1 / 28

Digital Learning Environments At Universities

Digital Learning Environments At Universities. Leen Van Rentergem, Herman Buelens,. &. V irtual M obility B etween U niversities. Piet Henderikx, & Wim Van Petegem. K.U.Leuven General Information. 27.734 students 6.500 employees 14 faculties

nalani
Download Presentation

Digital Learning Environments At Universities

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Digital Learning EnvironmentsAt Universities Leen Van Rentergem, Herman Buelens, & Virtual MobilityBetween Universities Piet Henderikx, & Wim Van Petegem

  2. K.U.LeuvenGeneral Information • 27.734 students • 6.500 employees • 14 faculties • Geographical distribution over Leuven, Heverlee & Kortrijk • About 500 buildings • 3.777 international students (16/1/2004), coming from more than 120 different countries, 75% enrolled in postgraduate or doctoral study programs • 572 outgoing Erasmus students, 591 incoming (in 2001-2002) • 56 study programmes in English, and >10 joint programmes

  3. K.U.LeuvenICT Facilities Internet Connectivity Belnet Gigabit network

  4. K.U.LeuvenICT Facilities Internet Connectivity

  5. K.U.LeuvenICT Facilities PC Classrooms • Public accessible 24 hours / day, 6 days a week • 17 classrooms, 500 PC’s • internet connectivity via KULeuvenNet • Reservations for class activities or individual use • Printer facilities by using print cards

  6. K.U.LeuvenICT Facilities PC renting • price range: 30 - 50 € / month (= cost of a pint of beer per day) • buy off option with recovery of paid money • Success PC-shop (Sale) • hardware • software: campus licenses

  7. K.U.LeuvenICT Facilities KOTNET (about 20.000 users) • Strategic vision • Added value • Optional • For every student • Without financial thresholds • low cost • preferably fixed amount • target 0 € • K.U.Leuven dormitories connected to K.U.Leuvennet • free • Private rooms: connected via Television cable • 5,5 € per month per student • Dial in • telephone cost

  8. K.U.LeuvenEducation Educational concept: Guided Independent Learning • Students learn best when they can act as independent critical researchers within their discipline • Students become responsible for their own learning • Teachers on the other hand are responsible to adequately coach their students

  9. K.U.Leuven anno 2000 ICT in education “Let a thousand flowers bloom” • Isolated projects • Carried by enthusiastic individuals or small teams • Ad hoc, micro-level • Funding • University (OOI) • Regional (STIHO) • European (EC)

  10. K.U.Leuven anno 2000 ICT in education “Let a thousand flowers bloom” • Some impressive results • Awareness raising • Enthusiasm and goodwill • Lot of reinventing the wheel • Results disappear as projects finish & individuals leave (Doesn’t scale up) • Hard to support centrally (educationally & technically) • No consolidation, no “share and reuse” • Too fragmented, no integration for students

  11. K.U.Leuven anno 2000 ICT in education “Let a thousand flowers bloom” • Only small-scale impact • However, this phase of experience and adaptation was critical for the introduction of ....

  12. K.U.Leuven anno 2001Toledo • Logo Alcatara-bridge in Toledo (Spain) Bridge between students and faculty • Acronym Toetsen en Leren Doeltreffend Ondersteunen Effectively supporting Testing and Learning • Project Aim is to implement and support (technically and pedagogically) a digital learning environment for all students and faculty at the K.U.Leuven

  13. K.U.Leuven anno 2001Toledo: the selection of a DLE • Task force on learning platforms • Criteria: • Basic functionality (in line with GIL) • Easy to use, minimal training • Should fit within university ICT infrastructure • Connectivity with administrative systems • Reliable support • Access to and reuse of learning material • Process: • Pre-selection, pilot projects • Study visits • Installing a team of 7 FTE WHICH DLE ?

