Virtual Learning Platforms
| Context
The DfES (Department for Education and Skills) at one point defined learning platforms as follows : The specification document for these platforms published by BECTA also states that “a learning platform is not expected to be a single product but rather a collection of interoperable systems or modules…. Each may perform discrete functions, but collectively they should deliver the requirements.” So the term “learning platform” incorporates the notion of a set of modules or services that interact. This definition differs from the original concept of the virtual learning environment, which was essentially an integrated set of services presented together in a common interface. Initially, many of these virtual environments mainly consisted of closed proprietary systems. In early 2000, schools started to discover the virtual learning environment. The priorities identified under the major policy initiatives led to a series of activities aimed at providing every child with an online personalised learning space by 2008 and every school with its own integrated management and learning system by 2010. Schools have made considerable investments in learning platforms. At the same time, many local authorities offered centralised learning platforms for the schools in their area. BECTA has worked in collaboration with the private sector to draw up a list of approved suppliers of learning platforms5 and defined a framework identifying the mandatory and optional features required of any platform.6 BECTA also created SIFA UK7 which brings together public and private sector representatives to implement the Systems Interoperability Framework (SIF), designed to support vertical and horizontal data transfer between different systems and define a British data model8 which is still being developed. Uses and Users As the agency responsible for the coordination, development and dissemination of the national digital strategy, BECTA has specified the functions of learning platforms and divided them into four categories :
Learning platform models Two main learning platform models can currently be identified in British schools: the “institutional” (in-house) model and the centralised model. The “institutional” model : financed from the school budget, platforms opting for this model are generally acquired within a structured service. Several open-source systems such as Moodle nonetheless represent a low-cost alternative, at least for secondary schools. The relative ease with which a copy of Moodle can be downloaded, installed and managed by an ICT technician makes it interesting for schools; but the fact remains that most primary schools do not have an ICT technician and are therefore unable to take advantage of this type of system. Moreover, the OFSTED inspection report on the use of virtual learning environments (2009) emphasises that all schools surveyed were concerned about the staff costs needed for developing it and the availability of specialised assistance. Primary schools are also concerned about the cost of acquiring a virtual learning environment and many of them expect their local authority to centrally fund this type of environment for all schools within the same area (OFSTED 2009). The centralised model : platforms within this model are supplied to several schools in a given area and are financed, hosted and managed by the local authority. In England, the members of the Regional Broadband Consortia, in particular the London Grid (LGFL, http://cms.lgfl.net/web/lgfl/homepage), Birmingham Grid In the UK market today, there are commercial learning platforms. However, open-source models are offering them fierce competition and growing numbers of schools are abandoning their commercial or centralised platform in favour of an open-source platform, particularly Moodle. Several reports discuss how these In Northern Ireland, a regional approach was adopted and a centrally managed platform was made available to the 350,000 teachers, pupils and support staff.9 Similarly, Scotland has adopted a regional approach with its centralised platform GLOW.10 Wales also offers some of these functionalities through the NGfL Cymru network and at least 50% of schools have a Web environment. However, even when learning platforms are provided centrally, some schools choose to install their own systems. Some studies suggest that this trend has its origin in the sense of ownership and control felt by a school when it has its own learning platform in contrast to an imposed centralised platform. In Northern Ireland and Scotland, although the centralised platforms are available to all schools, it is not obligatory to use them, since in some cases schools are allowed to install their own virtual learning environment. Analysis of the relative merits of a centralised platform as against a local school platform in a school reveals that the centralised system undoubtedly offers value in terms of future-proofing, identity management and security, data management and coordination, and universal access. Schools do not need to concern themselves with the technology and can focus all their attention on the educational aspects. Virtual learning environments that are installed in schools and are not part of a structured service require ongoing technical assistance and their use is concentrated mainly within the school, which does not optimise the potential for collaboration, sharing and involvement outside of school. Overall, the United Kingdom has invested considerable funds and resources to meet the priorities set out in its online learning strategies. Recent studies indicate, however, that despite these efforts, ICTE integration has not fulfilled the initial expectations and has not yet succeeded in transforming the overall learning environment. Deployment • a clear vision in the school of the uses of a learning platform More fundamentally, the implicit message emerging from most studies and evaluations is that the current organisation of schools does not lend itself readily to the use of learning platforms. When computers can only be accessed in laboratories open at fixed times, it is not possible to apply the principle of permanent availability that is required for effective use of an online environment. Similarly, limiting access to the duration of a typical 45-minute lesson can be frustrating for users because of lack of time. According to a BECTA study, the use of technology in schools simply for presentation purposes may also be a barrier. This finding suggests a traditional pedagogical orientation with the teacher in charge, presenting material and controlling the class. BECTA’s “Landscape Review” on the impact of ICT in schools (2007) identified a traditional mode of operation in which teaching is structured according to subject: “Unless deliberate steps are taken, VLEs can replicate the stage- or discipline-oriented