Project Digidol
BASELINE 1
Baseline for Digital Literacy in learning and teaching
Project Information
Project Identifier
To be completed by JISC
Project Title
Digidol: Developing Digital Literacy
Project Hashtag
#digidol
Start Date
1 July 2011
Lead Institution
Cardiff University
Project Director
Joe Nicholls
Project Manager
Joy Head
Contact email
Headja1@cardiff.ac.uk
Partner Institutions
N/A
Project
End Date
31 July 2013
Webpage http://digidol.cardiff.ac.uk/
URL
Programme Name
E-Learning programme
Document History
Version
Date
Comments
0.1
08/12/11
First draft structure
0.2
19/01/12
Merge Semi Structure interview content
0.3
23/01/12
Steering Group Review
1.0
27/01/12
Revised and sent to JISC
Page 2 of 80
Table of Contents
1.
Overview ....................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 Cardiff University ............................................................................................................ 5
1.2 Project Summary............................................................................................................ 6
1.3 Document Summary ...................................................................................................... 6
1.4 Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 7
1.5 Methodology .................................................................................................................. 7
2
Strategy and Policy ...................................................................................................... 9
2.1 Welsh Landscape......................................................................................................... 10
2.2 Cardiff University Strategy ............................................................................................ 10
2.3 Education Strategy ....................................................................................................... 11
2.4 The Digital and Social Media Strategy.......................................................................... 12
2.5 INSRV Information Literacy Strategy ............................................................................ 12
2.6 Student Charter ............................................................................................................ 13
3
Infrastructure & Access ............................................................................................. 14
3.1 Physical Infrastructure .................................................................................................. 14
3.2 Mobile Infrastructure .................................................................................................... 15
3.3 Mobile Access .............................................................................................................. 16
3.4 Cardiff Portal ................................................................................................................ 17
3.5 Learning Central........................................................................................................... 18
3.6 Supported Software and Electronic Resources ............................................................ 20
3.7 Social Media and External Technologies ...................................................................... 20
4
Support ....................................................................................................................... 22
4.1 IT User Support ............................................................................................................ 22
4.2 Information Literacy ...................................................................................................... 22
4.3 Learning and Teaching Support ................................................................................... 25
4.4 Technology Enhanced Learning ................................................................................... 25
4.5 IT User Training ........................................................................................................... 26
4.6 Wider Literacies ........................................................................................................... 27
5
Processes ................................................................................................................... 28
5.1 Staff Development Processes ...................................................................................... 28
5.2 Student Development Processes ................................................................................. 30
6
Practices ..................................................................................................................... 34
6.1 Course Management .................................................................................................... 34
6.2 Technology and Tasks ................................................................................................. 37
6.3 Fragmented Practice .................................................................................................... 44
Page 3 of 80
7
Skills ........................................................................................................................... 44
7.1 Recognition .................................................................................................................. 44
7.2 Student IT Skills ........................................................................................................... 45
7.3 Student Basic Skills ...................................................................................................... 45
7.4 Staff IT Skills ................................................................................................................ 47
8
Attitudes ..................................................................................................................... 47
8.1 Cultural Attitudes to Digital Literacy .............................................................................. 47
8.2 Staff Attitudes............................................................................................................... 52
