1. Programme Wide Evaluation – Biological Sciences Karen Howie E-Learning Project Officer

2. Project Summary –Running since Summer 2004 –Aim: to roll out WebCT to all of the School’s 1 st -3 rd year courses –Staff 1 full-time since Oct 2004 Project Manager (Dr Paul McLaughlin) 1 part-time paid by BTO (Dr David Barrass)

3. What are we evaluating? –Staff and student opinion : Template development Improvement in e-learning tools and usage of the tools The service we provide –Project progression –Extra: general background information about students –Would like to measure: Does E-Learning provision improve student marks?

4. How we gauge student opinion –Course questionnaires –E-Learning questionnaire to all years 1-3 students –Analysing course site usage –Anecdotal evidence – staff/student meetings, talking to students, helping students –Focus groups for specific items of interest – ie. Clickers project

5. Course Questionnaires –Annual –Standard questions –Large number of questionnaires now moved onto WebCT –Change in average response rate Paper 04/05: 56% Online 05/06: 51% Saves staff time & paper!

6. Comparison between Semester 1 courses in 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 - % of students which felt the course area was a valuable resource Is the WebCT course area a valuable resource?

7. Comparison between Semester 1 courses in 2004/2005 and 2005/2006 - % of students which felt the course area was easy to use How easy is the WebCT course area to use?

8. E-Learning Questionnaire for Students –Ask a wider variety of questions –Response rate: 16% (of ~ 1700 students) –Provided a ‘response’ document Summary of statistics Answered repeated queries –Ran last year (04-05) and in progress this year –Only online last year. Paper and online this year

9. 04/05 E-Learning Student Questionnaire

10. Analysing Course Site Usage –Uptake by staff has been better this year –Uptake by students generally better also Measured using crude approximation of tools available for logging available in WebCT –Change in course staff can make noticeable difference

11. Anecdotal Evidence –Talking to students during tutorials/sessions –Staff-student meetings –Discussion postings & emails Focus Groups –Have run 5 in Biological Sciences for the ‘Clicker’ project (ref Simon’s presentation) –Tend to get lots of interesting things discussed – not just clickers, room sizes, furniture layout, use of WebCT, etc

12. How we gauge staff opinion –They tell us! –E-Learning Questionnaire for Staff Response rate of 31% (all known staff involved with course teaching) Mostly positive and some ambiguities spotted –Improvement in up-take, particularly in Honours courses

13. Evaluating Project Progression –Steering group with external consultant –External consultant – Stephen Clarke, Head of E-Learning, University of Birmingham –Valuable to have!

14. Future Plans –Run optional student training and use it to get some feedback from students –Keep running other forms of evaluation –Honours evaluation and standardising courses over Honours