Electronic Learning and Assessment Intranet and Internet

1. Electronic Learning and AssessmentIntranet and Internet Leon Litvack L.Litvack@qub.ac.uk

2. Aims • Examine the context for use of C&IT in English studies • Demonstrate model from intranet VLE, for undergraduates • Demonstrate model using internet at postgraduate level, in constructing research resource in the public domain • Consider how C&IT can be used for summative assessment, in context of degree in English studies

3. Benchmark statement: defining principles for English degree • Develop critical thinking & judgement • Engage students imaginatively in reading & analysing literary & non-literary texts • Develop range of subject specific and transferable skills, including high-order conceptual, literacy & communication skills • Provide intellectually stimulating & satisfying experience of learning & studying • Encourage enthusiasm for subject, & appreciation of continuing social & cultural importance Source: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/crntwork/benchmark/english.pdf

4. Skills • Transferable outside the discipline: • oral & written communication skills • interpersonal skills (work in a group context) • time-management skills • collate & process information from a variety of sources • respond positively and productively to feedback • think creatively and flexibly in diverse situations • basic word-processing & other IT skills Source: QUB English programme specification

5. Dearing Report (1997) ‘We believe that the innovative application of... C&IT holds out much promise for improving the quality, flexibility and effectiveness of higher education. The potential benefits will extend to, and affect the practice of, learning and teaching and research’ • Does achieving Dearing’s vision of a ‘learning society’, aided by developments in internet / intranet based software systems NECESSARILY apply to all teachers and learners? Consider your objectives carefully

6. Incorporation of IT into curriculum -- considerations • For staff • Worth time spent? • Training • Applications for other areas of activity? • Relation to career advancement • For students • Worth time spent? • Training • Skills

7. Other considerations • Pedagogic criteria • Teaching Facilities • Appropriate environment • Features, specifications & cost of software • Access to terminals outside class time • Support • Department • Central IT services

8. Intranet or internet? • Intranet • Private network • Admission across firewall • Requires authorisation • Useful for delivering & sharing information on selective basis

9. Internet • Public network • No authorisation required • Useful for delivering & sharing information on global basis • Consider usefulness of information to outside users • What level of scrutiny to ensure accuracy of content?

10. Intranet model – Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) • Creates micro-world – allows teacher to construct learning activities enriched by multimedia resources • Curriculum divided into assessable/ recordable elements • Student activity & achievement can be tracked • Online learning supported by staff & peers • Offers central & remote access

11. Features of prototypical VLE

12. Demonstration of Queen’s Online VLEhttp://www.qnet.qub.ac.uk/

13. Features of VLE • University-wide (only one system to learn) • Linked to student records database • Single sign-on for all university systems • Time to learn system – 1 hour • Easily navigable • Satisfies demand for acquisition of specific skills

14. Flexibility of time and place of access • Copes with increased student numbers – esp. undergraduates • Sharing and re-use of resources • Facilitates Student-centred learning • Enhances variety of teaching and learning strategies • Supports constructivist conversational approaches to learning (see Laurillard, Rethinking University Teaching:A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology [London: Routledge, 1993]) • Can reduce administrative burden

15. Information can be disseminated quickly • Photocopying bill for course packs eliminated for department – cost transferred to students! • Information remains in-house: not published to wider world

16. Caveats re: particular VLE • Rigid & hierarchical • Designed for delivery rather than interaction -- flow of information is largely one-way (tutor to student) • Only recognises official (QUB) email addresses for students • Students cannot email each other through VLE • One person controls information (implications for team-taught modules) • Favours IE browser (not Netscape)

17. General considerations for VLE • Planning of teaching sessions requires more staff time & care • Proactive attitude demanded from staff, to ensure that students are coping – esp. in early stages

18. Particular Use of Queen’s Online • A wrap-around (50/50) system (see Mason, ‘Models of Online Courses’ [1998]) • course materials wrapped by activities • online interactions and discussions occupy roughly half the students' time