8.3 Student Attitudes .......................................................................................................... 57
9
Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 58
Appendices ....................................................................................................................... 61
Appendix A. Case Study Learning Literacies in MSc Computing ........................................ 61
Appendix B. Review of the educational requirements of schools at Cardiff University ........ 64
Appendix C. Student Responses to the 2011 NUSS Survey in relation to the use of
technology (by school) ........................................................................................................ 76
Appendix D. References ..................................................................................................... 79
Page 4 of 80
1. Overview
1.1
Cardiff University
Cardiff University received its Royal charter in 1883 and is a member of the Russell Group of
UK universities. The University currently has 28,842 students, including 20,694
undergraduates and 8,148 Postgraduates. The university is also made up of 6,154 staff
members (including 2,149 full time and 949 part time academic and research staff and is
spread across 27 schools and 5 directorates (Cardiff University, 2011a). A full list of Cardiff
University academic schools is included below with embedded links to the school websites.
This initial baseline work reviews the Digital Literacy of teaching staff and taught students in
Cardiff University across the academic schools listed below. Subsequent baseline reviews
are planned which will look at the Digital Literacy of researchers and administrative staff
across the University.
Abbreviation School Name
Abbreviation
& Web link
& Web link
School Name
ARCHI
Architecture
CLAWS
Law
BIOSI
Biosciences
LEARN
Lifelong Learning
CARBS
Business
MATHS
Mathematics
CHEMY
Chemistry
MEDIC
Medicine
CPLAN
City and Regional Planning
MUSIC
Music
COMSC
Computer
SONMS
Nursing and Midwifery Studies
Science
&
Informatics
DENTL
Dentistry
OPTOM
Optometry & Vision Sciences
EARTH
Earth and Ocean Sciences
PHRMY
Pharmacy
and
Pharmaceutical
Sciences
ENGIN
Engineering
PHYSX
Physics and Astronomy
ENCAP
English,
PGMDE
Postgraduate Medical and Dental
Communication
and Philosophy
Education
EUROS
European Studies
PSYCH
Psychology
SOHCS
Healthcare Studies
SOCSI
Social Sciences
SHARE
History, Archaeology and
WELSH
Welsh
Religion
JOMEC
Journalism
Media
and
Cultural Studies
Page 5 of 80
1.2
Project Summary
Digital Literacy is defined as “those capabilities which fit an individual for living,
learning and working in a digital society: for example, the skills to use digital tools
to undertake academic research, writing and critical thinking; as part of personal
development planning; and as a way of showcasing achievements” (JISC, 2011).
“Digidol aims to embed and align processes and practices that enable the development of
Digital Literacy amongst staff and students across Cardiff University. It is understood that
this will be as much about changing attitudes and beliefs, as it will be about realising
practical knowledge and skills.” (Digidol, 2011)
The project is funded to last until August 2013 and will align and develop integrated Digital
Literacy provision across the university. Key to this will be the development of staff skills and
encouraging innovation in delivery models across the university.
Baselining staff and
student perceptions of Digital Literacy in learning and teaching will instruct the project as it
develops. For more information on Digidol, please see the project website1.
1.3
Document Summary
This document is intended as an initial snapshot in order to baseline attitudes and
behaviours amongst teaching staff and taught students across academic schools in Cardiff
University at the start of the project in 2011. It will explore how Digital Literacy requirements
are currently met and identify candidate practices, process and mechanisms within schools
that could be adapted to better promote and engage staff in Digital Literacy related
resources and activities. Information gathered will be a valuable asset in guiding the project
as it develops. A second baseline document is also to be produced by the end of March
2012 to establish an understanding of Digital Literacy practices amongst support staff and
researchers.
The baseline report will be used as an evaluation tool when the integration of Digital Literacy
across teaching and learning is explored in the post project review. The document will also
to contribute to JISC’s synthesis report defining the 'starting point' for the sector as a whole,
against which the programme can be evaluated and which can also inform planning at
programme and funder/policy level.
1
http://digidol.cardiff.ac.uk/
Page 6 of 80
1.3.1 Distribution
The baseline report will be distributed amongst the JISC programme team, the Digidol
project team and the project steering group. The document will also be circulated to key
personnel across Cardiff University in order to share current practice and ideas across the
university. Reports from the project will be submitted to JISC will be made available on the
support wiki, i.e. they will be available to other projects and to the programme team but not
the general public. Outputs from all the projects in the JISC: Developing Digital Literacy
programme will contribute towards a synthesis report. This will provide feedback on key
trends and findings across the sector. A draft will be circulated to projects for at least one
iteration of consultation/verification before wider distribution.
1.4
Evaluation
The baseline information will be used to help evaluate impact of the project as it develops.
Unlike some of the other projects in the JISC programme, Digidol does not aim to directly
supply Digital Literacy provision in the institution; therefore, an audit of current student skills
would not be an effective approach for evaluation.
The baseline will be used to evaluate:

