learning
Fifth International Conference on Networked Learning 2006
2. • What is the Academy - overview
• What is the Academy doing in the area of
e-Learning?
– Context – learning and teaching driven
– Subject Centres (Distributed e-Learning Programme)
– Recent Academy e-Learning research call
– HEFCE’s e-Learning strategy: Benchmarking/Pathfinder
– Work with the JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee)
Outline
3. Introduction
• Founded in May 2004, we are an independent organisation
funded by grants from the four UK funding bodies, subscriptions
from higher education institutions, and grant and contract
income for specific initiatives.
• Brought together LTSN subject centre network (24 subject
centres) and Institute for Learning & Teaching (ILT)
• We engage in a wide variety of activities to support our mission
and deliver our strategic aims and objectives.
4. Our mission
Our mission is to
help institutions,
discipline groups
and all staff to
provide the best
possible learning
experience for their
students.
5. Strategic aims and objectives
• To be an authoritative and independent voice on policies that
influence student learning experiences
• To support institutions in their strategies for improving the
student learning experience
• To lead, support and inform the professional development and
recognition of staff in higher education
• To promote good practice in all aspects of support for the
student learning experience
• To lead the development of research and evaluation to improve
the quality of the student learning experience
• To be a responsive, efficient and accountable organisation
Supporting the student learning experience is core to
the Academy . . . .
Currently all feeding into the
development of 06/07 operational plan
6. Our stakeholders
Institutions • As subscribers, institutions can
collaborate with us in many different
ways.
• We provide tools, practical solutions
and research evidence to help you
improve your students’ learning
experience.
• Can join different network groups to
exchange practices and ideas.
• Can have institutional staff
development programmes accredited
by the Academy.
• We have a direct liaison scheme with
institutions to identify priorities, needs
and innovative practice.
7. Institutions – examples of engagement
• Network of deputy and Pro-vice-Chancellors and
Vice-Principals
• Change Academy
• Support for specific groups (ie. External Examiners,
PDP, e-Learning and employability)
• Research literature reviews and surveys
• Continuing professional development accreditation
scheme and support
• Programmes of activity on broad themes identified by
institutions
9. Individual staff – examples of engagement
• The Academy’s Subject Network
• The register of accredited practitioners
• Special interest groups and networks
• National standards framework
• Working toward professional transferability across
the different educational sectors (e.g. HE in FE)
• National Teaching Fellowship Scheme
10. Disciplines and subjects
Practitioners, subject
departments and
discipline communities
are supported through
the 24 Subject
Centres as well as
Academy York.
11. Disciplines and subjects – examples of
engagement
• Subject-specific information and resources (databases,
knowledge banks, case studies, question banks, journals and
guides)
• Events, departmental workshops, teaching and student awards
• Brokerage and collaboration activities include mini-project
funding, establishing partnerships and special interest groups
• Interdisciplinary collaborations address mutual concerns
• Subject specific support for assessment, e-Learning,
employability and enterprise
• Help subject communities respond to the challenges posed by
emerging policy issues
12. Governments and funding bodies
Governments and funding
bodies can draw on our
expertise to assist with
the development and
implementation of policy
that influenced the
student learning
experience
13. Governments and funding bodies –
examples of engagement
• Engaging with policy issues such as e-Learning (e.g.
HEFCE 10 yr e-Learning strategy), widening
participation, the implications of competition and the
global market, and the changing expectations of
industry and the professions
• Representation in the main and sub-panels for the
2008 RAE
• Providing a voice for the sector.
14. Students
• Everything we do is aimed at
improving the student learning
experience.
• This focus leads us to work on
all aspects of the student
learning lifecycle – including
strategies for retention, the
effective uses of e-learning, the
development of enterprise
capabilities and support for
excellent research training
environments
15. Organisations and associations
Professional associations and bodies work
closely with us to ensure we do not duplicate
efforts but collaborate to increase efficacy
and impact
16. Organisations and professional bodies –
examples of engagement
• Collaborative activities such as joint conferences and
events
• Corporate agreements and Memoranda of
Understanding with key national bodies, e.g. JISC
• Building capacity for evidence-informed activities
• Subject Centres work closely with subject
associations and professional bodies
• Collaborative agreements for practitioner
accreditation
17. • What are their key issues and core
areas/themes requiring advice/support?
