A UK Case Study - Technology Enhances Educational Experiences in the University of
Glamorgan
Esyin Chew, Norah Jones, Haydn Blackey
Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching (CELT),
University of Glamorgan, United Kingdom, CF37 1DL.
{echew, njones2,hblackey}@glam.ac.uk
Abstract— This paper provides a critical exploration of an
institutional case study in the UK. The University of
Glamorgan is one of a number of UK Higher Educational
Institutions whish has taken a whole institutional commitment
to blended learning. The paper use case study research method
to report the educational technologies that have implemented
across the institution with qualitative experiences and views.
The case study aimed to provide insights which can be
compared and contrasted with the experiences in other
institutions to inform researchers who are attempting related
development. The research also recognises the disciplinary
differences and the issue of “technology in education”. It is
further argued that researchers must shift the focus from
technology in education to “education in technology” in the
emphasis of education and pedagogy than technology alone.
an add-on to a classroom lecture nor an online course. It is
the fundamental redesign and an optimal (re)design
approach to enhance and extend learning by rethinking and
restructuring teaching and learning [3]. The interpretation of
Vaughan and Garrison is notable simply because it
addresses and expands Laurillard’s [7] idea on refining the
learning and teaching in higher education by embedding
educational technology. The University of Glamorgan has
adopted such view of “refining the learning and teaching by
embedding technology” with the lesson learnt from ECW
project and have committed to an institutional strategy for
blended learning. This research is a brief case study of what
the university’s practices and experiences on blended
learning to evidence the above claim.
Keywords- blended learning, higher education, educational
technology, technology in education
I.
INTRODUCTION
Most often, e-learning in higher education in the early
days refers to web-based learning and teaching materials
and e-tivities [1]. The University of Glamorgan (UoG)
started a large scale e-learning project – E-College Wales
(ECW) £6m EU project to stimulate entrepreneurial activity
in Wales [2]. The ECW project indicated that the most
effective delivery is a blended delivery model, not a
complete e-learning mode. What Glamorgan learnt from
ECW project is that building on the vast knowledge and
skill to improve learning and teaching using what they have
experienced from ECW to embed blended learning across
the institution [3].
Put very crudely, blended learning simply means a
mixture of face-to-face learning and teaching with some
online activities. Blended learning is the integration of
online with face-to-face instruction in a planned,
pedagogically valuable manner [4]. It is cautioned that such
simple substitution and enrichment of face-to-face for
electronic learning is unlikely to be successful in higher
education [5]. However, Vaughan and Garrison [6] argued
with a remarkable definition for blended learning - it is the
thoughtful integration of face-to-face classroom and
Internet based learning or technology-mediated opportunity.
They further argue that the thoughtful integration is neither
II.
RESEARCH METHOD
Education is a complicated process and therefore a
research method which is flexible and process-oriented is
needed [8]. The present study is different from normal
computing or technological research as it resides across
education and computing. The research incorporated a
qualitative research method, case study, to investigate
current institutional phenomena within ICT contexts
especially when the boundaries between phenomena and
contexts are not clear [9]. 12 academics and students were
interviewed and the educational technologies used in the
university was observed and noted for in-depth case analysis.
III.
EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGIES IMPLEMENTED
A three-year project to embed blended learning across the
university’s provision is being carried out based on the
continuum of blended learning:
Figure 1. Jones’ Continum of Blended Learning [2]
Chew, E., Jones, N. and Blackey, H. (2009) ‘A UK Case Study - Technology Enhances Educational Experiences in the University of Glamorgan’ The IEEE
International Conference on Future Computer and Communication, Kuala Lumpur, 3-5 April, 2009 [IEEE No. 09PR3591; ISBN 978-1-4244-3754-2].
The continuum is a subject dependent and flexible model
which acts as a guideline to individual disciplines in the
university. It provides clear practical overview to the
institution that wishes to adopt blended learning. This model
provides the overall picture especially the choices that can
be made in producing simple but direct blended learning
experiences. Jones [10] reports that as a result of ECW the
university invested in a centralised support unit - the Centre
for Excellence in Learning and Teaching [11] that
comprises staff who have a breadth of professional and
operational experience in blended learning, education and
the use of information and communication technology
(ICT). The establishment of this multi-disciplinary team is
proficient in developing and supporting pedagogy and the
development and technology to enhance learning practice. It
consists of the blended learning team of educational experts
and its centralised ICT support department, the Learning
and Corporate Support Services.