Potential areas for process alignment

Potential areas for staff development and support

Potential areas for developing Digital Literacy provision to students through existing
delivery mechanisms
Qualitative data will be gathered through interviews with staff and students from across all
schools. This will be used to inform the project as it seeks to align Digital Literacy provision
within the University. Its findings will be used to guide the development of practice in areas
that staff and students identify as being of the most value.
1.5
Methodology
This baseline explores Digital Literacy perceptions and behaviours at an organisational and
an individual level. The wider organisational level is analysed through strategic
documentation. This report also looks at the broad quantitative data gathered through the
NUSS survey and from data gathered by the Learning and Teaching Support Unit within
Registry.
Page 7 of 80
In addition to this information, The project has gathered data through a series of in-depth,
semi-structured interviews conducted with teaching staff and students from each of Cardiff
University’s 27 schools2. Sessions were recorded and selectively transcribed to identify
comments illustrative of current thinking and practice within the school (although desirable, a
more thorough thematic analysis of the findings was not possible due to time constraints).
The format of the semi-structured interviews was guided by Beetham and Sharpe’s Digital
Literacy Framework (Beetham and Sharpe, 2009). Lecturers were asked to describe current
learning and teaching processes and mechanisms within their school. They were also asked
to expand on any issues they were aware of that had a bearing, in either a positive or
negative way with regard to enabling access to technology, the development of technology
related skills, learning and teaching practices involving the use of technology and also their
assessment of the collective attributes (attitudes/mind-set/prevailing culture) of staff and
students with regard to technology use for learning and teaching within the school. This
information will be used to establish whether and how these factors impact on the
effectiveness of school based learning and teaching processes as a means for promoting
and engaging with Digital Literacy focused initiatives.
The interview data is organised according to the four perspectives identified in the Beetham
and Sharpe framework: Access, Skills, Practices and Attributes.
2
The transcript extracts in this report have been anonymised and references to specific members of staff and
courses removed.
Page 8 of 80
In addition, key learning and teaching related processes within schools were identified and
described. Their value to raise awareness and embed Digital Literacy within schools is also
explored.
This approach will give us an organisation wide view of the role of Digital Literacy in teaching
provision. It will also be supported by the rich qualitative data gathered through in depth
discussion. Interviewees will form an ongoing focus group (the Digital Literacy Champion’s
Network), providing regular feedback to inform and validate the development of Digidol’s
objectives and deliverables.
The content of this document is structured in accordance with Helen Beethams’s Digital
Literacy Baseline Framework for Projects3 (JISC, 2011). This framework is structured into
the following categories: Strategy and Policy, Infrastructure, Support, Practices, Expertise &
Attitudes. This approach takes into account the relationship between the individual and the
organisation as illustrated below.
Organisational  Individual
Strategy
and
Policy
2
Infrastruc
ture
Support
Practices
Expertise
Attitudes
Strategy and Policy
This section of the baseline report will highlight institutional policies and strategic vision
statements that have a bearing on Digital Literacy. This section provides the broadest
contextual element of the baseline. The most widespread strategies and policies will
3
http://jiscdesignstudio.pbworks.com/w/page/47831216/DL%20baseline%20framework%20for%20projects
Page 9 of 80
therefore be listed first and sections pertaining to Digital Literacy development will be
extracted and included in this document.
2.1
Welsh Landscape
It is worth noting that within the national context of Wales there is significant work at the
moment in the field of Digital Literacy. The Welsh Government’s framework document for
Digital Wales (March, 2011)4 states that the "Widespread Digital Literacy and the
development of a workforce which can offer a broad range of high quality "e-skills” is critical
to the success of Digital Wales."
The Welsh Government has also funded the Welsh
Information Literacy project for two years which has been a national partnership between
schools, FE, HE, Public Libraries, CILIP, Health Libraries, the National Library, the
Department of Education and CyMAL (Museums Archives and Libraries in Wales.). The
project has been hosted in Cardiff University for two years and next year will be moving to
the FE sector and will be based at Coleg Llandrillo in North Wales. The project has
implemented an Information Literacy Framework for Wales together with seven accredited
units of learning in Information Literacy aligned to the Credit and Qualification Framework of
Wales (CQFW). These are currently being piloted across Wales. The success of the Welsh
Information Literacy Project clearly demonstrates a growing awareness of the importance of
the Learning Literacies in all sectors (for more information see the Welsh Information
Literacy Project website Welsh Information Literacy Project website.5)
2.2
Cardiff University Strategy
The term ‘Digital Literacy’ does not currently appear in the overarching Cardiff University
Strategy 2009/2010 – 2013/2014(Cardiff University, 2009a) 6. However, the strategy does
identify that the University should be “a catalyst for enhancing the economic and social
development of Wales” and this aim is aligned to Digital Wales (as demonstrated in section
2.1 above). Furthermore, the strategy states that the University should promote “an inspiring
and enriching educational experience” for students and “build on a culture of excellence and
enhancement”. This has been translated into three supporting strategies across the
organisation:

