1. Exploring whether e-Learning has lived up to the early promise e-learning: A Reality Check Durham University, January 2009 Andy Ramsden Head of e-Learning University of Bath http://go.bath.ac.uk/andyramsden eatbath-present andyramsden Link: download the presentation

2. expectations http://www.flickr.com/photos/bidryboo/300945382/

3. my aims & your role http://www.flickr.com/photos/pigpogm/13839044/

6. The reality: vle use

8. VLE use at University of Bath 4 21 75 Group Average 30 (26) 1 15 84 F 70 (59) 3 24 73 E 54 (26) 5 25 70 D 185 (54) 2 19 79 C 82 (64) 3 15 82 B 40 (31) 12 27 61 A No of courses (as a percent of available units) Category 3 (integrated) Category 2 (Wrap around) Category 1 (Content & Support) Dept / School

10. The reality: face to face teaching

11. The respondents Number of respondents: 69 30 14 Time in teaching (years) 15 29 Smallest Class Size (students) 150 115 Largest Class Size (students) Mode Average

14. What is their lecture style? Could you summarise how you lecture, in particular, the style you adopt and the technologies that you use.

15. The reality: sharing stuff

17. How do you share these resources? how do you share these resources? For instance, email, shared word document, wiki, blog, social bookmark software (diigo, delicious) or other 07624 804921

18. Word cloud

20. What might explain this reality?

22. Collis and Moonen 4 E’s Model Educational effectiveness (perceived or actual) ease of use (personal) engagement environmental (institutional) factors Organisational influences Social-cultural influences Technological influences threshold “an individual’s likelihood of making use of a technological innovation for a learning related purpose is a function of for groups of factors”

23. Back to Bath … use of VLE for specific tasks 30 0 80 F 70 21 70 E 54 2 28 D 185 3 79 C 82 4 84 B 40 8 70 A No of courses Include an online formative or summative quiz (%) Include a copy of the course handbook (%) Dept / School

24. Pattern makes sense if you put yourself in the academics shoes 10 5 Effectiveness: Total Score High (3) Low (1) Better grades for students Medium (2) Low (1) Result in new learning experiences in institution Medium (2) Medium (2) Help me do routine tasks more quickly High (3) Low (1) Likely to solve a learning related problem 4 10 Environment: Total Score Low (1) Medium (2) Previous experiences Low (1) High (3) Adequacy of technical infrastructure Low (1) High (3) Level of day to day support Low (1) Medium (2) Actual level of use in the organisation Running an objective test Putting lecture notes online

25. High (3) Low (1) Improve my career prospects 6 10 Engagement: Total Score Low (1) High (3) My prior experiences of this task have been +ve Low (1) High (3) Self confident at using the software Low (1) High (3) Encourage others to follow 3 9 Ease of use: Total Score Low (1) High (3) Lets me do what I want / need for the task Low (1) High (3) Software is easy to learn Low (1) High (3) Network is adequate in speed and reliability Running an objective test Putting lecture notes online

26. The outcome (black: notes) Educ effectiveness ease of use Personal engagement environmental factors

27. How might we change the situation?

29. Generating lots of different uses QR Codes only QR Codes with other tools e-Admin e-Learning Sign up for news alerts using QR codes Append to Moodle printouts Classroom evaluation Augmented Reality Gaming Access to further guidance Student (campus) induction Library catalogue

32. They have the technology in their pockets QR Code Readers: Kaywa, Quickmark, i-Nigma & SnapMaze

33. Back to Collis and Moonen 4 E’s Model Educ effectiveness ease of use Personal engagement environmental (institution) factors threshold Down with …. Central workshops, a large case study which takes a year to publish, one single specialist within the team

34. Back to Collis and Moonen 4 E’s Model Educ effectiveness ease of use Personal engagement environmental (institution) factors threshold Up with …. Dedicated project blog, attending uses and co-writing session reports, a project lead but all the team deliver, prioritise profiling at meetings (DoS, LTC, Innovations Week, eLPF), implement with other teams, focus regular deliverables on lit reviews, encourage academics to submit journal and conference papers, assist with evaluation and resource, ring fence LT development time, organise publicity events with external speakers, commit to the long term (3 year plan).

35. Back to Collis and Moonen 4 E’s Model Educ effectiveness ease of use Personal engagement environmental (institution) factors threshold

36. Why do you think e-learning has not lived up to it’s early promise?

39. thank you & questions Andy Ramsden [email_address] eatbath-present andyramsden