Assessing and enhancing quality using toolkits

“Toolkits” are decision-making frameworks based on expert models. This paper outlines one toolkit, which provides support for practitioners involved in the process of embedding Learning Technology into their courses. Although the toolkit was created as a design tool, feedback from evaluations identified its value as a means of assessing Quality. This paper outlines the background of the creation and scope of the toolkit, examines how it can be used to assess and enhance the quality of courses and concludes by summarising how toolkits can be used as part of Quality procedures in other areas

A literature synthesis of personalised technology-enhanced learning: what works and why

Personalised learning, having seen both surges and declines in popularity over the past few decades, is once again enjoying a resurgence. Examples include digital resources tailored to a particular learner’s needs, or individual feedback on a student’s assessed work. In addition, personalised technology-enhanced learning (TEL) now seems to be attracting interest from philanthropists and venture capitalists indicating a new level of enthusiasm for the area and a potential growth industry. However, these industries may be driven by profit rather than pedagogy, and hence it is vital these new developments are informed by relevant, evidence-based research. For many people, personalised learning is an ambiguous and even loaded term that promises much but does not always deliver. This paper provides an in-depth and critical review and synthesis of how personalisation has been represented in the literature since 2000, with a particular focus on TEL. We examine the reasons why personalised learning can be beneficial and examine how TEL can contribute to this. We also unpack how personalisation can contribute to more effective learning. Lastly, we examine the limitations of personalised learning and discuss the potential impacts on wider stakeholders

A personal journey of discoveries through a DIY open course development for professional development of teachers in Higher Education

This paper is the author's exploration into the story behind the development of the pedagogical ideas for the open course around Flexible, Distance and Online Learning (FDOL), its design and implementation, and the opportunities and challenges this presented to the author through three iterations, FDOL131, FDOL132 and FDOL141 during 2013 and 2014. Flexible, Distance and Online Learning is an open course developed by educational developers in the UK and Sweden for teachers in Higher Education (HE). Formal and informal continuing professional development opportunities are blended to bring higher education teachers from different disciplines, institutions and countries together into a community to learn autonomously or in groups supported by facilitators from different institutions. Personal discoveries and learning points are shared, based on reflections, observations and related research activities carried out as part of a PhD research project by the author together with a description of the pedagogical design developed for and used in FDOL. Findings shared might be useful for other open course designers who are interested in providing extended, and extending, collaborative learning opportunities for their students through opening-up and joining-up educational provision and practices

Open by Degrees: A Case of Flexibility or Personalization?

This chapter focuses on the history, development, and perceived value of The Open University UK’s BA/BSc (Hons) Open degree (hereafter referred to as “OUUK Open degree”) over the past half-century in the context of changing external pressures and addressing debates around the coherence and acceptance of such a personalized program of study. It touches on the changing views of “openness” over time, from the origins of The Open University’s “open entry” policy, through to ideas around flexibility of study, open education, and personalized learning. The chapter concludes with recommendations for other higher education institutions wishing to introduce a multidisciplinary open degree into their portfolio of curriculum

Quality Frameworks for MOOCs

The hype surrounding MOOCs has been tempered by scepticism about the quality of MOOCs. The possible flaws of MOOCs include the quality of the pedagogies employed, low completion rates and a failure to deliver on the promise of inclusive and equitable quality education for all. On the other hand, MOOCs that have given a boost to open and online education have become a symbol of a larger modernisation agenda for universities, and are perceived as tools for universities to improve the quality of blended and online education—both in degree education and Continuous Professional Development. MOOC provision is also much more open to external scrutiny as part of a stronger globalising higher education market. This has important consequences for quality frameworks and quality processes that go beyond the individual MOOC. In this context, different quality approaches are discussed including possible measures at different levels and the tension between product and process models. Two case studies are described: one at the institutional level (The Open University) and one at a MOOC platform level (FutureLearn) and how they intertwine is discussed. The importance of a national or international quality framework which carries with it a certification or label is illustrated with the OpenupEd Quality label. Both the label itself and its practical use are described in detail. The examples will illustrate that MOOCs require quality assurance processes tailored to e-learning and open education, embedded in institutional frameworks. The increasing unbundling of educational services may require additional quality processes

An investigation into the adoption of CDIO in distance learning

The Conceive, Design, Implement and Operate Initiative (CDIO) uses integrated learning to develop deep learning of the disciplinary knowledge base whilst simultaneously developing personal, interpersonal, product, process and system building skills. This is achieved through active and experiential learning methods that expose students to experiences engineers will encounter in their profession. These are incorporated not only in the design-build-test experiences that form a crucial part of a CDIO programme but also in discipline focused studies. Active and experiential learning methods are, of course, more difficult to incorporate into distance education. This paper investigates these difficulties and the implications in providing a programme that best achieves the goals of the CDIO approach through contemporary distance education methods. First, the key issues of adopting the CDIO approach in conventional oncampus courses are considered with reference to the development of the CDIO engineering programmes at the University of Liverpool. The different models of distance based delivery of engineering programmes provided by the Open University in the UK, and Deakin University and the University of Southern Queensland in Australia are then presented and issues that may present obstacles to the future adoption of the CDIO approach in these programmes are discussed. The effectiveness and suitability of various solutions to foreseen difficulties in delivering CDIO programmes through distance education are then considered. These include the further development, increased use and interinstitutional sharing of technology based facilities such as Internet facilitated access to laboratory facilities and computer aided learning (CAL) laboratory simulations, on campus workshops, and the development of a virtual engineering enterprise