1 / 33

Different shoes, same footprints?

Different shoes, same footprints?. Sue Timmis and Ros O’Leary. A cross-disciplinary evaluation of students’ online learning experiences. Preliminary findings from the SOLE project. The VLE gold rush. The VLE gold rush. Uptake in UK HE (Armitage et al, 2001) 1997: 13% 2001: 81%

candy
Download Presentation

Different shoes, same footprints?

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. Different shoes, same footprints? Sue Timmis and Ros O’Leary

  2. A cross-disciplinary evaluation of students’ online learning experiences Preliminary findings from the SOLE project

  3. The VLE gold rush

  4. The VLE gold rush • Uptake in UK HE (Armitage et al, 2001) • 1997: 13% • 2001: 81% • Reflects government and institutional imperatives • Selected for “ease of use by staff” (Stiles, 2002) • Focus of impact is on institutions and staff rather than students

  5. One size fits all? • over 50% of HEIs with VLEs have two or more (Armitage et al, 2001) • Different needs and drivers across subject areas eg Medicine VLEs (Cook, 2002)

  6. SOLE aim ‘An independent evaluation of the usage of VLEs by UK HE and FE students. How effective are VLEs in supporting different subjects, current national agendas and student learning?’

  7. Information and Computer Sciences Economics Education Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Psychology • 2 case HE studies per subject area • One year 1 module per institution • 5 different VLEs • 2 FE case studies

  8. 2 case HE studies per subject area • One year 1 module per institution • 5 different VLEs • 2 FE case studies

  9. Sampling • All campus-based groups • More than just an archive • Whole cohorts • Balance of old and new • National representation • 2 FE pilots to represent 2 of the 5 subjects

  10. Core research questions • What are the implicit and explicit learning models? • What factors do students identify as affecting their motivation positively or negatively? • What is the role of the tutor? • How is support perceived and used?

  11. Core research questions • How is the VLE used? • How much time online and offline? • What resources are used? • How do students communicate?

  12. Methodology • Handbook for learner-centred evaluation of computer facilitated learning projects in Higher Education (Phillips et al, 2000) • ‘Eclectic-Mixed Methods-Pragmatic Paradigm‘

  13. Student questionnaires Student diaries Transaction logging Recording of interactions Interviews with tutor Interview with students Instruments

  14. Final report 12 case studies Articles, conference papers 7 workshops Web site / ’knowledge pool’ on students and VLEs Video recorded interviews with students Recommendations on methodology Outputs

  15. Case Study 1 216 students Team-working in economics Blackboard Economics and Psychology Case Study 3 • 80 students, year 2 • Cognitive Psychology • WebCT Case Study 2 • 76 students • Introduction to Macroeconomics • WebCT Case Study 4 • 175 students • Design, Execution & Analysis of Research • Merlin

  16. Case Study 1 2 Lectures - week 1 & 3 Assessed by group project Course information; group communication Case Study 3 • Lecture & workshop weekly • Lecture preparation; weekly assessment; discussion board Case Study 2 • Lectures & seminars weekly • Lecture notes; seminar problems; links; discussions Case Study 4 • Mostly online; non-compulsory support workshops • Email; weekly tasks with links to other resources & online assessment

  17. How was the VLE used? • Information retrieval and preparatory work • Email and online assessment (Psychology) • Communications not used in Economics

  18. x

  19. Support for students • Spread of support; central support, peers, notes, tutor • Tutor strongly identified in some cases

  20. Support • “never really been shown how to use it, sometimes can not get onto it and often things are not there that should be.” Case study 5 • “Every teacher introduced the basics to the class about WebCT”Case study 2

  21. Motivation: Psychology • Motivation towards the module was affected by confidence in: • working and learning online • finding way around VLE • obtaining information • the module “Working with Merlin has allow(ed) me to be in control of my education, definitely a good thing” Case study 4

  22. Case Study 3 • Access on campus and from home was a major barrier “”Not having a computer at home” “Having to pay for printouts”

  23. Case Study 4 • Subject matter of module was particularly challenging • “Merlin has been a worthwhile learning tool, however, as stats is an area that I lack confidence in I feel I would have benefited more so if Merlin was accompanied by lectures”

  24. Motivation: Economics • Preliminary findings suggest students motivated by • flexibility of access to information • tutor involvement • Demotivated by poor online communications

  25. ‘… the greatest thing I think I got from WebCT is the fact that I could cross reference between my notes and his notes and his own techniques…and then go back go him if I didn’t understand.’ Case study 2

  26. ‘… most of the time I used WebCT because I wanted to make sure that the notes I had were actually adequate, and you know they were updated… because if I was in the lecture theatre, most of the time, you spent more time listening to what he was saying than actually writing down.’ Case study 2

  27. ‘… I think the tutor expected everybody would be able to log on and check their e-mails and keep contact regularly. The situation .. I was not happy. I e-mailed them about five times and then they didn’t even contact me…’ Case study 1

  28. Preliminary findings • Wide range of student views on support, barriers etc. • Enthusiasm for online course information • Students motivated by provision of information and tutor involvement • Access still a big barrier at some institutions • Online communications a problem which affected student motivation and the intended learning model

  29. Implications for a discipline-centred approach • Our studies have shown so far that: • Students in different disciplines may behave differently and have different needs • BUT most issues that have emerged to date are not discipline dependent • A balancing act?

  30. What next? • Still at an early stage ... • Distributed subject-based research teams • Amount of data • Discourse analysis of discussion data and interviews • Roles and authority issues • Discipline dependent and cross-cutting issues

  31. Questions? http://sole.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ http://www.shef.ac.uk/alt/ Ros.OLeary@bristol.ac.uk Sue.Timmis@bristol.ac.uk

  32. References • Armitage, S, Brown, T, Jenkins, M: (2001) Management and implementation of Virtual Learning Environments: A UCISA funded survey, available at http://www.ucisa.ac.uk/TLIG/vle/welcome.htm • Cook, J. Timmis, S. (2002) Towards a theory of student motivation in virtual learning. Proceedings of ALTC 2002 Conference, Sunderland. Association of Learning Technology • Phillips R. (ed), Bain J., McNaught C., Rice M., Tripp D. Handbook for learner-centred evaluation of computer facilitated learning projects in higher education. Murdoch University, Australia 2000 http://wwwtlc1.murdoch.edu.au/projects/cutsd99/ • Stiles, M. Staying on track: why are we using technology in teaching? JISC Inform, Spring 2002.

More Related