Advancing Learning Environments through Development Programmes: Exploring MLE Integration in Scotland, Wales, and Northe
This initiative focuses on building Managed Learning Environments (MLEs) to seamlessly link learners across educational sectors. It demonstrates the potential of MLEs to support learning and teaching, with a special emphasis on technical exploration, curriculum pilots, and integration with digital libraries. The projects aim to enhance the learning experience by updating lifelong learner records and promoting cross-institution collaboration through vertical MLE integration. Key challenges and achievements are discussed, highlighting the importance of stakeholder engagement, technology testing, and effective planning.
Advancing Learning Environments through Development Programmes: Exploring MLE Integration in Scotland, Wales, and Northe
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Development Programmes • Information Environment • Learning Environment • Building and linking systems for the delivery of learning & teaching • Middleware • Networking • Preservation • Research Environment • JCALTProgramme
Learning Environment • Managed Learning Environments for Lifelong Learning: Building MLEs across FE and HE • Facilitating the seamless movement of learners across sectors and institutions • 2 large scale projects (NIIMLE and Shell) • Supporting studies surveying MLE activity and building learner profiles • Managed Learning Environments for Lifelong Learning 2 • Build on the outcome of the two current projects • Make initial explorations of the wider aspects of linking MLEs
Learning Environment • Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (SWaNI) • More later ….. • Building MLEs in HE • Demonstrating the potential of MLEs to support learning and teaching • Linking Digital Libraries with Virtual Learning Environments (DiVLE) • 10 projects • Pedagogical and organisational issues • Technical exploration and curriculum focussed pilots
Update on SWaNI • MIS-VLE-MIS (Enterprise) • 4 projects • 3 VLE vendors • Granada Learnwise • Teknical • WebCT • 4 MIS vendors • Capita Dita • FD Learning • Microcompass • SITS
Update on SWaNI • LIP (Learner Information Profile) • 2 projects • Scottish UFI and SITS • UFI and Teknical • Content interop and packaging • 1 project (large consortium) • Intrallect (digital repository) • FD • Learnwise • Teknical • Digital Brain • producers of some of the best NLN materials
What’s being tested with Enterprise spec? • TEKNICAL • Capita Dita • Sits • FD • Granada Learnwise • Capita Dita • Microcompass • WebCT • Capita Dita
What’s being tested with LIP spec? • Personal Development Planning • Updating the lifelong learning record • Commonality with the NIIMLE and Shell projects • Integration with SUfI and UfI • Allowing for complete learner log • Vertical MLE • Cross institution • Cross sector
How? • Transport mechanism • IMS have recommended the use of SOAP with attachments • Not all vendors are ready for this • Application Profiles • Need to ensure that the agreed profiles are appropriate for the different sectors • Regional FE extensions where necessary
Where we’re up to • MIS/VLE • Agreed the application profiles • What we’re sending • In what format • Currently testing the app profiles • Agreed the transport mechanism • A number of different models • For testing purposes • All vendors committed to SOAP in future
Where we’re up to • Personal Development Planning • Ongoing process • Working with CRA • Content • Currently testing and reporting • Consortium have secured funding to continue this work
And the content? • Content packaging and metadata • Content produced by 5 different institutions in different formats and within different VLEs • Simple learning objects • Export/Import from vle to vle • Test results • Modify • Report • Export/Import from digital repository • Effectiveness of consortium approach
Issues arising • The projects’ perspective • Time • Projects too short – too much lead time • Money • There’s never enough • Working with multiple vendors • Time consuming - herding cats • Strengthened relationships • How was it for them? • Underestimated the complexity • Use to kick start further work at institutional level • Raised senior management awareness
Issues arising • The JISC perspective • Need to better plan the timing of projects • Need to work with vendor partners at planning stage • Differences between FE and HE • In terms of capacity for such projects • In terms of expectations of projects • Horse and cart ……..
CART – HORSE - CART • Why are you doing this? • For the experience • Absolutely valid • As long as the experience leads to recognition of the need to change • A perceived need • Technology driving the change • Need to consider what you want to do and then consider the available AND appropriate technology/ies • Institutional buy-in • Business process re-engineering involves absolutely everyone • Top down and bottom up