D7.2.4

=Incentives provided to teaching staff who reuse e-learning resources. =

Evidence
There are many barriers to uptake of ongoing professional development. Many staff complain of time constraints, or that teaching is not valued in performance indicator measures so there is a lack of incentive. Hence professional development is seen as an optional activity. Across the five institutions surveyed by Mansvelt et al. (2009) e-learning support was unevenly experienced and sometimes hampered by unsupportive management, resource conflicts and organisational structures. Alignment between policy and practice was poor. Staff are unclear how policies relate to expectations of their own practice. This must be made clear and transparent.

Leem & Lim (2007) conducted a survey of all 201 universities in Korea. They found that 85% had investigated offering e-learning. However, meaningful supports and policies were lacking. They recommend creating ‘Knowledge Servers’ to accumulate e-learning knowledge and content stored by a university. They noted that e-learning is severely limited in scope when it continues to operate on classroom models. Also, that less than half the universities provided support for tutors and that there was a significant lack of support and incentives for faculty to take part in e-learning.

Resources
Teaching staff should be provided with training and support in the creation and reuse of resources as well as incentives to both create reusable resources in the first place as well as enable reuse.

According to Leem & Lim’s survey results (2007) only 34% of universities awarded extra credits for faculty achievement evaluation. Only 21% reported reducing teaching workload. Only a small number of universities reported providing awards for excellent content. All these methods can potentially be used to reward and recognize and encourage teaching staff for innovative e-learning. If excellent content results from crediting staff with reduced workloads, the content may