– Initial feedback from institutional visits by
Academy senior advisors (50% to date)
– Feedback from PVC network and SIGs
– Feedback from subject centres
• A demand-driven approach
HE institutions
18. • Feedback from institutional visits, sector consultations
and internal discussions identify 4 broad themes:
Student learning experience – what is good learning (evidence),
student satisfaction vs good learning, what is student centred
learning etc
Curriculum Design – employability, wbl/wrl, flexible delivery (inc.
e-Learning), internationalisation, sustainability, diversity, WP,
innovation & creativity etc
Assessment – feedback to students (what and how), plagiarism,
eAssessment, innovation (are we over assessing?), i.e.
assessment for learning and of learning issues.
Research & teaching nexus – what does this mean?,
strengthening relationship, how can we encourage this?, pedR
capacity building.
What are the key issues/areas?
19. (e)Learning in UK Higher
Education
Where are we now?
- Reality check -
20. e-Learning - where are we now?
• A changing HE landscape - more institutional
autonomy, student fees, regional agendas/issues etc
• We need to step back from e-Learning - to
reflect, review and look at this within an overall
Learning, Teaching and Assessment context . . .
• . . . . and then see where e-Learning fits into and can
support all of this.
21. • Policy
– HEFCE’s 10 yr e-Learning strategy, e.g. eChina,
research
– Academy & JISC named as lead partners
• Partnerships
– JISC
• Institutions
– Benchmarking/Pathfinder
• Subject Centres
– Support for practitioners
– Disciplines - Distributed e-Learning Programme
• Research
– Focus on student learning experience within institution
– Recent research call
Academy support for e-Learning in HE
22. • e-Learning identified by institutions as a key area
of interest
• Policy and Funding
– DfES e-Strategy: Vision for technology – ‘each
individual maximises their potential through the
personalisation of their learning and development’.
– HEFCE 10 yr e-Learning Strategy: ‘Our goal is to
help the sector use new technology as effectively
as they can, so that it becomes a 'normal' or
embedded part of their activities’.
e-Learning is a major driver for achieving
‘transformation’
24. • In the early days the design of railway coaches was based on stage-
coach practice, and evolved slowly from there:
– coaches were not designed with corridors to allow passengers to walk
along the carriage and from one carriage to the next - that would take up
valuable seating space;
– passengers were expected to stay in their place for the entire journey;
– if you wanted a meal on the train you had to take it with you;
– toilet facilities were not normally available even on the longest routes!
The early days of e-learning . . . a comparison?
25. • What is e-Learning?
• Not a single entity
• A development of educational processes
driven by possibilities enabled by new
technology
• Perceived benefits, DfES, SHEFC, HEFCE e-
learning strategies – ‘embedding’,
‘transformation’
The state of e-learning in UK HE
26. • ICT as a communication tool is widely used by
students and staff.
• Tools such as the WWW and email are
becoming common practice.
• Numerous examples/case studies of staff using
the WWW in their teaching to provide additional
resources and support for their students.
Where are we (1)?
27. • Institutional Learning and Teaching strategies
increasingly make references to their chosen
VLE (and MLE as the institutional VLE
becomes more embedded)
• However, the use of ICT to deliver substantial
proportions of course materials and to provide
an integrated approach to student-teacher and
student-student interactions is much less
widely established.
Where are we (2)?
28. • Management commitment and organisational structure – a lack of
understanding?
• Willingness and ability to invest (what are the actual benefits – can
we cost them? Do we have a choice?)
• Competing resources – staff time and rewards (2008 RAE!)
• Lack of skills in the emerging area of learning technology (those that
can do – if they can find the time
• Reward and recognition – what is in it for me?
