Critical Success Factors for the Implementation of eLearning in Consortia of Universities Professor Paul Bacsich Director of Special Projects and Research UK eUniversities Worldwide Limited ISEL, Sabah, October 2003

2 UKeU UKeU is a broker/demand aggregator between UK university e-learning courses and students, world-wide See Pedagogic model is content plus asynchronous collaboration with a little spice of synchronous in some cases

3 Special Projects General: to oversee… Research into e-learning relevant to our mission Educational evaluation of courses Development of policy on Quality Assurance of eLearning International research collaboration including: European Commission Framework projects links with research labs around the world on relevant topics Specific studies: Mid-band services including t-learning Off-line working including m-learning Residual role of f2f in “pure-play” e-learning propositions Benchmarking of MLEs, e-universities and HE-focussed ASPs

4 Overview 1. Exemplars (UK focus) 2. Critical Success Factors 3. Some less critical issues 1. Standards 2. Research 4. Other observations 5. Recommendations

5 e-universities in the UK Open University University for Industry UK eUniversities Worldwide Limited (UKeU) NHS University Russell Group consortia New universities – Virtual Campuses Scottish consortia

6 Oxbridge and Russell Group World University Network (WUN) Sheffield, Leeds, York, Bristol, Manchester, Southampton – plus US partners - many of these now are developing programmes for UKeU Universitas21: Birmingham, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Nottingham (UKeU programme) Cambridge-OU alliance (UKeU pilot) Oxford with Stanford, Princeton, etc

7 New Universities (post-1992) Sheffield Hallam (UKeU pilot) Coventry: first large UK WebCT site Robert Gordons (Scotland) Early Virtual Campus Ulster (N Ireland) – UKeU collaborator Glamorgan (Wales) Middlesex (London) – UKeU collaborator Global University Alliance: Derby+ Glamorgan (UKeU) plus others non-UK hosted by NextEd

8 Scotland University of Highlands and Islands consortium of colleges teaching at HE level Scottish University for Industry: focus on linking learners to learning opportunities a broker and facilitator, providing information, support, guidance, advice and encouragement to learners Scottish Knowledge Was a consortium of many Scottish universities Now turned into the Interactive University

9 Types of e-university Green fields/new build – e.g. TechBC (Canada) Consortium “Orange skin” – Virtual Campus Those run or serviced by non-HE organisations

10 Purposes behind e-universities Government initiative: national or regional or local International initiatives: AVU; ITU; UN VU (environment) several imminent examples in Mid East now Business opportunity: Publisher Broadcaster IT company

11 Critical Success Factors for Consortia - my top four Binding energy oriented to a real purpose Organisational homogeneity or managed diversity Stratification Linguistic homogeneity

12 Alternative view: Harasim (Canada) Bottom up is good Realism Common vision yet clear differentiation of roles Management and marketing (funded) Contracts in place and accepted by all Role models of other consortia

13 European view (Bavarian VU) Clear goals Sufficient funds Definition of USP Clear target group and proposition/programmes High quality Student-centred pedagogy Solid marketing strategy, growth-oriented Common execution of project across partners Common organisational structure Centralised organisational structure, specified responsibilities

14 And a UK view (HE in FE consortia) Explicit and agreed purpose Written statements from all members of expectations Finance and student number issues clear Student progression and access issues clear Staff collaboration clear also! Periodic review of the contract and its effectiveness

15 Less critical factors: Standards IMS – good work but early days But major challenge is co-operative learning EML (Dutch Open universiteit) – interesting Interoperability still hard: consortia must solve this or avoid it

16 Less critical: Research Research is not vital to start an e-University But it is vital to sustain it Look at impact from EU research work Look at impact of work elsewhere UK TL-NCE Australia, Singapore, New Zealand, Hong Kong….

17 Conclusions from Research European research: FP3 set the scene; FP4 added little, FP5 we shall soon see Canadian work more integrated, but lacks evidence of scalable approaches and has a discontinuity with TL-NCE Too much gap between theorists and industrial- strength pedagogic practice theorists are usually in universities and not seriously active in e- learning services US still too synchronous and transmissive Australia too fragmented but some key institutions Big players still need convincing that research is directly relevant

18 Conclusions for research Focus on co-operative learning Start with basic asynchronous (BBS) model Allow new models to be supported, especially those with business potential But be cautious on new models Develop scalable approaches More focus on assessment Support multiple media and devices including mobile and TV for special purposes

19 Other observations 1 National responses still confused many agencies without clear mission or longevity Increasing consensus on mainstream e-pedagogy and evaluation but big national differences on how seriously cost-effectiveness issues are addressed Truly international consortia do not really yet exist E-learning still growing through DL But many established “open universities” slow to change

20 Other observations 2 IPR is much talked about as an issue But it is not a “show-stopper” Ethical considerations are starting to inhibit research/evaluation and the situation could get worse Staff development is an endless and thankless task However much money one spends on it A view formed over 15 years

21 Other observations 3 Accessibility issues are starting to inhibit innovation in mass deployment Will get worse if a UK compliance culture spreads out Multi-standard services (PC/Mac/Unix) are getting harder to do and more restrictive in functionality Lack of clear view on “mid-band” is inhibiting service development Will television return? If so, how?

22 Recommendations what do you think?

23 A personal view as a researcher Have plenty of funds, not all commercial Hire staff and some “names” from sector Your university-facing staff should be academically aware Be cautious about developing your own system Accept the need for sales and sales staff Not the same as academic staff Be cautious about outsourcing too much IT Keep a close eye on competitors and the market Have an innovation strategy E.g. in Europe, consider FP6 etc You will end up with more staff and spending more money than you or your funders first thought Be pragmatic – survival is the prime imperative!

Thanks for listening Questions? Responses? Professor Paul Bacsich The source material for this is mostly still at But it will soon be at the UKeU Research Centre Web site! Acknowledgements for funding: Finland, UNESCO, EU, TL-NCE (Canada), OU, SHU HEFCE and DfES (UK)