divisions that exist in some schools.” (BECTA, 2007, p. 55) Teachers very often lack understanding and knowledge about the deployment of learning platforms. But simply replicating more traditional teacher/taught models will not encourage a more interactive studentcentred approach, which could explain why learning platforms are used more as sources of content than as sources of collaboration and communication. The importance of identifying a problem to which the virtual learning platform might offer a solution is a central element in the case studies devoted to the use of learning platforms. In the case studies BECTA conducted in 2006, the problems of communication, of increased involvement of parents, of availability of resources, and of the need for a teamwork approach in curriculum planning were all seen as issues that can find solutions through the use of learning platforms. In a 2008 study that looked at models of innovative online learning for 14-19 year olds, BECTA described other practical problems that had prompted the schools and colleges in question to use learning platforms. These problems included: • reduced staffing; Alongside these practical issues, BECTA also identified educational goals that schools and colleges wanted to achieve. These included : • winning over demotivated students; The findings indicated that learning platforms enabled schools and colleges to achieve these objectives and to address practical problems. The transition from pilot to mainstreaming raised questions related to training and support, supply and access to equipment, and also the management of the process. Because schools need to hire more teachers, acquire more peripherals and offer higher access speeds, their funding should also be increased, and for groups of schools working together in a collegial structure, better management needs to be secured and the administrative burden on staff has to be limited. In other words, while it is clear that learning platforms can help to deal with the practical and pedagogical problems of a school, the questions of costs, access (both at and outside school), and working practices also need to be addressed if their use is to be mainstreamed (BECTA, 2008). Governance If governance is about making decisions and implementing them transparently, effectively and inclusively, what would good governance look like in large-scale deployment of a learning platform? The evolving concept of education as a total package of services for children requires an intersectoral and community engagement involving the various stakeholders, the policy-makers and those responsible for implementation at national, local and school level. Studies in the field of implementation of ICT in the British educational system make it possible to identify five key areas of governance and the related issues : TABLEAU Area Issues
These areas and issues highlight the complexity of implementation given the multidimensional factors at each level (national/macro, local/meso and school/micro) and within each level. In relation to management and intersectoral collaboration, concerns are expressed at all levels regarding : • the lack of professional expertise to guide decision-makers Key players and decision-makers in local authorities have been given roles and responsibilities for which they had little or no ICT expertise or qualifications. Decisions on priorities were complicated by the number of competing and equally important initiatives. At the same time, all parties were affected by problems relating to management. In schools, leaders had to be able to coordinate and manage many aspects of provision, training and pedagogy. In many cases school leadership was inadequate. This problem was not confined to schools : local authorities also had difficulty in collaborating with several organisations, particularly in delivering consistent implementation programmes. The supply of technology and funding was another problematic issue in terms of governance. Across the United Kingdom, there are different models. In Northern Ireland, the framework foresees an infrastructure, connectivity, content and learning platform provided centrally by the local Education and Library Boards (equivalent to LEAs) to all schools, although schools control their own ICT budgets. Under this model, activities related to procurement, financing and contract management are less likely to cause problems for schools. The requisite expertise must, however, be available at regional level. In England and Wales, schools generally secure their own ICT services. Such knowledge and expertise are therefore desirable both in schools as well as within local authorities, which are also engaged in supplying a wide range of regional ICT services and therefore need the appropriate expertise in this field. • successful decision-making depends on the dissemination of information, knowledge and expertise between and among the multiple agencies involved; Key Success Factors The deployment of a virtual learning environment or a platform for large-scale learning is a complex and multifaceted process in several respects. It can be problematic because of its architecture and design. Large-scale training models can be expensive and complicated; the production and maintenance of the required materials can be resource-intensive; and technical assistance services must be provided continuously. These important issues relating to supply, training, support and sustainability must be addressed from the outset. In an overview of ICT commissioned by BECTA, Peter Twining (professor of education at the Open University) and his colleagues pinpointed a sense of ownership (or consent) among end users, and identified it as crucial to the success of the deployment: “It is recognised that, without this ownership, the anticipated changes may be subverted, undermined or blocked” (p. 74). He suggests several ways of establishing this sense of ownership or “buy-in”:
The importance of these factors is echoed in the findings of the interviews, surveys and evaluations analysed in our report. Success appears to be associated with the ability of decision-makers and those implementing platforms to harmonise their ideas and objectives, to ensure a collaborative climate among the various groups, to move towards a common goal, and to provide strong leadership. 4 Metadata Guide for Tagging, version 1.11, Curriculum Online, produced by the DfES in collaboration with Simulacra, Schemeta, 2003, available at : http://industry.becta.org.uk/content_files/industry/resources/Key% 20docs/metadata_guide_tagging_v1_11.pdf 5 Approved Suppliers Becta learning platform services framework. This list provides detailed information on suppliers. It is available at : http://industry.becta.org.uk/content_files/industry/resources/Key%20docs/framework_%20suppliers.pdf
9 Information on LNI is available at : http://www.c2kni.org.uk/
|