  14. K.U.Leuven anno 2001 Toledo: GO! • July 2001 • purchase of software and hardware • Augustus 2001 • installation • Load all courses • Load all teacher-course combinations • Enrol all students in mandatory courses • September 2001 • Roll-out • The use of Toledo is on voluntary basis • Information sessions in all departments were organized • For more experienced users: workshops were organized

  15. K.U.Leuven anno 2003 Toledo in use • December 2003 • More than 19000 active students • Over 1250 active teachers • More than 1500 active courses • 240 000 hits/day ( max 80000 last year)

  16. K.U.Leuven anno 2004 The impact of Toledo At the micro level (=K.U.Leuven courses) • makes teachers think about their education • 20% of all courses combine functionalities of the DLE with more traditional forms of education (‘blended’ learning) • Toledo was used mainly to deliver information to students • 25% of the courses use Toledo’s communication, assessment and assignments functionalities substantially • The use of these functionalities had positive effect upon educational practices (i.e. in line with the concept of guided independent learning).

  17. K.U.Leuven anno 2004 The impact of Toledo At the meso level (=K.U.Leuven institute) • Positive effects upon both education and research: a common basis for conversation and future collaboration • Every day more that 6000 students use Toledo, this affects • ICT services (KOTnet) • Role of central services • Educational support services • Toledo is used as an administrative tool within faculties • Due to the new use of administrative data, Toledo contributes to the design of a new campus management system

  18. K.U.Leuven anno 2003 The impact of Toledo Reasons for the impact on micro & meso level ? • The software • Easy to use • minimal training • user friendly • Reliable • Offers basic functionalities... • Embedded in the university’s • technical infrastructure • administrative systems • organisation of education (i.e. Toledo is course oriented)

  19. So far about The Digital Learning EnvironmentAt K.U.Leuven. What about Virtual Mobility Between Universities ?

  20. Virtual Mobility anno 2004 “Let a thousand flowers bloom” ? • Isolated projects • Carried by enthusiastic individuals or small teams • Ad hoc, micro-level • By means of video-conferencing computer-conferencing ... • Used as an subsitute for fysical mobility ?

  21. Virtual Mobility anno 2004 “Let a thousand flowers bloom” ? • Some impressive results • Enthusiasm and goodwill (e.g. 2 case-studies presented hereafter) • Awareness raising • Lot of reinventing the wheel ? • Results disappear as projects finish & individuals leave ? • Hard to support centrally (educationally & technically) ? • No consolidation, no “share and reuse” ? • Too fragmented, no integration for students ?

  22. Virtual Mobility anno 2004 “Let a thousand flowers bloom” • Bologna context: • Flexibilisation • Internationalisation • Only small-scale impact ? • We are now where we were with Toledo 3 years ago, i.e. at the crossroads for a broader and more structured implementation and approach

  23. Virtual Mobility anno 2004 “Let a thousand flowers bloom” • Is this phase of experience and adaptation critical for the introduction of .... DLE’s within universities to promote Virtual Mobility in the future ?

  24. DLE’s & Virtual Mobility ? Opportunities • DLE’s might help to redefine ‘virtual mobility’ no longer as a substitute for physical mobility, but as a totally different opportunity • DLE’s can be used for • more specialised courses (complementarity – Erasmus-like) • joint courses and programmes (sharing electronic learning content with other universities) • creating international learning communities (by / for students / faculty), e.g. international discussion groups, seminars, etc • preparation for physical mobility • sharing experiences with other universities (staff mobility) • … • DLE’s might help to overcome the con’s associated with a ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’- approach.

  25. DLE’s & Virtual Mobility ? Obstacles • DLE’s are embedded in the university’s • technical infrastructure • administrative systems • organisation of education (i.e. DLE’s are course oriented) • The software and hardware • Licence agreements • Need for new tools (interfacing) • Need for standards The same factors that facilitate positive effects of DLE’s at micro & meso level might hamper positive effects at a macro level (i.e. virtual mobility between universities).

  26. DLE’s & Virtual Mobility ? Solutions? • Further promote blended (hybrid) learning within universities ? • Look for low budget technology ? (web cams...) • Linking DLE’s between universities?

  27. DLE’s & Virtual Mobility ? A mission for Coimbra? • Show and promote best practices? • Launch experiments and pilot projects? • Lobby, negociate with vendors of DLE’s? • Share ideas • And not to forget: Your creativity during this workshop

  28. Thank you for your attention !

More Related