Feb 23

Preliminary results of the Learning Technology Staff Survey

Sue No Comments »

We recently undertook a survey of the e-learning staff development requirements of staff. In all, the survey was completed by over 200 members of staff from a variety of schools & services. The survey asked for people thoughts on the University VLE (UEL Plus) and a range of learning technologies (Wikis, Blogs, Podcasts , Videocast , Virtual Worlds , Image sharing, Social Bookmarking, Video/audio conferencing , Chat , Microblogging, Online games  and Social networking). The survey also asked for preferences for support mechanisms when they require immediate support and longer term training on learning technologies.

Further analysis of the results is being undertaken at the moment, but some brief highlights are as below.

  • Approximately 75% of all staff surveyed use UEL Plus in their current work.
  • Of the different technologies we requested information, the highest used for work within UEL were Wikis, Blog, Podcasts and Video/Audio Conferencing. Each technology had between 10-15% of people stating ‘I have used/use this technology within my work at UEL’.
  • Of all of the learning technologies mentioned, over 90% of people had heard of the majority of technologies, even if they had never used them. The technology most people had never heard of was Social Bookmarking e.g. Del.icio.us (with 31% having never heard of the tool).
  • When asked to state their level of enthusiasm on the use of learning technologies, 78% stated their enthusiasm was 7 or over (on a scale of 1-10) however only 52% believed UEL Plus to be rated 7 or over for their overall opinion of the tool.
  • Of the current e-learning support mechanisms used, the most common form of support staff draw upon is the help of colleagues (26%) within their schools or services.
  • When asked for preferred methods of short term/immediate support Over 90% stated they would go to a colleague frequently or occasionally. This was closely followed by online FAQs (88%) and support from LTAs (83%).
  • When asked for support methods for learning a new tool / substantial information, hands on workshops (92%) and support from colleagues (92%) were the most likely to be used. Of the least preferred methods support from students (66%) and video recordings of previous sessions (51%) were highlighted as methods staff would never use.
  • With regards to style of workshop delivery, 62% of people would prefer a face to face session, 7% would prefer an online session and 31% would have no specific preference.

This staff development survey highlights some interesting results, which will feed into the redevelopment of the provision. Trials in virtual classroom tools are currently being undertaken along with a much needed review of the support documentation we have for UEL Plus.

Feb 23

Future of Virtual Worlds in Education

Rose Heaney 1 Comment »

Debates about virtual worlds continue to interest some of us and Eduserv’s ‘Where next for Virtual Worlds’ on 25th January was no exception.

Ralph Schroeder of the Oxford Internet Institute argued the case for two end states – 3D video conferencing or computer generated virtual worlds on the one hand and virtual reality environments on the other. (Or something to that effect – refer to one of his many publications for the definitive version.) John Kirriemuir of Virtual World Watch summarised his latest snapshot survey of Virtual World activity in HE & FE. Daniel Livingstone brought us up to date with Sloodle and then went on to predict how technologies might converge in the future.

Martin Oliver of London Knowledge Lab (LKL) challenged the use of the term ‘affordance’ in virtual world research. Diane Carr also of LKL gave us the deaf person’s perspective on communications in Second Life – voice was not a welcome addition for this community.

Others wrote about the event at the time – see Daniel Livingstone and Heather Williamson (JISC). Most of the presentations are available on the site above.

Several weeks on I am reflecting a bit further ….

A room full of enthusiasts tends to be quite optimistic about the future of virtual worlds, even if the organisers Eduserv have come to the end of their funding stream for new developments, but for me ‘the elephant in the room’ is ongoing lack of uptake by the mainstream.

In the school of Health & Bioscience at UEL we are using SL in a very specific way for simulation and problem based learning in healthcare settings. Elsewhere in UEL, very few are using it. The only other educational use I am aware of is a limited pilot in the school of Psychology offering tutorials and the possibility of a virtual conference later in the year.

In a post in January 2010 Stephen Downes, in reference to another post by Alja Sulčič, described SL as ‘not dead but niche’. I tend to concur, whilst acknowledging that the same could be said about quite a few technologies e.g. Twitter. On the other hand, I also feel that if those institutions already active in SL can find ways to share their developments and resources beyond their own institutions in the form of OERs or their VW equivalent (e.g. Leicester have recently made a deposit in Open Jorum ), there is a possibility of wider use. A welcome aspect of any open offerings would be more end user tools, such as UEL’s embryonic web-based case editor, that enables academics to manipulate Second Life objects without any technical knowhow. Only a small minority will ever rise to the challenge of building letalone scripting in SL. Many, in fact, still struggle with the most basic aspects of more common place technologies such as the VLE.

Where next? My crystal ball points towards increased activity in simulation for health education and other subjects and for problem based learning generally but without a more open approach and user friendly development interface this type of growth will be limited. And one other thing – Second Life’s dominance of Virtual Worlds may recede as OpenSim and the like come of age.

preload preload preload
FireStats icon Powered by FireStats