The Education Strategy,

The Innovation and Engagement Strategy
4
http://wales.gov.uk/topics/businessandeconomy/digitalwales/publications/framework/
5
http://www.welshinformationliteracy.org/
6
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/plann/strategicplan/index.html
Page 10 of 80

The Widening Access and Retention Strategy and the Research Strategy).

The Research Strategy
Digital Literacy is explicitly covered in the Education Strategy which is aligned to the scope
of this baseline (teaching staff and taught students).
2.3
Education Strategy
Cardiff University published the Education Strategy in July 20117. In the document it
identifies Digital Literacy as being a core element of skills development and it is seen in the
context of related Learning Literacies which are essential preparation for effective
engagement in the modern world.
“We are ensuring students are prepared for study and employment in the digital age, with a
range of Learning Literacies embedded into the curriculum in addition to the subject
knowledge. Specifically:

Academic and Professional Literacies - critical thinking, creativity, innovative
thinking, problem solving, reflection, academic writing, teamworking, note-taking,
time and self management, numeracy, analysis, synthesis, evaluation, self-directed
learning, collaborative learning, inter disciplinarity, equality, dignity.

Digital Literacies - being able to use appropriately and effectively: communication
tools, office programmes, digital devices, analysis tools, social software, professionspecific software, collaborative tools.

