ETEC 520: Planning and Managing Learning Technologies in Higher Education
Reflections
In ETEC 520 I learned how to plan and manage e-learning effectively and how to make practical decisions regarding technology.
At the beginning of the course we shared our definitions of eLearning. I found the concept of e-learning continuum really interesting. I have mostly been involved into face-to-face or fully online distance learning (as a student, teacher and instructional designer), and now I have a clear picture of how e-learning begins as ICT in support of face-to-face classroom teaching, plays an important part in blended learning and turns into fully online distance learning at the right end of the continuum (where still some face-to-face interactions can be used with the help of various web conferencing tools).
One of the biggest eye-opening moments for me was that e-learning (all forms of teaching and learning through ICT) is used not only for teaching and learning, but also for class administration, library management, student registration management, academic publishing, mobility, etc. ICT change the way how the university is organized, financed and governed. These functions of e-learning were separate from my understanding of e-learning before.
This course also helped me to come up with strong arguments why we need to put learning before the technology and why we need to re-think and re-design learning, not simply use e-learning to enhance existing approaches. It also helped to support the faculty I work with not only in learning how to use technology but also how to implement best teaching and learning practices (that have changed over time) into their teaching and how to change their strategies to improve the quality of learning.
During the course we analyzed various strategic plans, learned about challenges for eLearning implementation, how to overcome these challenges and increase funding. We also practiced predicting whether eLearning implementation would be successful.
I loved that after we completed the first individual assignment, we were given an option to decide whether we want to work in groups or individually on the remaining two assignments. It was great to be able to choose your team members, and I totally enjoyed working in a group in this course.
At the beginning of the course we shared our definitions of eLearning. I found the concept of e-learning continuum really interesting. I have mostly been involved into face-to-face or fully online distance learning (as a student, teacher and instructional designer), and now I have a clear picture of how e-learning begins as ICT in support of face-to-face classroom teaching, plays an important part in blended learning and turns into fully online distance learning at the right end of the continuum (where still some face-to-face interactions can be used with the help of various web conferencing tools).
One of the biggest eye-opening moments for me was that e-learning (all forms of teaching and learning through ICT) is used not only for teaching and learning, but also for class administration, library management, student registration management, academic publishing, mobility, etc. ICT change the way how the university is organized, financed and governed. These functions of e-learning were separate from my understanding of e-learning before.
This course also helped me to come up with strong arguments why we need to put learning before the technology and why we need to re-think and re-design learning, not simply use e-learning to enhance existing approaches. It also helped to support the faculty I work with not only in learning how to use technology but also how to implement best teaching and learning practices (that have changed over time) into their teaching and how to change their strategies to improve the quality of learning.
During the course we analyzed various strategic plans, learned about challenges for eLearning implementation, how to overcome these challenges and increase funding. We also practiced predicting whether eLearning implementation would be successful.
I loved that after we completed the first individual assignment, we were given an option to decide whether we want to work in groups or individually on the remaining two assignments. It was great to be able to choose your team members, and I totally enjoyed working in a group in this course.
Artifacts
Artifact 1: Analysis and Comparison of Rationales for eLearning
For this assignment, I provided an analysis and comparison of how two universities are planning for e-learning and the reasons they are planning to increase its use. I highlighted the key elements of each plan to identify the similarities and differences. From instructor feedback I learned that I need to be careful about accepting university claims at face value.
Artifact 2: E-Learning Readiness Audit
For this assignment, our group adapted James-Springer’s (2016) e-learning readiness audit tool and used it to assess the e-learning readiness of The University of Western Ontario (UWO). We assessed the university readiness based on four factors: organizational, technological, learner and financial readiness. We concluded that Western University is pretty well established in terms of its eLearning readiness according to the factors outlined in our audit tool. eLearning is in line with the university’s mission and there is support from the institution’s leadership as shown in the resources invested towards training and funding for programs. We also provided a couple of recommendations where they can improve.
One of the recommendations that I suggested and that was supported by my peers was organizing a community of practice to bring online instructors together to share ideas, build community, and develop a higher degree of collaboration, communication, and shared reflection.
Artifact 3: Analysis and Comparison of Approaches to E-Learning
For this assignment, our group provided an analysis and comparison of how the two universities we have chosen planned for e-learning. We supported our analysis of each institution with reference to some of the key ideas presented in the course and identified the key strengths and weaknesses of each institution’s approach. According to the instructor feedback, our recommendations are sound and practical.
The key learning from this assignment is that in order for technology integration to be successful, there needs to be “engagement from a number of key players, all working together and developing and sharing a common vision or set of goals for the use of technology” (Bates and Sangrà, 2011)
Resources
Bates, A.W., & Sangrà, A. (2011). Managing technology in higher education: Strategies for transforming teaching and learning. John Wiley & Sons.