1. The MLE Landscape Study: current trends and activity Margaret Wallis Social Informatics Research Unit, University of Brighton,

2. Background to the study Commissioned by JISC and UCISA - August 2002 to June 2003 Social Informatics Research Unit, University of Brighton Education for Change The Research Partnership

3. Objective of the study To identify and analyse the current picture in UK FE and HE institutions with regard to issues of the integration of business processes, services and systems in support of learning and teaching www.jisc.ac.uk/project_mle_activity.ht ml

4. Research Methodology Extensive literature and web review Consultation with key informants National survey of all FE and HE institutions 699 institutions - 540 FE and 194 HE Response rate 358 institutions - 51% Eight case studies selected to represent FE and HE categories and levels of integration

5. Defining an MLE Initial focus to provide a definition The term MLE rarely understood Functions and level of integration the key

6. Research findings Significant levels of MLE activity across all institutions - 70% 47% have yet to finalise an MLE development strategy VLE use - 83% Institutional portal - 44%

7. Strategic models for MLE development Predominantly centrally managed - 40% Institution-wide initiative with devolved responsibilities - 27% Move away from local/departmental initiatives

8. Drivers of MLE development Enhancing the quality of teaching and learning Improving access to learning for students off- campus Widening participation/inclusiveness Student expectations Access to/attracting overseas students Competitive advantage

9. Consultation on MLE development Consulting with staff Consulting with students Consulting with external organisations

10. Operational model for MLE development 77% of HE institutions are developing and/or integrating systems using in- house capability.

11. MLE Functions 17 functions including: Academic teaching/guidance Access to course descriptions Integration of on-line library resources with VLE Payment of fees

12. MLE Current and future integration Extent of integration Course enrolment Course enrolment is through paper forms only Enrolment for some courses can be done on-line On-line enrolment available for the majority of courses Students primarily enrol for courses on-line Now 3-5 years Now 3-5 years Now 3-5 years Now3-5 years Signing-on to access electronic learning resources and environments No electronic learning resources Students have to use multiple user names specific to each resource to access electronic learning resources and environments Students access electronic learning resources and environments using many user names; some cover multiple resources Students access all electronic learning resources and environments directly using a single user name and password Now 3-5 years Now 3-5 years Now 3-5 years Now3-5 years

13. Systems integration 19% of universities have minimal systems integration 24% have partial integration 57% have relatively high levels of integration HE Colleges 11%; 61% and 28% respectively

14. Findings (1) Course enrolment Cautious approach Module selection 44% online selection Academic teaching/guidance – Pre-91 24% online guidance Post 91 51% online guidance

15. Integration of online library resources into VLE Pre-91 - 38%; Post-91 - 64% Access needs for students with disabilities Limited on-line support – 56% Support for wide range of needs Pre-91 – 13%; Post-91 – 31% Findings (2)

16. Advantages, disadvantages and impact of MLEs Advantages Open and wider access to learning; Greater administrative efficiency Integration of data across the institution

17. Disadvantages of MLEs There are no disadvantages, but there are obstacles and risks. The development of the MLE impacts on current working practices of both academic and administrative staff. There are significant training needs for staff and students. [There is a] risk to quality of student experience if not used well. Comments from a post-1991 university.

18. Disadvantages Cost and time involved Resistance to culture change Scale of need for staff training and development Stable infrastructure and dependence on software systems vendors Importance of system and data security

19. Impact on learning and teaching Too soon to assess the impact of MLEs The relationship between the MLE and VLE largely unexplored Systems not yet well embedded or accepted Student expectations raised

20. Constraints and barriers to development Lack of time Lack of money Lack of academic staff knowledge Lack of academic staff development Lack of support staff

21. Conclusions MLEs are a good thing Not yet fully embedded institutionally Student experience is being enhanced Pedagogical issues have been a secondary concern Scale of the task is daunting Uneven quality of materials

22. Future activity Further case studies Development of a benchmarking tool to build on the integration matrix Development of a case study data base Further survey