Pam Woodward<br />University of Ballarat<br />Developing Organisational E-capabilityIs there a problem?<br />
Well, yes it‘s not that easy!<br />Prior to 2006 - two state promoted strategic directions<br />Targetted - LearnScope Pro...
what worked & what didn’t <br />Projects<br />Positives<br />Some early adopters embraced and embedded into programs<br />...
2007-2009 Champion Model – E-learning Facilitators (ELFs)<br />Embed champion in depts<br />local support – ‘just-in-time’...
Again differential outcomes<br />*best outcomes when middle managers ‘get’ opportunities   <br /><ul><li>KPIs – on positio...
Lessons Learnt<br />
Next time ....<br /><ul><li>Before any strategy involving depts needing to drive the strategy, then;
Significant induction to heads of depts – what real outcomes e-learning can be achieved for dept >> accessibility and mark...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Developing institutional e capability

372 views

Published on

University of Ballarat ecapability model

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
372
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
14
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Developing institutional e capability

  1. 1. Pam Woodward<br />University of Ballarat<br />Developing Organisational E-capabilityIs there a problem?<br />
  2. 2. Well, yes it‘s not that easy!<br />Prior to 2006 - two state promoted strategic directions<br />Targetted - LearnScope Projects <br />small group of teachers with ongoing pd support<br />dept determine project and nominate teachers<br />dept would agree to deliver program online<br />Broad brush – Vic ICT Strategy<br />ICT training – all teachers required to attain an accredited unit<br />
  3. 3. what worked & what didn’t <br />Projects<br />Positives<br />Some early adopters embraced and embedded into programs<br />Negatives<br />Others ignored post-project<br />Depts did not follow up with real delivery - no control<br />Developed a ‘needy’ model<br />Broad brush<br />Positives<br />ICT now on the VET agenda<br />most gained ‘some’ skills<br />Negatives<br />not embraced – as compliance<br />Big expense & effort for overall gain<br />
  4. 4. 2007-2009 Champion Model – E-learning Facilitators (ELFs)<br />Embed champion in depts<br />local support – ‘just-in-time’ – sits at next desk<br />understand teachers, programs, student cohort<br />focus support on dept needs<br />Issues <br />tension between positions – other ongoing position usually had priority<br />Depts did not leverage off central funded support sufficiently – design real outcomes & pd <br />
  5. 5. Again differential outcomes<br />*best outcomes when middle managers ‘get’ opportunities <br /><ul><li>KPIs – on position description and performance managed</li></ul>Champion Model - ELFs<br />
  6. 6. Lessons Learnt<br />
  7. 7. Next time ....<br /><ul><li>Before any strategy involving depts needing to drive the strategy, then;
  8. 8. Significant induction to heads of depts – what real outcomes e-learning can be achieved for dept >> accessibility and market growth*If not ‘onboard’ then would not centrally fund dept ELF
  9. 9. Ensure (?) real delivery outcomes</li></li></ul><li>BUT looking back .... we have moved a long way since 2006!!<br />

×