______________________________________________________________________ Handout from Profs. John Fothergill, Gilly Salmon & Jaideep Mukherjee University of Leicester 1. 2. Original rationale: substantial internal consultation and self-reflection to inform future planning review of early stages of new e-learning strategy and ways of measuring progress in the future ideas for developing new e-learning programmes opportunity to contribute to and learn from other institutions Modifications to the rationale in the light of experience? We were disappointed that no information has been shared with the three other Universities in our group or between the eleven other institutions involved in the pilot. 3. 4. Anticipated scope of the e-benchmarking activity, e.g. institution, faculty, department: Whole institution plus selected slices which included Distance and blended learning provision Development of new missions and markets The three CETL-s awarded to the University of Leicester and its partners The Leicester contribution to the Leicester-Warwick Medical Schools and to the UK Health Education Partnership Actual scope of the e-benchmarking activity and why? Whole institution plus selected slices which included: Distance Learning provision (almost all of Leicester’s provision could now be considered ‘blended’ ) Development of new missions and markets The three CETLs awarded to the University of Leicester and its partners The Leicester contribution to the Leicester-Warwick Medical Schools ______________________________________________________________________ HEA e-Learning Benchmarking Pilot Internal Dissemination Workshop Wed 21 June 2006 Page 1 of 4 ______________________________________________________________________ 5. Who was involved and what was their role? Person Title Prof Gilly Salmon Jaideep Mukherjee PVC Learning & Teaching Prof of E-learning RA in e-learning David Christmas Director of DL Admin Richard Taylor Director of Marketing Prof John Fothergill Dr Richard Mobbs Michael Corin Dr Annette Cashmore Dr Matthew Higgins Prof Rachel Gibson Roger Dickinson Dr Joanne Badge Dr Hazel Derbyshire 6. Head of Learning technologies Deputy University Secretary GENIE (CETL director) Deputy Director of DL, UoL, Management Sch. Professor of New Media Director, DL, UoL Department of Media and Communications Web Resources Development Officer Manager of eLearning for the Leicester Warwick Medical Schools Role Chair Steering Group Project Director Project Manager Steering Group & Project Team Steering Group & Project Team Project Team Project Team Project Team Steering Group & Project Team Steering Group & Project Team Contributor to ‘Slices’ project Contributor to ‘Slices’ project Contributor to ‘Slices’ project Affordances from taking part in the e-benchmarking exercise? Welcomed by e-learning sub-committee and departments as an appropriate review towards the end of the first year of implementation of a new e-learning strategy Reports to go forward to a wide variety of formal committees and informal meetings in the autumn term for discussion Identified strengths and weaknesses not previously surfaced and articulated Provided vehicle for ongoing discussion around a wide variety of elearning issues Identified increasing and deepening needs to take account of the development of e-learning in the University’s strategic discussions ______________________________________________________________________ HEA e-Learning Benchmarking Pilot Internal Dissemination Workshop Wed 21 June 2006 Page 2 of 4 ______________________________________________________________________ 7. Constraints, institutional reactions, unexpected issues? The exercise was one of internal benchmarking, we had no opportunity to explore findings with others Despite high level of commitment, difficult to get senior people together – often individual meetings were needed Evidence collection took place during AUT industrial action – some people’s priorities were different of course, however, we did achieve all that was needed in the end 8. Would you do anything differently if you were to start again? We would establish a benchmarking club and ways of working with others from the very beginning. We would establish more ways of negotiating criteria that were relevant to a research-led highly autonomous university 9. On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being best) rate your experience of ebenchmarking – why? 8 – mainly good if demanding experience, fantastic to get so many people at different levels to focus on e-learning issues, so process has been ‘everything’ with benchmarking as a vehicle. 10. On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being best) rate the e-benchmarking tools you used – why? 6 – as a pilot the Pick and Mix approach was satisfactory. We would have preferred: Ways of changing the very embedded values in the criteria; there is more than one way of achieving progress and success in most of the benchmarked areas Ways of taking it beyond internal opinions and outside - to compare and contrast and learn more from others ______________________________________________________________________ HEA e-Learning Benchmarking Pilot Internal Dissemination Workshop Wed 21 June 2006 Page 3 of 4 ______________________________________________________________________ 11. What next? We would like to share results and processes with other pilot benchmark institutions ADELIE pathfinder project: benchmarking surfaced two key challenges for Leicester: designing for e-learning and teaching online through student activities. Our pathfinder bid addresses these We will run a mini benchmarking exercise at the end of our pathfinder as part of year-two in the implementation of our e-learning strategy 12. Lessons for e-benchmarking phase 1 institutions and the wider sector? It is essential that future exercises enable institutions to share information, compare themselves with each other and discuss ways forward: benchmarking is of less value when the benchmarks are a set of theoretical constructs and not calibrated or shared; it is best when experiences are shared openly, in a spirit of cooperation. ______________________________________________________________________ HEA e-Learning Benchmarking Pilot Internal Dissemination Workshop Wed 21 June 2006 Page 4 of 4