O2.1.1

=E–learning technologies and pedagogies explicitly addressed in relevant institutional learning and teaching policies and strategies. =

Evidence
The emergence of e-learning as a ‘significant…pedagogy [which] raises a host of issues…concerning the complex and idiosyncratic nature of online learning’ (Jamieson, 2004, p. 22) that is ‘forcing universities to rethink their foundations and shift their paradigms’ (Howard et al., 2004, p. vii), highlights the importance of explicitly addressing its requirements. Posing questions about matters like adapting teaching practice, and interpreting online communications, Jamieson observes that e-learning brings pedagogical, technological, and operational challenges to teaching practice (p. 22). E-learning involves a ‘major realignment of the institutions organizational identity’ (p. 26) that calls for intensive, strategic professional development activity.

Shackelford (2007) in describing the eighteen pitfalls of project managing e-course development notes that failure to set forth an e-learning strategy will lead to difficulties.

Haughey (2007) analyses the organizational responses of several Canadian universities to provision of faculty support for teaching and learning over the period 1997-2005. Several recommendations follow. Haughey notes that there is a shift in technology focus from emphasis on course management systems and presentation software to blended learning and technological assistance for active learning. ‘The integration of digital technologies occurs not only in response to changing conditions, it is also driven by the vision of the institution’ (p. 28). The seven recommendations made on the basis of the research are: 1. A digital technologies vision is required to coordinate top down and bottom up adoption of technology. 2. Technology support and developmental units must work closely together. 3. Faculty need strong support to understand and employ learner-centred methods. 4. A combination of centralized and decentralized support. 5. The development of sufficient in-house technology expertise among faculty to track technological trends. 6. Be aware that policy change does drive pedagogic change first by restructuring and then by changes to teaching practice. 7. Resistance to change is inevitable.

Resources
A review undertaken by Mioduser et al. (2000) found that web resources at the time employed traditional pedagogies (individual rather than collaborative learning, direct instruction rather than inquiry, clicking rather than communicating, automatic feedback rather than guidance, memorisation rather than knowledge construction. There is far more scope for good pedagogy in online learning than this, and formal institutional guidelines can be useful.

Herrington & Bunker (2002) describe developments at Edith Cowan University. A multidisciplinary team of academics and support staff produced guidelines that focused on the key areas of online learning, pedagogy, resources, and delivery. The guidelines were produced to assist both academics and instructional designers. Further developments have been the production of an ‘online sampler’, where staff can turn to view examples of what online courses can/should look like. Staff developing online courses are very concerned to know what they are aiming for and an online database of exemplars can help (examples include how to engineer online collaboration, buddy systems, assessment, how to support different learning methodologies and how to disseminate feedback). Finally, a workshop called the ‘Blackboard License’ has been introduced. This is the forum for staff to be introduced to the e-learning guidelines and the teaching and learning philosophy at Edith Cowan University. Good pedagogy must be the prime mover of e-learning and Herrington & Bunker give some examples of how it can be implemented beginning at institutional level.