• Lack of examples of appropriate (transferable) models for using e-
learning to improve campus-based learning
• Lack of affordable, reliable tools and technical infrastructure within
universities; and
• Pedagogic effectiveness of e-learning? – uncertainty?
Why isn’t it happening – some possible reasons?
29. So how do we bring
about change?
Lets step back a bit . . .
30. • Conceptualising the SLE
• Where do we want to go (post 2009)?
• What part should e-Learning play in all of
this?
• How do we take this forward?
Enhancing the SLE
(student learning experience)
31. • What is a good student learning
experience?
• What is the quality of today’s student
experience . . . . . and how is it likely to
change?
• Experience . . . . or satisfaction?
Conceptualising the SLE
32. Conceptualising the SLE
Design of the SLE The curriculum; the assessment; the teaching;
student support; the co-curricular and extra
curricular context
Student experiences of the
design of the SLE
(evaluation and monitoring)
How students experience these designs (not to be
confused with ‘satisfaction’)
Institutional practice and
policy to support the SLE
Systems at multiple levels (including departments,
academic review processes, administrative units,
leadership and governance)
Subject based policy to
support the SLE
Professional bodies, discipline associations,
Academy etc
National policy and practice
to support the SLE (across
disciplines)
Governments, funding bodies, QAA, Academy,
JISC etc
33. Conceptualising the SLE - INSTITUTIONAL
Curriculum
& Student
Support
Quality
Management
Academic
Leadership
Assessment
Design of the SLE
Student experiences of
the design of the SLE
(evaluation and
monitoring
Institutional practice and
policy to support the
SLE
Subject based policy to
support the SLE
National policy and
practice to support the
SLE (across disciplines)
34. Academy support for e-Learning (1)
Distributed e-Learning Programme
• JISC funded
• Involves all 24 Subject Centres
• Round one completed (£1.3m), Round two to start
(£1.45m) over 2 yrs
– share and reuse – learning objects etc
– e-Portfolios
– embedding tools and resources
– embedding JISC digitisation programme
35. Academy support for e-Learning (2)
Research
• Focus on HE student learning experience
(institutional)
• Complements other research funding
opportunities, e.g. ESRC’s TLRP call
– technology enhanced learning is now the term
– £6M to support both a small number (3-6 projects)
– Broad themes - interdisciplinary, lifelong learning,
personalised learning etc
36. Academy support for e-Learning (3)
Recent Academy research call
• Theme A - Student learning experience
– student perceptions, role of tutor, informal learning
e.g. blogs, disciplinary differences, e-Assessment
• Theme B - The e-Learning environment
– institutional support, staff development, QA
processes, collaborative learning, blended
learning
• £200,000 total funding available
• 5 projects max to be funded
• 123 expressions of interest received
• 8 invited to submit full proposals
37. Theme A Student Learning Experience
A1 Student diversity and its impact on the demand for learning solutions. 17 (14%)
A2 Student conceptions of e-Learning and perceptions of e-Learning
environments
37 (30%)
A3 Issues raised by more informal learning, such as loss of tutor control,
student blogging, the ability of students to learn in any location
when using personal devices and related issues of quality.
26 (21%)
A4 Disciplinary differences in the role and use of e-Learning; e-Learning
and internationalism, including the internationalisation of the
curriculum.
10 (8%)
A5 The forms of e-assessment and their impact on the students’ learning
experience.
17 (14%)
Total theme A 107 (87%)
Theme B The e-Learning environment 2 (2%)
B1 Ways in which institutions link and relate support for e-Learning with
other institutional teaching and learning supports structures.
10 (8%)
B2 Issues for the design and implementation of staff development to
support e-Learning
18 (15%)
B3 Approaches to Collaborative and Community learning 18 (15%)
B4 Blended learning: anticipating learner preferences; learning objects
and reuse; improving retention and support, formalising support in
e-Learning, resource management, e-assessment, etc.
