Implementing a learning technology strategy: top-down strategy meets bottom-up culture

Using interview-based 'insider case study' research, this paper outlines why the University of Salford has adopted a Learning Technologies Strategy and examines the factors which are likely to lead to its successful implementation. External reasons for the adoption focused on the need to: respond to 'increased Higher Education (HE) competition', meet student expectations of learning technology use, provide more flexibility and access to the curriculum, address the possible determining effect of technology and establish a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) presence in this 'particular area of the HE landscape'. Internal drivers centred on the need to: continue a 'bottom-up' e-learning pilot project initiative, particularly given that a VLE is a 'complex tool' which requires effective strategic implementation, and promote the idea that learning technology will play an important role in determining the type of HE institution that the University of Salford wishes to become. Likely success factors highlighted the need to: create 'time and space' for innovation, maintain effective communication and consultation at all levels of the organization, emphasize the operational aspects of the strategy, establish a variety of staff development processes and recognize the negotiatory processes involved in understanding the term 'web presence' in local teaching cultures. Fundamentally, the paper argues that policy makers should acknowledge the correct 'cultural configuration' of HE institutions when seeking to manage and achieve organizational change. Thus, it is not just a question of establishing 'success factors' per se but also whether they are contextualized appropriately within a 'correct' characterization of the organizational culture

Examining the five‐stage e‐moderating model: Designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession

This paper highlights the need for learning technologists to establish their ‘academic legitimacy’ within the complexities of online learning and teaching practice. Frameworks such as the ‘five stage e‐moderating model’ can be useful in developing the knowledge base but there are dangers in them becoming too reified within an increasingly commodified higher education (HE) environment. The paper calls for greater professional reflexivity and contestation within learning technology practice and concludes by inviting the Alt‐J readership to engage in a critical debate with regard to these issues

On reification: A reinterpretation of designed and emergent practice ‐ a reply

We welcome the response of Chris Tompsett and Graham Alsop to our article (Lisewski and Joyce, 2003). Within its ‘stricter analysis’, it is thoughtful and incisive, presenting an interesting critique of our ideas. However, we cannot help but think that the authors have missed the point. Indeed, if we wish to be mischievous we woidd argue that their response is an exemplar of some of the concerns we wanted to raise in our original article