Developing e-learning courses for work-based learning
Claire Bradley
Learning Technology Research Institute, University of North London
Martin OliverHigher Education Research and Development Unit,University College London
The aims of the project
Masters-level modules in supply chain management for employees in SMEs (who have small training budget and limited release time; must be vocationally relevant)
Use multimedia, information and communication technologies (ICT) and the Internet in the course (e-learning)
Develop and implement an award scheme; deliver the programmes to learners in the UK and Europe
Part of a broader project to create a virtual university; large partnership created to achieve this
Educational context
economic and social change - needs of the ‘new’ or ‘knowledge’ economy - impact of ICT
increasing policy emphasis on lifelong learning and flexible learning (distance education, modular learning, e-learning)
changes in higher education - new characteristics (Collis and Moonen, 2001)
– being wired, new models for flexible delivery, new collaborations and competition
Development can be seen within the context of:
The course development model
The process of drafting learning materials
Authors produce an outline of each unit, using a pre-designed template
Authors submit draft unit for review and approvalDraft reviewed by pedagogic and academic reviewersUnit approved or not approved with feedback and
suggestions for improvementTechnical team take approved material and transform
it for online delivery - produce graphics and animations, add interactivity and functionality
Regular team and cross-team meetings held and materials exchanged via email
Materials for work-based learning
Activities and assessments should draw on work-based experience, and enable work-based application
Structure should enable short periods of learning, to enable learning to take place as required (J-I-T); but should also allow coherent pathways
Materials should be capable of delivery over the Internet - utilise but not driven by technology
Mainly independent study, but opportunities for communication and shared experiences encouraged
Suitable support for learners is vital for success
Evolution of pedagogic models
1 Flexible learning (combining elements of flexible, computer-based and work-based learning)
2 Socio-constructivism (based on Laurillard’s conversational framework)
3 Experiential learning (based on Kolb’s learning cycle)
4 A pragmatic synthesis - combined some elements of each of the previous 3 models
A series of pedagogic models were developed and subsequently rejected as development progressed
Courses were masters-level and modular - 100 learning hours per module
Online peer group discussions and exchanges built-in
Assessment combined self-assessment activities with computer-generated feedback or model answers, tutor-marked assessments, with credits for completed modules
Learner support structure combined an online tutor, an in-company mentor, regional centre facilitator
Delivery system gave structure to learning, but permitted flexible pathways
The resulting framework
Specifying the pedagogic framework
Authors, support network (tutors, in-company mentors, regional facilitators), learners, regional delivery centres
Example guidelines for authors:
Context, pedagogic framework, learner support systems, how to prepare units, use multimedia, incorporate peer group discussion, design activities/assessment, etc.
Templates for specifying aims, objectives, methods etc., plus description of submission process
The framework was translated into a series of guidelines covering the key areas:
Ensuring quality
Also developed criteria for quality assessment (e.g. pedagogic and academic effectiveness)
Author Academic editing
Pedagogic review
Technical review
Peer review
Technical implementation
Utilisation of Internet technologies
Development of a bespoke delivery system:– web interface, public information area, secure area
for registered learners– delivers learning materials, admin, communication,
back-end database for content managementMaterials incorporate multimedia, e.g. video talking
heads, flash-based animations of processes, etc. but balance between richness and users’ machine specs
Interactive activities and assessments via submission to server-based applications (e.g. software models) providing immediate feedback to learners
Learning materials
12 modules developed initiallyModule consists of 100 study hours - 10 units of
10 hours eachNotional study time includes:
– working through the learning content– carrying out activities and assessments– reading case studies and related reading materials– building up a learning portfolio– participating in online discussion groups
Units were sub-divided into sections, ideally 4 - 6 per unit
Tabs along the top allow navigation to section components
Materials load into the main window
Quick Jump to sections
Module, unit, section orientation
Use of multimedia and ICT
Audio and video resources were not fully developed
Animated graphics
Activities (client-server)
Activities stored in learner portfolio
The materials make use of widely available web technologies to enhance and facilitate the learning process
Animated graphic (created in Flash)
The flow of goods through the procurement, materials management and distribution stages
Activity - with text input
Activities incorporate text input or allow files to be uploaded to the system
Responses are stored in the learner’s portfolio within the system
Activity responses stored in portfolio
Online discussion and collaboration
Important vehicle for learner debate, involvement and collaboration
Communication services were built into the delivery system - discussion groups and chat rooms
A problem - we didn’t expect cohorts of learners to begin modules or units at the same time
Our solution – design some structured learning experiences that
would use the discussion group – ensure that completion of these activities and
assessments were not dependent on contributions from other learners
Supporting work-based learning
Learner support framework was designed to support the needs of online work-based learners
regional facilitators
online tutors - in most cases performed by the author
in-company mentors
Assessment
marked and graded by the tutorpositioning of assessments throughout the modules
was decided by author (but not all at the end)marking schemes provided by authorsaccreditation - from University of registration - the
wider issues of credit transfer and central awarding of qualifications was outside the limits of the project
The assessments are incorporated within the unit materials, and placed within the activity tab
Key learning points
Development and production process took far longer than anticipated– large number of teams and individual contributors– engaged in parallel strands of developmental activity
Industrialised development process was unfamiliar to authors
Authors were inexperienced – either didn’t grasp opportunities of online medium or
over-used them– resulted in much re-drafting
Conclusions
The approach was well suited to researching the problems of developing such courses, but not necessarily for producing them
The ‘industrial’ approach was not possible until all involved had reached shared understandings; required educative pilot phase
Developing learning materials for any new course is a learning experience in itself, requiring iterative, evolutionary development – this must be planned for
Contact details
Claire BradleyLearning Technology Research Institute, University of North [email protected]://www.unl.ac.uk/ltri/
Martin OliverHigher Education Research and Development Unit,University College [email protected]
Recommended
