1. Anglia Ruskin Case Study for QA-QE e-Learning Toolkit Uwe Matthias Richter Dr Berenice Rivera-Macias George Evangelinos Dr Julian Priddle 14 th of June 2011

2. Overview Introduction Research Approach Research Findings The Distance Learning Lifecycle (Stage 1) Questions

3. Introduction Comparative study of the development of two online distance learning (ODL) pathways up to validation –Pathway A: in-house development –Pathway B: distributed and partially outsourced development Aims –To review existing processes –To identify gaps –To streamline process(es) informed by the QA-QE e- Learning Toolkit as part of a distance learning lifecycle

4. Research Approach Survey (guided by QA-QE e-Learning Toolkit) followed by Focus groups / Interviews with pathway academic and support development teams Review of validation documentation

5. Findings: The Case Studies Driven by Internal Change Fully in-house Development Pathway A Driven by Market Demand Combined Outsourced & in-house Pathway B

6. Similarities: Processes Institutional ODL development and validation processes: Structured development processes were not in place Communication channels between and within the team(s) had to be developed Validation process lacked transparency regarding requirements / checklist Disparity between face-to-face and ODL modules in validation requirements

7. Similarities: Design The design process and expertise: The approach to using the VLE was more conservative than innovative The academic development teams depended on the technology expertise of one learning technologist in each faculty

8. Similarities: Support Local and central support of ODL development teams: Insufficient acknowledgement of time for the development of ODL pathways Workload relating to development process poorly quantified Insufficient readiness of academic development teams due to lack of e-learning training and experience Insufficient central provision of materials and resources for student induction and support

9. Differences: Drivers / Organisation Drivers: Pathway A driven by internal change of provision Pathway B driven by market demand Teams and Roles: Pathway A was managed by an internal Academic Development Team supported by the Faculty learning technologist (technically) and the Head of Department (strategically) The development of Pathway B was based on a distributed team of external content developers, the academic development team and Faculty learning technologist, and a central ODL support team. The Team was lead by a dedicated project manager and strategically by the Faculty and support service senior management

10. Module Leaders: Development Team (Faculty) Pathway Leader (Faculty) Central ODL Support Unit (LDS) Learning Technologist (Faculty) Technical & DL support The Relations for Pathway A Faculty / Department Management Clear initial Processes & Support

11. The Relations for Pathway B Central ODL Support Unit (LDS) External Body (Outsourced Content Production) Learning Development Services (LDS) Management Distance Learning Project Manager (LDS) Learning Technologist (Faculty) Came in much later Did not produce ODL materials Adaptation of ODL material Faculty / Department Management Academic Development Team (Faculty) Lack of engagement of module leader Unclear initial stages & processes

12. Advantages & Risks of a Distributed Process The main advantage is that a distributed process with outsourced elements allows a more agile course of action with “capacity on demand” The main risks are associated with: –the complexity of the processes –the complexity of communication –the lack of expertise in ODL by some contributors –the unclear ownership of the “product”

13. Suggestions for the validation process: QA-QE e-Learning Toolkit To include an initial analysis stage with: –market research in order to understand the potential students, and –a scoping exercise to identify resources and cost benefit To promote a project management approach to ODL development involving: –defined project management and responsibilities / accountabilities, –clear timelines, milestones and sign-off points, –resource requirements, and –a risk analysis To identify which parts of the process are supported locally, centrally and externally

14. Plenary Questions Our illustration of the distance learning lifecycle includes many existing elements but is still like a large jigsaw puzzle. Questions Do you have a lifecycle approach? If so, how does it look? Have you completed the puzzle and, if yes, how?