LTC13-P33
6 June 2013
Learn Minimum Presence Audit May 2013
Background
In 2012 a new ‘Minimum Module Online Presence’ was agreed by the E-learning Advisory
Group (ELAG) and LTC, replacing the previous version which had been in place since 2008.
(See Appendix 2.) The new version introduced modest additional requirements, notably
around the use of the University Reading List System, the General Announcements feature,
and contact details. Between August and early October 2012 the Teaching Centre Elearning team audited every School-owned module on Learn11, as actioned in the Elearning Implementation Plan.
Following the last audit, the Minimum Presence requirements were discussed at LTC and at
ASPSC, as a result of which the contact details requirement was removed, and the reading
list requirement was clarified.
During May 2013, the E-learning team audited every taught module on Learn, excluding
those with 5 or fewer students currently enrolled. By the time this report is presented to LTC
on June 6th, each ADT will have received the full audit spreadsheet for each of his/her
departments.
Caveats



While the audit was as objective as possible, it was conducted by a number of people
and there was some room for subjective interpretation. As previously, we have tried
to normalise the data as far as possible.
Where the compliance rates are low, for most departments the pass rate would be
significantly higher if modules where there is only a single point of non-compliance
were passed.
The pass rates from the last audit are not included in the table below as these would
be misleading (because the requirements have changed).
Areas of Improvement / Good Practice







The auditing team agree that there has been a significant improvement overall.
There are exemplary modules on Learn in most areas.
Some of the exemplary modules are ‘owned’ by senior staff; this is not just the
domain of new lecturers.
The University Reading List System is now well-used in most areas.
The General Announcements noticeboard is now well-used in many areas.
Departmental office modules, although not the focus of the audit, are very helpful to
students.
Use of the mechanisms supporting online submission (eg the Turnitin assignment
activity) is growing.
Learn Minimum Presence Report to LTC 6th June 2013
Page | 1
LTC13-P33
6 June 2013


Despite the removal of the contact details requirement, many module tutors do still
choose to provide additional information about office hours etc.
There is evidence of particular attention having been given to project modules in
some areas, with generic resources / reading lists added.
Areas of Concern


Many of the failures, across different schools / departments, are ‘single-point’
failures, eg the reading list is missing, and could be easily rectified.
As noted in the last audit report, in terms of the student experience, there is still a
huge degree of inconsistency even within programmes, which must lead students to
question why this should be so.
Areas Requiring Urgent Attention


There are still far too many ‘ghost’ modules on Learn for whatever reason: modules
with no students and / or no content.
We have NOT systematically audited resources for possible copyright infringement,
because this would be an impossible task given the enormous quantity of resources
on the system, but we have flagged up resources which concern us when we have
spotted them. It should be noted that, although we have tried to put on central staff
development sessions on copyright with the Library, take-up has been poor.
Specific Learn Recommendations



Modules that do not have any registered students for whatever reason should ideally
be put into the archive until they are again needed. This would remove a lot of
modules, particularly in the Business School.
More use could be made of the range of activity types in Learn (forums, wikis,
quizzes, etc). For the most part, Learn module pages (even ‘good’ ones) consist of
little more than a list of resources.
In general, module tutors should give consideration to how they can make the Learn
module page an integral part of the curriculum, rather than merely an administrative
adjunct.
General Recommendations


There should be some kind of reward / recognition for module tutors who take the
trouble to provide their students with well-thought-out Learn modules. Our approach
should be based on incentivisation rather than compliance monitoring.
Training / staff development is crucial. Over the last year, our wide range of
scheduled staff development workshops (on Learn and other learning technologies)
have not recruited as well as they have done previously.
Learn Minimum Presence Report to LTC 6th June 2013
Page | 2
LTC13-P33
6 June 2013

Learn is an essential system and the focus of student expectations in terms of the
use of learning technologies. Given that take-up of both central and school
workshops has been poor over the last year, consideration should be given again to
making introductory and refresher training mandatory.
Table: May 2013 Learn Minimum Presence Audit, By Department
Dept / School
AAE
Arts
Business School
Chem Eng
Chemistry
Civils
Comp Science
Design School
Economics
Elec
English and Drama
Geography
Information Science
Materials
Maths
PHIR
Physics
Social Sciences
SSEHS
Wolfson
Total Mods Audited*
88
66
258
57
54
191
67
88
67
95
111
62
61
67
66
111
48
93
169
122
Overall Pass
23%
58%
29%
4%
31%
37%
16%
76%
42%
33%
60%
79%
25%
31%
58%
92%
48%
87%
15%
44%
Part A Pass**
21%
41%
53%
22%
22%
48%
38%
83%
60%
83%
53%
83%
0%
57%
57%
100%
73%
92%
19%
50%
*For each department, all taught modules were audited excluding those with 5 or fewer
students enrolled.
**The Part A pass rate is included here because when the last audit was presented to LTC in
September 12, the PVC(T) asked AD(T)s to focus on improving the compliance rate of Part
A modules.
Learn Minimum Presence Report to LTC 6th June 2013
Page | 3