1. LTI seminar – June 2009 Jon Alltree j.r.alltree@herts.ac.uk

2. Session objectives Provide an overview of two pieces of research Highlight some key findings Discuss some of the implications

3. Flexible study – what students do and what they want Jon Alltree and Nuz Quadri

4. The sample – February 2007 2143 respondents 65% female, 35% male 6% declared a disability 86% UG, 14% PG 93% broadband or UH connection at home - 4% had no home connection

5. Spread across age groups

6. Students are busy people… Family commitments Employment Social life Sport

7. How much does looking after family/others impact upon the amount of time you allocate to your studies?

8. How much does paid employment impact upon the amount of time you allocate to your studies?

9. How much do sports activities impact upon the amount of time you allocate to your studies?

10. How much do social activities impact upon the amount of time you allocate to your studies?

11. Aspects of Study Timetabling preference Use of the VLE for communicating with each other Guidance for independent study Appetite for more/less F2F contact Wish list for support

12. Timetabling preference (FT students only)

13. How useful is the StudyNet mediated communication between you and your fellow students?

14. Independent study 30% report getting no guidance at all Of the 70% that do get guidance, 80% rate it as only ‘quite useful’ or ‘not useful at all’

15. Which two of the following would be the most important to help you study more effectively?

16. Appetite for flexibility - If changes could be made to your timetable, which of the following would you like to see in place? (FT students only)

17. Percentage of FT students agreeing with the following: If I had fewer timetabled hours per week, I would lose motivation to study ….62% If I had fewer timetabled hours per week, I think I would learn just as effectively ….38% I would not like fewer timetabled hours per week ….70% It would suit my lifestyle to have fewer timetabled hours ….44%

18. Conclusions Many very technologically aware with equipment and access Block timetabling preferred Appetite for F2F strong – but not universal and less F2F would suit a substantial minority – new technology (eg Elluminate, Skype, Second Life etc) might offer new opportunities Potential to enhance various areas eg: – guidance for independent study – online communication between part time students – new communication/learning environment opportunities

19. Limitations.. Online questionnaires skew sample towards students with access and willingness to use the technology Respondents not generally familiar with virtual classroom technology (pilots now underway)

20. Teachers’ use of StudyNet Jon Alltree

21. Extending the classroom Pre-classroom: eg guidance on preparation, pre-reading Classroom: interactive, engaging, authentic Post- classroom: eg wider reading, discussion and material that was modified in classroom

22. Enhancing F2F Pre-classroom: eg 1) Multimedia engagement with core content in preparation for class 2) weekly worksheets to reinforce learning and determine the cohort's level of understanding Classroom activity changed: eg 1) Doing things differently - interactive workshop replaces lecture 2) Doing different things - intelligence informed review of areas of difficulty Post classroom : eg Follow up through discussion forum and repeat cycle for next week

23. Extending into virtual space Pre classroom Synchronous virtual classroom Physical classroom Interaction Post classroom