33 (27%)
Total theme B 81 (66%)
38. Academy support for e-Learning (4)
• Benchmarking Exercise
• and Pathfinder Programme
• HEFCE consultation with sector - feedback asked
for benchmarking
• First 3 yrs experiences to inform future funding
opportunities
• £8m allocated (remainder of UKeU funds), with
£6m distributed to institutions for the Pathfinder
(max 35)
• Jointly managed by JISC & Academy, led by the
Academy
39. Background
The story so far
Project plan (macro)
Outcomes (expected & possible)
Evaluation
Route map
Benchmarking and Pathfinder
40. Why benchmarking?
• A sector request via HEFCE e-learning strategy
feedback
• Seeks answers to question of where we are with our
embedding of e-learning? Where are we in
comparison to others we think have a similar profile
to us? What’s the picture sector-wide?
41. What’s Pathfinder?
• Moving beyond innovation. Where do we need to
be? – informed by Benchmarking findings?
• How do we get there?
• What resources and development do we need?
• How do we overcome the challenges which arise?
• How do we know we’ve got there?
• How do we disseminate the lessons?
42. Pathfinder Programme
• £6 million available to institutions for Phase 1
Pathfinder until 2008 (matched funding required)
• Self-organizing institutional groupings (max 35
institutions – including the HEFCE funded
benchmarking pilots - in this round)
• Phased (a Pilot and a Phase 1 in this funding
round)
44. 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)
• 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
• 44 await phase 1
• 23 consultants
responded to the ITT to
support the
benchmarking exercise
• 3 were invited to join
the pilot phase
47. 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 *
48. Who else is involved?
Academy
Derek Morrison
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
Sarah Davies: Programme Manager
Craig Wentworth: Development Director (User
Environments)
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. Evaluation
of the Pilot?
Dr Nick Hammond
Professor Terry Mayes
Paucity of data is, for
some institutions, the
major challenge
The message, so far, is that
the main priority is the
institutions want to get a
handle on their own e-learning
activity before worrying about
comparisons with others.
58. JISC and the Academy
• JISC and the Academy bring a wealth of complementary
expertise and service:
– JISC – development programmes, tools, resources, content,
repositories, research etc
– JISC - advisory services
– Academy – pedagogy, overarching L&T context, resources,
professional development, research, staff development focus etc
– Academy – discipline focus through subject centre network
engagement with institutions at all levels i.e.
individuals, discipline groups, staff & educational
developers, senior managers (PVCs etc) . . . . . . .
i.e. horizontal integration
=
59. A key challenge for JISC and the Academy
• JISC and the Academy bring a wealth of complementary
expertise and service:
– JISC – development programmes, tools, resources, content,
repositories, research etc
– JISC - advisory services
– Academy – pedagogy, overarching L&T context, resources,
professional development, research, staff development focus etc
– Academy – discipline focus through subject centre network
Vertical Integration
60. JISC and Academy: Building on success
• Joint activities/programmes
– DeL – phase one and two
– Benchmarking
– Pathfinder
– Joint Management Board (established
March 2005)
– Next steps . . ‘joining-up’
61. Current JISC/Academy e-learning support model
Advisory and
Content Services
Developments
Subject Centres
Learning and teaching
practice and research
developments
JISC Higher Education Academy
CETLs
HEIs
Individuals/Groups
62. Adapted JISC/Academy e-learning support model
incorporating brokerage function
Advisory and
Content Services
Developments
Subject Centres
Learning and teaching
practice and research
developments
JISC Higher Education Academy
PVC network & e-learning SIG
CETLs
HEIs
Individuals/Groups
Aim: to establish a
seamless brokerage
function both within and
between our respective
organisations to support
the HE sector in a
coherent and meaningful
way.
63. Reality Check . . .
• Most HEIs have purchased or developed a Virtual
Learning Environment (VLE)
• HEIs are integrating this into other systems, e.g. student
records – a Managed Learning Environment
• New and innovative learning tools are being developed
• So, e-Learning is becoming ‘embedded’ and
transformation is taking place? Post 2009:
– should we carry on as we are doing now (Academy, JISC etc)?
– can we be sure the student learning experience will be
‘transformed’?
– is there evidence of a shift in teaching methods?
– can we do more to support/speed up this change process?
– what else is needed?