A few educational technologies are widely used in the
university. All of them are supported by the centralised
multi-disciplinary team,
both instrumentally and
pedagogically:
university. Technologies below are the three highly
recommended assessment tools for Glamorgan academics to
embed in their teaching practices.
 Blackboard built-in assessment facilities: online
discussion board for summative assessment (e.g.
discussion and reflections) and enable academics to
develop and deliver MCQ test.
 Questionmark Perception: assessment and survey
management system that empower academics to
author, schedule, deliver, report and automate the
assessment.
 TurnitinUK: an efficient and effective UK-wide
plagiarism system for self-assessment and to
enhance the tedious assessment mechanism. The
originality reports generated in a short period
provide impressive learning and teaching
experiences for both academics and students.
Academics and students could use TurnitinUK
within the Blackboard environment or via the
public link (http://submit.ac.uk).
A. Blackboard
Blackboard is the widely used Virtual Learning
Environment among academic and student cohorts in UoG.
Most of the course materials can be accessed via Blackboard
and it acts as a basic, easy access and organised learning
materials repository and delivery platform for learning,
teaching and assessment in Glamorgan. It also offers useful
personalised communication tools, i.e. announcement,
discussion board, private/group emails and online lecture
hall.
Figure 3. Screen shot for two online assessmsent tools
Figure 2. Screen shot of Blackboard in Glamorgan
B. Online Assessment Tools
Online assessment, both formative and summative, is
currently one of the key strategies promoted by the
Figure 4. Screen shot for Turn it In Originality Report
Chew, E., Jones, N. and Blackey, H. (2009) ‘A UK Case Study - Technology Enhances Educational Experiences in the University of Glamorgan’ The IEEE
International Conference on Future Computer and Communication, Kuala Lumpur, 3-5 April, 2009 [IEEE No. 09PR3591; ISBN 978-1-4244-3754-2].
C. Social Software and Web 2.0 Technologies
Many organisations today seem to recognise the value
and potential in the emerging Web 2.0 technologies. In two
recent surveys, 89% of the CIOs said they had adopted at
least one or more Web 2.0 technologies and saw its high
business value [12]; more than 75% of senior executives plan
to increase the investment for the social software as they are
strategic [13]. Glamorgan recognise the opportunities of
social software and made an attempt to take the educational
advantage out of them.
Web 2.0 technologies and social software such as blog,
wiki, Facebook, Ning and etc increasingly used by the
academics and students in Glamorgan, both socially and
academically. Socially they enable better communication,
scholarly network and peer support; academically they
provide an alternative assessment tool. For instance wiki is
used for information sharing or publishing students’ group
assignment; blog is used for learning journey and reflection.
Such innovation is still undergoing the development and
testing process.
materials.
put up is line and mean, not much text, you don’t
want pages and pages of words but a picture worth
a thousand words.” ~Interviewee C8
Social Software Blog act as a
powerful tool for
student
monitoring and
holistic
assessment:
“I give you an example: if I set a piece of group
work and I ask them to go away to do this. I can’t
see how that group is functioning because I am not
with them. I don’t know if there is a very dominant
character or two of them aren’t doing anything. If I
monitor their progression with something like
online discussion board or they have to keep a blog
for their experiences, I can see who is participating
and who isn’t, I can see who is giving leadership
and how the leadership is being challenged and
where the conflict within the team. And none of
that is open to me in the traditional situation where
they just gone off and done the work. So I think
they are very powerful tools.” ~ Interviewee C7
On the other hand, there are confirming and disconfirming
experiences evidenced from the research interviews:
TABLE II.
D. Other Educational Technologies
Leading edge developments such as interactive workbooks,
reusable learning objects (developed in Flash) [14],
simulations and game-based learning such as GlamStart
[15] and hand held electronic voting are implemented in the
university.
IV.
EXPERIENCES, CHALLENGES AND REFLECTIONS
Academics’ experiences
Confirming
Experiences
Blended learning promotes formative feedback, attractive
visual aid, soft skills evaluation and holistic learning. Such
powerful changes and enhancement are evidenced by the
following experiences:
TABLE I.
