UK Higher Education Institutions - How Flexible, How Virtual, How Soon? Charlotte Ash, (Professor Paul Bacsich), Online Educa ‘99

Introduction  Discuss the current status of Flexible and Virtual Universities in the United Kingdom  Draw upon work done at Sheffield Hallam University under the auspices of the JISC funded “Costs of Networked Learning” project  In addition, a trawl of UK University Web sites was undertaken and revealed interesting results

Demonstrate the move from paper- based distance learning and, slowly, from traditional campus based learning to an online mode of learning available to students both on and off campus Presentation Aim

The Management of Change

Extent of Networked Learning  Generally instigated by a small number of enthusiastic academic staff  In the majority of Universities there was quite obviously no strategic coherence at present  But the word is beginning to spread and therefore more coherence is expected in the next 2-3 years  The main reason for moving towards Networked Learning was universal

Force Field Analysis DRIVING FORCES individual members of academic staff dynamism from top level management project champions need to increase student numbers with ever decreasing budgets RESTRAINING FORCES lack of training in technology lack of time for development lack of transparent tools lack of pedagogical evidence opportunity cost of development or evaluation lack of network stability concerns about quality and standards

Virtual Campus Initiatives in the UK Sheffield Hallam University De Montfort University Clyde Virtual University University of Lancaster University of Paisley Virtual Radio University

Conclusions Institutions feel that this is an uncharted area and are consequently unsure about its status and structure Confusion does little more than add fuel to the soap-box speeches of believers and non- believers There is currently no accepted methodology of how Networked Learning can benefit the Institution in the long or short term

Access

24-hour opening  31% of Institutions offer 24-hour opening Monday to Friday, 27% continue on weekends  Longer opening hours mean greater access to computers without increasing provision  Institutions are concerned about security and misuse / abuse  Students want longer opening hours in the evenings and before lectures but not necessarily in the middle of the night

Laptops  Some Institutions are providing plug-in points for laptops but these are not widely used  Students do not carry laptops around due to the risk of theft and the weight  Students generally own laptops because they take up less room in residences

Computer Ratios  Academic staff have one to one access to a PC at work  The average ratio for students is nine to one  Not yet at Dearing recommendation of five to one by the year 2002  Research shows that upto 90% of academic staff and 75% of students have access to a computer at home

Internet Access  Whilst most home computers were attached to a printer only half were connected to the Internet  Students, and staff, more commonly use Institutional computers for surfing for work or pleasure  43% of Institutions offered Internet access from Halls of Residence - this is always charged back to the student

Student Perspectives

Views “Learning packages back up learning but do not replace a teacher, lecturers or lectures” “Using computers has made many aspects of the course a lot easier but I agree that there are a lot of hidden costs involved” “I have found Networked Learning more flexible e.g. I can log on to University web sites and view lecture slides whenever I want” “90% of my course... has been done at home”

Employment  Overall 33% of students are in employment  42% of postgraduates are part-time students but work over 33 hours per week

Spending  The 1996 National Union of Students survey found that students were spending £89 per annum on computer software and hardware  Our survey found that students were spending £81 just on computer consumables per annum  Most students purchased a home computer for between £1000 and £1500  96% of undergraduate students believe that Networked Learning is increasing the cost of education

Conclusions The cost is offset by the view that Networked Learning is enhancing the learning experience Networked Learning may increase the cost but students feel that the experience is more enjoyable and may be more permanent Students definitely feel more in control with Networked Learning due to the flexible nature

Main Conclusions

There has been a considerable, but often invisible, move towards online learning It is definitely flexible and learner controlled But not necessarily virtual

For a copy of this presentation and information about the Costs of Networked Learning project see -