Modelling institutional approaches to web-based lecture technologies
0 likes80 views
The document outlines the implementation and integration of web-based lecture technologies (WBLT) within academic institutions, emphasizing the importance of stakeholder involvement, governance, and staff development. It details various strategies and challenges associated with rolling out these technologies, such as addressing legal implications, ensuring effectiveness, and balancing technological adoption with institutional needs. Additionally, it suggests that successful implementation requires a clear business model and collaboration across departments to enhance pedagogical practices and improve student learning outcomes.
Modelling institutional approaches to web-based lecture technologies
- 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