Information Literacies - searching, retrieving, analysing, interpreting, critiquing,
evaluating, managing resources, referencing, sharing content.” (Cardiff University,
20011b)
Cardiff University therefore supports the view that Digital Literacies are part of a core set of
Learning Literacies which are interrelated. Academic and Professional Literacies are,
generally, subject specific and therefore managed individually through the schools. This may
or may not include elements of Digital Literacy and is often informed by the guidance of the
professional body for that specific area (for example Law, Medicine etc…). The current
emphasis and provision of Digital Literacy through the schools will be covered in more detail
through the output of the semi-structured interviews.
7
http://learning.cf.ac.uk/strategies/
Page 11 of 80
2.4
The Digital and Social Media Strategy
Cardiff University Communications Division is in the process of developing a Digital and
Social Media Strategy to development of consistency across all areas of the university in the
following key areas: Web, Social Media, Audio & Video, Physical-to-Digital, Data & Feeds,
Mobile, Digital-Centricity, Emerging, User Experience and Global.
A wide range of work has already been identified for each of these areas. Digital Literacy is a
key element of the Digital-Centricity category that has been identified. This aims to look at
the integration of working practices and benefits through the realisation of a number of digital
and technological development initiatives around the university.
Digital Literacy and Staff Development are recognised as significant enablers to Digital
Centricity. This strand of the emerging Digital and Social Media Strategy is therefore
supported by the Digidol Project. As this baseline is concerned with Digital Literacy in
relation to teaching and learning, this aspect of the strategy will be explored in more detail in
the second baselining exercise focusing on researchers and administrative staff. However, it
should be noted that work such as this is in progress across the university which will also
impact staff and students in the academic schools.
2.5
INSRV Information Literacy Strategy
As identified in the Education Strategy, there are close links between the Learning Literacies
and in particular between Information Literacy and Digital Literacy. Information Literacy
provision will be explored in detail in section 4.1 of this document. There is a mature model
of delivery which is provided through the University Library Service (ULS) which is part if the
Information Services (INSRV) division. It is worth noting at this point that the five year
Information Literacy strategy and action plan is currently under review and the Digidol project
is working with the Information Literacy group to develop a combined and complimentary
Digital and Information Literacy strategic vision.
Page 12 of 80
2.6
Student Charter
Cardiff University and Cardiff Student Union are currently in the process of developing a
student charter. In order to reflect the feedback from taught and research students Cardiff
University is working to capture the student voice and to work with students as partners to
deliver effective change. As part of the student voice work it was identified that “teaching and
curriculum should, where possible, incorporate new and varied technologies” (Cardiff
University & Student Union 2011)”.
Page 13 of 80
3 Infrastructure & Access
This section will discuss provision and access to hardware, supported software and IT
services across the university.
3.1
Physical Infrastructure
For students who do not own their own computer or laptop the university provides a range of
open access networked PC’s in shared learning areas around the university8. These are
distributed throughout the University’s network of Libraries, Study Centres and Pool Rooms.
Respondents in some schools did not feel that lack of access to physical terminals was a
problem.
Access is not an issue for [our] students. Financially, most of them are well off.
Especially the international students at postgraduate level.” [int7_9.00]
However, the value of shared space that is enabled for shared and personally owned
devices for learning activities was recognised as being increasingly important.
You notice more and more students hanging out in social spaces working on their
laptops. The [ ] school needs to create more spaces for that, and I know that the [
] school is planning to do just that. [int7_8.40]
A number of lecturers interviewed did report significant practical issues with computing
equipment and infrastructure, especially in lecturer theatres and poolrooms. Examples were
given of out of date computers being so slow to boot up that staff primed each other not to
switch them off because otherwise they would lose significant amounts of lecture time
waiting for them to start up, and they just weren’t used if found switched off. Also, broken
display technologies (projectors and video players) and persistently mislaid equipment, all
served to undermine staff confidence in technology. This was reported to have a marked
negative impact on staff attitudes to anything technological, and served to undermine other
kinds of engagement that sought to raise awareness about Digital Literacy.
“The issue is not so much about access to the core computing technology. We
have computer labs right throughout the [ ] school. We have four computer labs
and one new huge one which has been refurbished. …The only thing I would say is
that the software sometimes is not upgraded. We do use them a lot with students
for learning. When it comes to all our other computing labs, yes, they are fit for
purpose.” [int7_8.30]
Lecture theatres were often described as not being fit for future use. They are not equipped
to enable the use of personal computing devices, with few accessible power sockets and
8
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/it/itrooms/index.html
Page 14 of 80
cramped seating conditions due to close packed tiered rows of seating with limited desk
space.
“Mentioned that in new building the lecture hall should have power sockets at the
bottom of every seat. One of the professors asked why would you want that?”
[int_8.45]
3.2
Mobile Infrastructure
Students increasingly possess smartphones that also enable them to access the Internet.
Cardiff University has developed several applications in the last couple of years to enable
students to access University IT Services and Learning Environments through smartphones.
In the course of the interviews it was remarked that students found it particularly useful to be
able to access Learning Central and the Cardiff Portal using these devices. Mobile
applications now available include the following:
Application: Cardiff University
Mobile
Compatible with:
iPhone,
Blackberry, Android, iPad or
iPod
touch
(iOS v3.1+)
Safari only.
Audience: Current Students
and Staff
Features:
 News – View the latest Cardiff University news
 Find a PC – Find the location of the nearest available open access PC
 Contacts – Quickly search for staff by surname and initials
 Maps – Search for a specific building, or browse a list of halls, libraries, sports facilities and
general buildings. Get a map of directions from your current location
 Calendar – See key Cardiff University term dates (including exam timetables once published)
 Videos – Browse Cardiff University videos
 Ask a Librarian Live – Instant messaging service to connect with a member of Library staff in
one of the University's 16 libraries to receive quick advice on any library related queries
 Email – Shortcut to the Cardiff University mobile email service
Compatible with: iPhone,
Audience: Current Students
Blackberry, Android, iPad or
and Staff
iPod touch(iOS v3.1.3+)
Students and instructors using Cardiff University Learning Central Mobile can access documents in
multiple formats, post announcements, create discussion threads and posts, upload media as
attachments to discussion boards and blogs, create content items within the course map, and
comment on blogs and journals - all from their mobile devices.
Application: Cardiff University
Learning Central
Application: Cardiff University Available for: iPhone, iPod Audience: Current Students
Student Support
touch and iPad. (iOS 3.2+)
Designed by The Student Support Centre to help current and prospective students of Cardiff
University find out about student life.
Features:
 Key Dates – Check out the calendar of university dates to remind you what’s going on and
when.
 Budget calculator – To help you keep on track of your finances.
 Information area – Having trouble with your funding? How do I rent a house?...got a
question? Look for the answer in our info area.
 Maps – Use our map function to find the Student Support Centre and University Halls of
Residence.
Page 15 of 80


