1. The implications of pedagogical innovation for academic practice in a large-scale online MBA
Stuart Allan Director of Online Learning Edinburgh Business School, Heriot-Watt University

2. Structure Context Research Key challenges and our responses
Implications for academic practice
Student feedback
Discussion

3. Context 9,000 students 166 countries 57% online (<5% on campus)
Average age 35
Open access
Self-paced

4. Improvements suggested by students (%, n = 1,132)

5. Key challenges Our responses Unequal internet access Offline options
Sense of isolation
Intimidating, complex material
Tutor presence at scale
Motivation and completion
Real-world relevance
Offline options
Activities, groups, social newsfeed
Rich, well-designed content
Moderation (not Q&A), digital media
Progress tracking, digital badges
Digital media, more creative exams

7. Capturing and sharing good practice

8. Educators’ evolving roles
Looking beyond student satisfaction ratings
‘Just show me what it should look like’
uncertainty / lack of constraints
‘Safe spaces for making mistakes and learning from them’
Support from multidisciplinary team
clear roles and responsibilities
Tutor presence in online discussions:
moderation at scale, not Q&A

9. Time commitment The effort is front-loaded:
every 1 study hour requires around 6 hours of development time
482 hours / 13 weeks FTE of an academic’s time to develop one module

10. Students’ feedback
“I am so in love … the addition of the progress tracker and the videos is such a welcome change”
“I would like to congratulate the EBS team for creating such an interactive and lively course … truly innovative”
“Very interactive and makes me feel less alone with my studies ”
“The content is rich and presented in a well thought-out / structured way”
“The new course is well designed and interactive”
“How do I download and print?”
(Tension with interactivity)
Lack of offline mode excludes some
(For now)

11. Main findings Online, at scale poses unique challenges
Critical analysis of ‘giving students what they ask for’ (Arbaugh 2014, Rienties & Toetenel 2016)
Holistic approach: integration of pedagogy, technology and practice (Bayne 2015)
Technology can constrain – but uncertainty can paralyse (Brown et al. 2015)
‘Failing well’: reflecting and adapting quickly
Giving academics appropriate time and support
Engaging with research and sharing good practice (e.g. Gašević et al. 2015)

12. References
Arbaugh J.B. (2014) System, scholar or students? Which most influences online MBA course effectiveness? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 30, 349–362.
Bayne S. (2015) What’s the matter with ‘technology-enhanced learning’? Learning, Media and Technology, 40 (1), 5–20.
Brown M., Dehoney J. and Millichap N. (2015) The Next Generation Digital Learning Environment: A Report on Research. Available from:
Gašević D., Adescope O., Joksimović S. and Kovanović V. (2015) Externally facilitated regulation scaffolding and role assignment to develop cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 53–65.
Orlikowski W. (2010) The sociomateriality of organisational life: considering technology in management research. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34, 125–141.
Rienties B. and Toetenel L. (2016) The impact of learning design on student behaviour, satisfaction and performance: a cross- institutional comparison across 151 modules. Computers in Human Behaviour, 60, 333–341.

13. Thank you – questions? stuart.allan@ebs.hw.ac.uk OpenPlanStuart