19. Summatively Assessed elements • Student presentations (delivered via PowerPoint) – 10% • Individual effort (collaborative work harder to assess in terms of individual input) • Approach to topic discussed with student beforehand, and among students working in same area

20. Contribution to asynchronous, threaded online discussion – 10% • Requires careful planning & structuring • provide specific tasks (e.g. developing answers to set questions in readings) • Set deadline by which contributions must be made • Other elements: • Assessed essay (students design own questions) • Exam

21. Criteria for assessment • Consistent across the English curriculum • Relevance – also considers implications, assumptions, & nuances of the issue/question • Knowledge – demonstrates breadth and range of reading • Analysis – analytical treatment of evidence, resulting in clear synthesis • Argument & Structure – coherent response to issue/question • Originality – distinctive response, showing independence of thought and approach • Presentation – includes spelling & syntax, readable style, use of particular medium, appropriate documentation Source: http://www.qub.ac.uk/en/ug/Marking-criteria.doc

22. Pedagogic Issues for VLEs Particular Models • Lee & Thompson (QUB), ‘Teaching at a Distance: Building a Virtual Learning Environment’ (MSc in computer-based learning) • http://www.jisc.ac.uk/jtap/htm/jtap-033.html • Stiles, COSE (Staffordshire) • http://www.staffs.ac.uk/COSE/cose10/welcome10.html

23. Comparative Studies • Landon (Douglas College, BC), ‘Online Delivery Applications: A Web Tool for Comparative Analysis’ • http://www.ctt.bc.ca/landonline/ • Britain and Liber (Univ. of Wales, Bangor), ‘A Framework for Pedagogical Evaluation of Virtual Learning Environments’ (assesses various VLEs, including COSE) • http://www.jisc.ac.uk/jtap/htm/jtap-041.html

24. General Principles • Mason (Open Univ.), ‘Models of Online Courses’ • http://www.aln.org/alnweb/magazine/vol2_issue2/Masonfinal.htm • JISC, Requirements for a VLE • http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub00/req-vle.html • JISC, Managed Learning Environments • http://www.jisc.ac.uk/jtap/theme-L.html

25. Internet Model – The Imperial Archive • Used in conjunction with Queen’s Online VLE • Aim: dissemination of student-generated material to the wider world as a research resource

26. Demonstration of Imperial Archivehttp://www.qub.ac.uk/en/imperial/imperial.htm

27. Project’s origins relate to Laurillard’s ‘conversational framework’

28. Student-centred learning at the heart of project development • Smaller numbers – allows more time with each student • VLE used in ‘wrap-around’ (50/50) manner • Material assessed according to standard English curriculum criteria: • Relevance • Knowledge • Analysis • Argument & Structure • Originality • Presentation

29. Material for Imperial Archive generated in HTML • Scrutinised online by internal & external examiners • Project worth 15% of overall mark • PowerPoint presentation – 10% • 5000-word assessed essay – 75%

30. Recognition of project’s success • ‘footfall’ through archive -- http://www.qub.ac.uk/en/logs/ • External examiners’ reports • Feedback from students • Dissemination of methodology through http://info.ox.ac.uk/ctitext/publish/comtxt/ct16-17/litvack.html

31. Conclusions • Many ways to use C&IT systems • Importance of staff-student and student-student interaction in the class • Focus on educational needs – not technology • Time spent must justify learning goals achieved • Consider how you currently teach, and how this might be improved • Consider the strengths & weaknesses of the technology when planning/ modifying courses

32. Do not necessarily abandon what you already do well • Make sure adequate support is offered to staff & students • Prerequisites: • ECDL? • Other in-house IT training? • Plan for disasters – network failure, power failure • Assessment methods: • Comparable to those used in ENGLISH learning environments not employing C&IT? • Use of marking criteria?

33. Bear in mind contribution made to • Subject knowledge & understanding • Intellectual skills • Subject-specific skills • Key skills THROUGH ENGLISH STUDIES

34. Presentation may be viewed online at http://www.qub.ac.uk/en/research/stoke-presentation.ppt