Contacts – Find a useful list of Cardiff University and external contacts.
Videos – View our latest video information about student funding, housing and study skills.
More information is available at the mobile webpage9.
3.3
Mobile Access
The pie chart shown below reveals the registration of mobile devices by first year
undergraduates staying in halls of residences in 2010/11. Total number of first year
undergraduate intake was approximately 3600 (n.b. not all first year students live in Halls of
Residences).
The majority of teaching staff interviewed reported that they had seen a noticeable rise in the
last few years in student owned devices, such as smartphones and laptops. But a number of
people also identified a significant minority who do not come to university already owning
these devices.
There seemed to be varying pattern of student ownership of laptops, with high levels of
ownership in some schools, such as the Business School and relatively lower levels in the
humanities and surprisingly in the School of Computer Science. However, in departments
such as English, there is evidence of increasing numbers of students using Kindle devices
for reading assigned texts. Somewhat unexpectedly for the teaching staff this is impacting on
how students cite their resources for assignments.
There were reports that certain schools did not accommodate the proportion of their students
owning Macintosh computers as opposed to PCs and this resulted in resources being
9
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/mobile/
Page 16 of 80
produced that weren’t accessible to all students. This was compounded by not
communicating alternative methods of access.
“Instead of a book of their course they gave them a print out of their timetable
and a handbook on a CD-ROM. However, it could only be read on a PC not a Mac
and 40% of the students in the school had Macs. It was online, but people needed
to know where to get it online – and most staff didn’t know because they weren’t
given a web address.” [int7_7.20]
Few examples were given of planned use of smartphone or laptop technologies for learning
and teaching. One forward looking school did however report that they were currently
planning to move towards student use of laptops in lectures as they were aiming to adopt a
more blended approach with associated workshops / active learning.
“We’re moving towards a requirement that they all have laptops and they are all
running the [local] software. So they have to do things in the lecture, such as look
up something. Basically, I’m moving towards a model where I’m blurring the
lecture and the workshop. We decided in DPM [Data Processing Module] that
everything was going to be online. As much as possible we’re not going to print
out anything.” [int3_30.33]
A few schools reported taking advantage of the fact students have these devices by sending
them administrative type text messages and emails, such as changes to scheduled events,
impending deadlines and other kinds of prompts. There were no reports of the devices being
specifically used for reciprocal communication between teachers and undergraduate
students, other than use in one-to-one supervisory situations, such as with final year
projects. There have been reports however of tutors using Twitter to monitor group progress
amongst postgraduates. This is not platform specific although students with ‘smart’ mobile
devices would be able to use a twitter application. The tutor who uses this method chose to
do so because it forces students to be concise (in 140 characters) and is fast because most
students have twitter applications on their phones.
3.4
Cardiff Portal
Cardiff Portal is a secure gateway to web-based University services using an Internet
browser, regardless of your location. Staff and students can also use it to remotely access:

Email and Calendar

Personal (H:\ Drive) and shared (S: Drive) file space

Electronic journals and databases

University Virtual Learning Environment (Learning Central)

Library catalogue (Voyager) without entering another password.
Page 17 of 80
The portal receives almost 20,000 visitors per day and users have accessed Cardiff Portal
from 138 countries. (See the portal website for more information10)
3.5
Learning Central
Learning Central is Cardiff University's Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) and is the latest
version of the well known Blackboard suite of tools. This is a web-based application that
supports online learning and teaching. It provides an integrated environment enabling:

announcements to be posted for a group of students enrolled on a particular module;

learning materials, such as handbooks, lecture handouts, slides, reading lists and
web links to be published in a secure environment;

asynchronous online communication between students and tutors using discussion
boards;

the creation of groups to support group tasks such as online discussion, group wikis
and file exchange;

collaborative learning and learner-learner interaction through the use of discussion
boards, blogs and wikis;