Descriptive Experiences
Blackboard
“Blackboard is good because from my perspective
as a tutor, I like having the history of all the
messages. I like to being one pack of someone
development and to see how they developed over
time…So I think you use Blackboard to monitor
the development, I think that’s a very powerful
mechanism.” ~ Interviewee C7
1. Blackboard:
- Accessible, flexible and organised learning materials
repository and delivery platform.
- Blackboard templates provide standardisation and
convenience.
- Engaging dialogue and interaction
- Powerful tool for recording history of students’
development.
2. Evidence “technologies enhance learning and
teaching” by positive experiences and successful case
studies as described in Table I.
3. Disciplinary tailored and peers support result in greater
interest and evangelise the “unconverted” group.
WHAT AND HOW TECHNOLOGY ENHANCES LEARNING AND
TEACHING EXPERIENCES
Technology
CONFIRMING AND DISCONFIRMING EXPERIENCES
Disconfirming
Experiences
1. Blackboard:
- Resistant to Blackboard template due to rigidness.
- Problem with the accessibility at the early stage.
- Issue with the variation of usage among the academics.
- Support issues due to ICT competency and disciplinary
differences.
-Communicative and technical problem between
academics and support team –technologists.
- Webpage visit rates and duration is an indicator but do
not equivalent to “learning”.
“I have used Blackboard as support material and
engaging dialogue with students. I found that very
helpful.” ~ Interviewee C5
2. It is not working as expected due to technical
competency and technological constraint - expectation
versus reality.
Both formative
and summative
feedback
enhanced by
online assessment
application
“I am quite excited about the prospect to be able to
use Questionmark Perception…I would like to be
able to use something like that to give students
formative feedback and summative feedback as
well…I am quite interested in the technology that
can be interactive.” ~ Interviewee C2
3. Disciplinary varies would cause contrasting experience
for designing or using a particular educational
technology and issue 1-3 above.
Multimedia
presentation such
as Flash
enhances textbased learning
“One thing that impressed me from the E-college
Wales project is the flash part in one of the
material. No words needed, just flash fading in…
When I was teaching the instructional design, the
basic is when you are using the computer, what you
4. Time was spent on technical problem solving rather
than curriculum.
5. Difficult to keep up-to-date to the best and suitable
educational technology.
6. Value face-to-face (f2f) more than communication in
the virtual world due to the hidden messages “hides”
behind the technology.
Chew, E., Jones, N. and Blackey, H. (2009) ‘A UK Case Study - Technology Enhances Educational Experiences in the University of Glamorgan’ The IEEE
International Conference on Future Computer and Communication, Kuala Lumpur, 3-5 April, 2009 [IEEE No. 09PR3591; ISBN 978-1-4244-3754-2].
A few major
experiences:





lessons learnt from the
Glamorgan
A multidisciplinary and centralised support unit or centre is
essential to provide advice and support up-to-date and the bestsuited educational technology for academics.
Disciplinary differences must be recognised and so disciplinary
and personalised support for the best-suited educational
technology is a must.
Time consuming and technical competence may be obstacles for
academics to embed technology in teaching practices. However,
once academics have tasted the benefits of blended learning or
gone through the thoughtfulness for students’ benefits, they
would be ‘converted’ to actively engage with blended learning.
Peer recommendations and good case studies act as exemplar
would be drivers for the above ‘conversion’.
Both academics and students value f2f and perceive that f2f can
never be fully replaced by complete e-learning. Therefore
blended learning, the thoughtful combination of f2f and elearning has widely used - e-enhanced and e-focused in Jones’
continuum are prevalent (refer to Figure 1).
Blended learning at Glamorgan has brought discourse,
revisiting and rethinking learning and teaching. An
academic even commented that educational technology
“change educators’ attitude and values on teaching and
learning practice like Trojan Horse!” However, technology
is not the focal point of the change but learning is;
technology shall not be “threatening” in a way that
“everyone has to embed”. Such threatening would definitely
upset academics. In the context of blended learning,
academics are, therefore, not necessary to adopt the
provided or suggested technology after a thoughtful
reflection. Two experienced academics in both higher
education and blended learning asserted:
“...blended learning has allowed people to actually say, ‘No I am not
going to use this technology because I believe my current teaching
practice is better and why it is better.’ As long as we achievie that kind
of personal reflections, and we get people to engage with blended
learning, this is exciting for the university and also exciting for me.”
~Interviewee C6
“Yes, none threatening. If they don’t work, don’t make them feel it
was someway that form, you know make it non threatening so that
there isn’t any...sometime you have to fail to find out what works.
