D2.1.1

=Teaching staff are provided with e-learning design and (re)development standards. =

Evidence
Ad-hoc development of resources has resulted in the proliferation of a variety of materials designed to support student learning. Many of these are developed without consideration of how they appear to students moving from course to course, how they can be reused over time, or how to learn from the experience of others in developing effective materials. Standards and guidelines can support more effective practice (Marshall, 2004a) and their use can result in cheaper, more useful materials to support student learning.

There is general agreement that institution-wide successful implementation of effective e-learning depends on explicit institutional procedures and standards. There are, however, differing views on what constitutes ‘success’ and how institutional procedures and standards are promulgated and managed. As ‘success’ is mainly subjective its achievement is a matter of interested perception. Then, there is tension between central and local interests that, on one hand, pre-suppose a need for strong centralised management for institution-wide e-learning implementation, and on the other expect localised pedagogical independence for educational professionals (SURF Foundation, 2006). But, as Agre (2002) argues, decentralisation is not a simple thing, it ‘requires a framework of standards, and standards require a center’ (p. 163). In another view, a top-down managerialist model that imposes structure and strategy over ICT implementation is contrasted with a bottom-up model that integrates individual roles and skills with process management to build core competencies that support ICT (Coen et al., 2004). However, the consensus is that there is no single success formula, and that central and local, and top-down and bottom up models need to function concurrently. Rather, cooperation and collaboration that works to build and support implementation of e-learning is preferred.

Resources
Evidence of capability in this area is seen through the use of consistent, documented practice that reuses previous experience within the institution to build capability. Formal standards are used where available to inform and guide practice and ensure quality and reusability of materials. These standards and guidelines are communicated widely within the institution to encourage wider adoption by teaching staff.

One example of a framework is the TASCOI model (Espejo et al., 1999, cited in Liber, 2005), which concerns transformation, actors, suppliers, customers, owners, and intervenors (p. 43). By identifying the relevant concerns of different departments in each category, potential problems between the departments can be revealed and ways to help manage and resolve issues them can be devised (p. 43). Another example is Khan’s (2005) e-learning framework, which he envisions as an octagonal figure comprising pedagogical, technological, interface design, evaluation, management, resource support, ethical, and institutional factors (p. 14). The framework is seen in relation to features and components of e-learning environments, such as ease of use, interactivity, multiple expertise, collaborative learning, authenticity, and learner-control (pp. 11-12). This model is also used to ‘identify the critical issues of an e-learning environment, and provide guidance on addressing them’ (p.18). Yet another example is the Lifestyle and Learning Style Design Framework, which involves six design levels: institutional, infrastructural, program, course, unit/learning activity, and assessment This model allows for contributions from a wide range of institutional personnel, but its ‘multi-level process keeps the process practical and realistic’ (Boettcher, 2004, p. 25).

Several sets of guidelines for e-learning design and (re)development exist. The JISC has guiding principles for staff involved in development of e-learning content:

http://www.techdis.ac.uk/index.php?p=6_6

And also, guidelines for e-learning content:

http://www.techdis.ac.uk/index.php?p=6_6_1

These set out minimum requirements.

Also, extensive explanation of design principles for e-learning can be found in Clark & Mayer (2007) ‘E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning.’ These authors systematically work through the evidence of how to most successfully employ a range of media in e-learning.

Van Assche & Vuorikari (2006) describe the aspects of quality that are related to the creation of learning material, its discovery and eventual use and reuse. These authors discuss the quality of learning resources from a product and process approach and cover all processes from creation to use. They present a full framework for dealing with quality of learning resources.