electronic submission of assignments;

setting and taking of online assessments with automatic marking and feedback
facilities;

recording of student grades in a secure environment;

tracking of student progress.
Feedback from several schools reported poor experience of using Learning Central (mainly
due to reliability issues, but also because of the perceived ‘chunkiness’ of its interface.
“We always find access to learning central is confusing to them in the first three
or four months and I think that comes down to how they get access to Learning
Central.” [int7_9.15]
One school in particular, had been trying for several years to make use of the
blogging facility in Learning Central and had encountered technical problems
every time that resulted in the failure of the learning activity.
“I have used very little of Blackboard. I remember when Blackboard first started.
Trying to do module evaluations on Blackboard…and the number of days I was
10
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/futures/portal/index.html
Page 18 of 80
throwing the computer out of the window. Presumably it has improved but my
experience of Blackboard now is that I go to it when I have to. And I do as little as
I can on a daily basis.” [int10_20.20]
“I know Blackboard has discussion boards and I’ve used those and they’re quite
self-limiting. They can sort of follow a question though reasonably well, but are
not really good for big issues.” [int10_52.11]
Learning Central (Blackboard VLE) is used extensively for storing, distributing and managing
content. The majority of teaching staff report using it solely as a content repository for textbased documents, and some use it for video and podcasts as well. It is also quite widely
used for making announcements to students and for electronic submission of coursework.
“Blackboard is used. Personally, I only use it ... as a repository for people to submit
work to. We do put lecture content in there. One of the other tutors in fourth year
puts all her lectures up there. Some tutors put videos of lectures up, but that
probably kills the server. But it’s not standard practice. There’s no standard across
the school. It is all patchy.” [int3_20.20]
“Well, we put stuff on there. We put our lectures on there by and large. Not
everybody. We have one or two who refuse to put anything on Blackboard. It’s
just used for storage. The lecture overheads go on there.” [int10_13.44]
A few examples were provided of Learning Central’s other facilities being used such as the
question and test tool, discussion lists and the wiki. The number of staff reportedly doing so
was very small and mostly limited to a handful of staff within a school. There were no reports
of Learning Central being used as a social platform by students or staff (although there were
many instances of the use of facebook and other external social media).
“Come exam time I use discussion boards on it [Learning Central]. A couple of
other staff members do as well. I certainly know the PCUTL’ers [lecturers who
have done the PCUTL course] have said come exam time open a discussion board
it saves you answering the same question time and time again. We’ve tried it
before in the past and it’s really hard work getting them to engage until it comes
to the exams. So we don’t do it to any great extent.” [int10_14.12]
“I’ve used the wikis, very successfully actually. I got them to create a textbook
using a wiki. Which was really fun. There was no textbook for my class, so what I
got them to do was each read a paper, summarise it and comment on it, and this
was all assessed. And I assessed how much change they had made. They were
forced to read the wiki. Five percent of the mark was for how much they had
engaged with the wiki.” [int30_31.36]
The institutional VLE as originally conceived was to be the online environment where staff
and students would work together by engaging in the virtual world of learning and teaching.
It is apparent that this vision is not being consistently realised. Several interviewees reported
that system reliability was a reason for it not being more widely used. A lack of training in
how to use the functionality also prevented staff from realising the benefits of the system. In
Page 19 of 80
some instances, staff felt that web based technology, although lacking the security and
functionality of Learning Central, was more intuitive.
“They are far more comfortable with third party stuff than things that are so
specific to Cardiff University, like Blackboard. It is so cumbersome.” [int3_19.30]
3.6
Supported Software and Electronic Resources