And I think, that’s probably a lot of pressures, I think a lot of people
think that to do blended learning it has to be like e-college. And it
doesn’t.” ~ Interviewee C7
On the other hand, computer scientists and technologists
are closely related in their view of technology as the process
of material construction based on systematic engineering
knowledge of how to design artifacts; where as
educationists and social scientists typically view technology
in broader terms, extending what is understood of material
construction to take educational social significance into
consideration” [16]. Such disciplinary difference was
evidenced in this case study in a noteworthy insight. For
example academics from science-based discipline have the
instrumental advantage to pick up new educational
technology and at the mean time less support and wider
flexibility required by them. On the other hand, academics
from social science-based discipline may need more
technical support and they would have wider social and
educational considerations for blended learning, for instance
the rigidness of Blackboard templates or the disappointment
of the “expectation versus technical constraint” may be
barriers for them.
Brabazon contended that money is being thrown at
technology in education, not education in technology [17].
The authors expand the idea of technology in education and
education in technology in the following table:
TABLE III.
Priority and
Focus
Philosophy
Being with
Technology
[16]
Glamorgan’s
experiences
TECHNOLOGY IN EDUCATION VERSUS EDUCATION IN
TECHNOLOGY
“Technology in
Education”
Technology – what and
how
EPT - engineering
philosophy of
technology
Begins with the
justification of
technology or an
analysis of the nature of
technology itself – its
concepts, its methods,
its cognitive structures
and objectives
manifestations.
Stereotypically
recognise educational
technology a “blanket
solution” for all
disciplines.
Academics or
researchers merely focus
on the instrumental
issues such as technical
design and operational
process.
Social science-based
academics are reluctant
to jump into the ‘pool of
educational
technologies’ – resistant
to the innovative
learning and teaching
practice.
“Education in Technology”
Pedagogy and education
HPT - humanities philosophy
of technology
Seeks by contrast insights
into the meaning of
technology – its relation to
the trans-technical: art and
literature, humanities and
socio-cultural issues – begins
with non-technical aspect of
the human world (in this case
education) and considers how
technology may (or may not)
fit in or correspond.
The thoughtful revisiting and
redesign of learning and
teaching may or may not
lead to the uses of certain
educational technology.
Academics or researchers
focus on both instrumental
and pedagogical
considerations.
Educational technology
would not be threatening and
academics from various
disciplines are comfortable to
embed blended learning
where necessary.
Most often, current research and practice on “technology in
education” emphasis on technology over education. The
focal point of educationists and social scientists is
“education in technology”; whereas technologists and
computer scientists would spend more effort in “technology
in education”. The authors argue that blended learning
should be “education in technology” rather than “technology
in Education” from Glamorgan’s experiences. The value of
Chew, E., Jones, N. and Blackey, H. (2009) ‘A UK Case Study - Technology Enhances Educational Experiences in the University of Glamorgan’ The IEEE
International Conference on Future Computer and Communication, Kuala Lumpur, 3-5 April, 2009 [IEEE No. 09PR3591; ISBN 978-1-4244-3754-2].
an educational technology reflects the values of who use it,
in this case - those academics. More effort would be put into
blended leaning if one has the thoughtfulness for students’
benefits. The value of an educational technology does not
reflect the value of how make it as often there is a gap
between technologies and academics as described in Table
III. Therefore, “education in technology” or blended
learning is the area that technologists shall pursue since
there is no blanket approach in education. After all,
disciplinary tailored blended learning is substantive.
V.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
CONCLUSION
The implementation of Blackboard, online assessment
tools, social software and other educational technologies
have enhanced the learning and teaching experiences in the
university. The Glamorgan research interviewees’ responses
to these blended learning initiatives are relatively positive.
They perceived such development have added value to their
learning and teaching experiences across the institution:
“I think it’s very exciting. It’s very exciting because the university
was taking the opportunity not just to change in technology
enhancement but to change the learning and teaching. And using
blended learning, like the trojan horse... get people thinking about
blended learning, and get them to start talking about all of the ways
they do learning and teaching, not just as the technology
enhancement...it’s something which is quite new to the culture in the
Univeristy of Glamorgan.” ~ Interviewee C6
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
While the university is reaping benefits from technology
or social software in education, some educational
professionals or researchers may remain sceptical. They
view these tools as, in a crude manner, not more than
alternative delivery platform, entertainment, facilitating
participation and collaboration, or merely one layer of
functionality for next-generation e-learning portals.
