The successful introduction of web-based lecture technologies (WBLT) into higher education institutions requires a blend of inter-dependent approaches (eg: business model; governance) each designed to enhance the pedagogical potential of the academic programmes. The implementation path for these approaches varies widely between institutions, often dependent upon finance, senior leadership and the capacity for change. An analysis of the approaches taken by eight UK and US institutions at various stages in their implementation highlights a high level of commonality in issues faced, good practice arising and the direction of travel. Furthermore, it is believed that the model presented can be more broadly applied in academic settings for the planning and implementation of similar large-scale technological systems. This is a poster presented at ASCILITE, 2010.

1. COVERAGE
“Define your end-point:
partial/focused or ubiquitous
installation and use”
Discipline Areas: Local
Control: Technical
Applications: Fixed
Institution
Managerial
Flexible
- Local enthusiasm or greatest
need?
- Ad hoc or patchy coverage
- Opt-in versus opt-out
STAFF DEVELOPMENT
“Leverage the benefits of WBLT
through staff development”
Technology orientated
Training orientated
Compliance orientated
Curriculum pedagogy
Informed consent
- Engagement and buy-in
- Who provides staff development?
- Evidence of impact
GOVERNANCE
“Responsibility will need to be
handed over from the initiators to
a formal university group”
IPR: Implicit
Consent: Informal
Policy: Enthusiast
Explicit
Formal
Steering Group
- Briefing managers on implications
- defining stakeholders and key
interests
- Pragmatic planning and policy
development
MODEL
“You will need to develop a
holistic framework to meet your
academic needs”
Business: Internal
Resource: Utility
External
Change
Value Added
- Role of lecture in teaching
- Perceived value of lecturers
- Distance learning vs. supplement
IMPLEMENTATION
“Be realistic about the pace at
which lecture capture can be
rolled out at your institution”
Stimulus: Organic
Push: Bottom
Timescale: Slow
Planned
Top
Rapid
- Cross service planning
- Academically led ?
- Incentivising
INTEGRATION
“Early standalone initiatives need to
be integrated into a wide range of
systems and policies”
Integrated
Integrated
Integrated
- Sustainability of early gains at
institutional level
- Management of integration with
corporate systems
Modelling institutional approaches to web-based lecture technologies
John Couperthwaite1, Juliet Hinrichsen2, Charles Shields3
1 Educational Technology Manager, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham
2 Educational Designer, eLearning Unit, Coventry University
3 Head of eLearning, Loughborough University
THEMES Sub-themes
Pedagogy: No change
University systems: standalone
Room facilities: standalone
Alternatives / Options Issues
The business case for using WBLTs will determine key decisions. For example,
enhancing student learning will lead to wide coverage, low production values
and ‘throwaway’ policy whilst distance learning capability may be targeted,
have a high-value production strategy coupled with a re-use policy. Consider
who delivers staff development.
Actions:
- Scope all potential uses of WBLT
Ensure your support model and financial investment
is sustainable
- Choose the right mix of technologies
The plan for adopting WBLT’s within the institution should be formulated
around principles of use by a representative group of stakeholders. Policy
decisions will need to be made to cover legal implications (such as IPR,
branding), ethical issues (opt-in, consent), and sustainable growth (finance,
storage, devices, administration).
Actions:
- Recognise complex implications
- Need for contractual clarity / issues
- Organisation of formal stakeholder groups
The model for implementation will limit the rate at which WBLT will be
integrated into the institution. Grassroots origins will require significant
evidence of impact and a critical mass of users to encourage growth, whilst
large scale introductions must necessarily be managed by senior staff, be
strategically planned and are often rapidly phased.
Actions:
- Establish a critical mass of committed academics
- Coordinate planning between departments and support units
- Ensure full stakeholder representation
- Gather evidence of impact and value
The roll-out of devices across an institution is unlikely to be evenly distributed
in the early stages as local demand, space and technical capacity dictate
usage. The move towards global coverage and a diversity of modes of
application will be founded upon peer review, escalating demand and a
growing confidence. Control over the administration of the service will also
require resolution as the service grows; this includes: maintenance,
scheduling, timetabling, editing, and storage.
Actions:
- Target installations to academic demand
- Use student demand
- Expect growth from word of mouth
- Ensure coherent IT and Estates infrastructure
- Link to timetabling and room allocation policies
Direct training for these technologies is minimal but may include presentation
and delivery tips, and practical aspects, such as timetabling and editing
captures. The main staff development opportunities lie in helping staff to
understand and apply the policies, and in leveraging WBLTs to improve
pedagogical practice and student learning. Appropriate and timely staff
development can support engagement by academic staff through ‘myth-
busting’ and response to legitimate concerns.
Actions:
- Highlight the variety of possible pedagogical approaches
- Stress the importance of rights and responsibilities
- Include opportunities for reflection and planning
- Create or reuse existing exemplars and toolkits
Embedding WBLT systems within organisations demands linkage at a variety of
levels: the pedagogical link with institutional learning and teaching strategies;
the systems link with technical infrastructure; the modification of learning
environments to accommodate new recording facilities; and complex cultural
issues between staff and student perceptions of use.
Actions:
- Integrate with Learning, Teaching and Assessment Strategies
- Stress the benefits for retention, accessibility and student support
- Identify related technologies
- Encourage inter-departmental working
“..a convergence of ideas and approaches...”
The introduction of WBLT varies widely between institutions owing to differing
starting points, drivers and experience, whilst variations within institutions are also
recognised. However, as the implementation matures we have observed a
convergence of ideas and approaches, common to other learning systems, such as
ePortfolios. An analysis of the approaches taken by eight UK and US institutions at
various stages in their implementation highlights a high level of commonality in
issues faced, good practice arising and the degree of integration with existing
systems.
This schematic model aims to describe how key change management themes are
represented for WBLT. Whilst not comprehensive, it identifies particular sub-
themes which demonstrate the range of approaches commonly taken, from
inception to system maturity.
“...a cross institutional perspective...”
From taking a cross-institutional perspective it is readily apparent that often
diverse starting positions and intentions lead to a ‘distinctive convergence’
around common core principles, such as governance and implementation.
Experiences from the eight institutions indicate that a successful
implementation is much more complex than first perceived, with a clear
business model, governance planning and stakeholder involvement being
equally critical. Furthermore, staff development and training in WBLT must
be academically led, with clear exemplars and supporting evidence of impact
and value. Finally, the model presented is believed to represent a much
broader applicability for the planning and implementation of similar large-
scale technological systems in an academic setting.
“...an audit tool for embedding lecture capture technologies”
This approach offers a set of simple guidelines and action points to staff
responsible for implementing lecture capture systems. Evidence from the
institutions involved in this analysis, and in the ELTAC study, highlights a
clear need for cross-working, and a sharing of ideas and solutions to maximise
the clear potential available.
By adopting this model as an audit tool for embedding lecture capture,
planning teams can assess their readiness for expansion/change based the set
of alternative positions presented in the themed areas. In many cases, we see
that evolution towards full institutional maturity will involve progressing from
the left to the right in each of the ranges expressed above.
Pedagogical Approaches: standalone
Curriculum pedagogy
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to thank JISC for funding the ELTAC project at the University of Coventry (link) and each of the institutions involved.
They would also like to thank the Universitas21 network for funding John Couperthwaite’s research into lecture capture.
Further resources are available from: http://del.ico.us/couperjo/wblt
Birmingham University: have
established a time-limited
pilot with 10 fixed units to
test efficacy, cost, staff and
student satisfaction
MODELIMPLEMETATIONSTAFF DEVELOPMENT
GOVERNANCECOVERAGEINTEGRATION