Challenges and problems such as pedagogical and
disciplinary issues, privacy risk, management control and
learning performance have been raised and debated.
Technology in education has been an innovative and
extensive field of both educational and technological study
since the last decade. Current research and practice on
technology in education, however, emphasis on technology
over education. The research recommends that future related
research and practice shall draw a distinction between
technology for education and for operational purposes. The
selection of technology must be related to the aims of
learning and teaching, and pedagogy, not the limits of the
technology. When the emphasis is place on meeting the
educational purposes with thoughtful integration of
educational technology, the result is no longer technology in
education but education in technology, or what the authors
claim, blended learning.
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
[16]
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge the support from
the Blended Learning Support Services, Learning and
Corporate Support Services and the rich information
provided by the University of Glamorgan.
[17]
G. Salmon,
E-tivities: The Key to Active Online
Learning, London: Kogan Page, 2002.
N. Jones, “Chapter 13: E-College Wales, A Case Study
of Blended Learning”, in Handbook of Blended
Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, C. J.
Bonk and C. R. Graham, Eds. San Francisco, CA:
Pfeiffer Publishing, 2006.
E. Chew, N. Jones and H. Blackey, “Embedding
Blended Learning Across a Higher Education
Institution”, Proceedings of the First Annual Blended
Learning Conference: Blended Learning – Promoting
Dialogue in Innovation and Practice, Hatfield:
University of Hertfordshire Press, pp. 64-73, 2006.
I. E. Allen, J. Seaman and R. Garrett, Blended In: The
Extent and Promise of Blended Education in the United
States. Needham, MA: Sloan-Consortium, 2007.
M. Stubb,I. Martin and L. Endlar, “The Structuration
of Blending Learning: Putting holistic design principles
into practice”, British Journal of Educational
Technology. Vol. 37, Issue 2, pp.163-175, 2006.
N. D. Vaughan and D. R. Garrison, “Creating Cognitive
Presence in a Blended Faculty Development
Community”, Internet and Higher Education, Vol. 8,
Issue 1, 1-12, 2005.
D. Laurillard, Rethinking University Teaching: A
Conversational Framework for the Effective Use of
Learning Technologies (2nd Edition). London:
Routledge, 2002.
G. Anderson, Fundamentals of educational Research
(2nd Edition). London: RoutlegeFalmer, 2004.
R. K. Yin, Application of Case Study Research (2nd
Edition), Applied Social Research Methods Series, 34,
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2003.
N. Jones, ‘The Disruptive Effect of Technology: a
University Case Study’, in Blended Learning, J. Fong
and F. L. Wang, Eds. Singapore: Pearson Prentice Hall,
pp. 114-122, 2007.
CELT, Centre of Excellent for Learning and Teaching,
University of Glamorgan. Retrieved 22 November 2008
from: http://celt.glam.ac.uk
G. O. Young, Efficiency Gains and Competitive
Pressures Drive Enterprise Web 2.0 Adoption.”, 2007.
http://www.forrester.com/Research/Document/Excerpt/
0,7211,41794,00.html
McKinsey Global Survey, How Businesses Are Using
Web 2.0, McKinsey Quarterly, June, 2007.
http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/links/26068.
LO CELT, Reusable Learning Object, Centre of
Excellent for Learning and Teaching, University of
Glamorgan. Retrieved 4 December 2008 from:
http://celt.glam.ac.uk/Support-Resources/?c=ReusableLearning-Materials
Glamstart, University of Glamorgan. Retrieved 4
December 2008
from:http://gettingstarted.glam.ac.uk/glamstart/
R. Luppicini, “A Systems Definition of Educational
Technology in Society”, Educational Technology &
Society, Vol. 8, Issue 3, 103-109, 2005.
T. Brabazon, The University of Goolge: Education in
the (post) Information Age. Hampshire: Ashgate
Publishing, 2007.
Chew, E., Jones, N. and Blackey, H. (2009) ‘A UK Case Study - Technology Enhances Educational Experiences in the University of Glamorgan’ The IEEE
International Conference on Future Computer and Communication, Kuala Lumpur, 3-5 April, 2009 [IEEE No. 09PR3591; ISBN 978-1-4244-3754-2].