A full list of supported software see the INSRV software index11

For more information on Electronic Journals see the INSRV journals web page12

For more information on Databases see the INSRV Databases webpage13
3.7
Social Media and External Technologies
3.7.1 Social Media
It was recognised by nearly all the schools that social media and online services were
increasingly being used in a learning context (particularly amongst student and special
interest groups). The most common of these were Facebook, Google Search and Twitter.
There were a number of reports of other kinds of external services being used, e.g.,
YouTube and iTunes, but these tended not to be used in any official or systematic way for
learning.
Cardiff University is currently developing a digital and social media policy which is outlined in
Section 2.
In some cases it was very apparent that a school was waiting for the university to develop
and offer guidance before they formally engaged with social media. Concern was expressed
over the potential ramifications if social media were abused by either staff or students. The
issue of e-bullying was also cited as being an area of concern requiring central support and
guidance.
There is growing evidence of Facebook being used by students for academic work. Staff are
rarely present in student owned and run Facebook communities. A notable exception is the
Shadow Module work being done in the school of Bioscience, where teaching and support
11
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/it/software/index.html
12
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/eresources/ejournals/index.html
13
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/eresources/databases/index.html
Page 20 of 80
staff proactively set up and maintain Facebook spaces for students. Student participation is
optional however and it is run in parallel with the established Learning Central (Blackboard)
service.
One member of staff felt that student run Facebook study communities would be inhibited
by staff presence.
“I suspect that’s to do with them seeing Twitter and Facebook as their thing. And
they don’t really want us to be in there. [int3_18:16]”
3.7.2 External Technologies
Other than the use of social media for private purposes, schools reported very little use by
either students or staff of technologies other than those made available by the University.
You might find one or two people who have their own website or a blog but there wasn’t any
pervasive use of such tools in any school. This seems to be related to the issue of skills and
is explored in more detail in the Skills section of this document.
Page 21 of 80
4 Support
4.1
IT User Support
The IT Service Desk is first point of contact for the support of IT services. The IT Service
Desk handles all queries from customers, including fault reports, assistance with services, or
suggestions for change and enhancements to IT services. For more details please see the
website14.
4.2
Information Literacy
Information Literacy is provided through the University Library Service (ULS) and subject
librarians work closely with The schools and programme leaders in order to establish tailored
provision within the curriculum as demonstrated by the promotional story board below.
As
shown
in
the
two
storyboards, elements of digital
literacy
are
incorporated
increasingly
in
Information
Literacy as technology and
information
are
increasingly
interrelated. This mature model
of delivery provides a robust
foundation
for
Digital
Information
and
Literacy
deployment to students and
researchers
supported
project.
(Cardiff University, 2009b)
14
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/it/help/index.html
Page 22 of 80
which
by
the
will
be
Digidol
Current provision of Information Literacy focuses upon requirements for student learning
activities (for example researching and presenting information for assignments) and
therefore Digital Literacy alignment in this area is vital to get content driven Digital Literacy
curriculum to the student stakeholder group. However, the Digidol project rather than
working directly with teaching staff to embed the use of digital media in pedagogy and tasks
will aim to work with other providers, such as Subject Librarians, to build upon their
established Information Literacy expertise. Examples were reported that illustrate innovative
ways of engaging students in information-seeking activities.
“I ran a two hour lab session with my second year students which was a treasure
hunt through of the different business databases they had access to. From Absco
to Science Direct, through to Mintel and so forth, and that was for second year
students.” [int7_16.15]
The data below was obtained by the seventh annual audit of Information Literacy provision
for all programmes of study at Cardiff University in 2011-12. The results are used to
measure success in achieving the University’s learning and teaching performance indicator
to “to make further progress in embedding Information Literacy into taught courses”.
Summary of results
The 2009/10 and 2008/9 figures are given in parentheses.
Level of training provided by, or in %
conjunction with, ULS staff
of
students % of students with training
provided with training
embedded
into
the
curriculum
Orientation, using the library and 97% (93%, 94%)
n/a
finding items from a reading list
Database training and/or evaluation 89% (82%, 84%)
72% (68%, 63%)
of web resources
Information Literacy
71% (63%, 64%)
61% (56%,57%)
Currently 61% of taught students in Cardiff receive Information Literacy within their
curriculum through the ULS partnership with academic schools. An example of this is shown
in appendix A:
integrated Information Literacy in the taught MSc in Computing. It is
expected that this will rise to 70% of taught students within the next two years. A further
10% also benefit from extracurricular Information Literacy sessions.
Page 23 of 80
For the minority of courses that do not receive Information Literacy sessions, staff observed
a lack in the student skills to use databases.
“They get a session from the library but it is very early on from my understanding
and it’s more about how to use the library, where is the library and how to use
resources and stuff like that, than specific database uses and so forth. … I became
aware that our students were not familiar with using a lot of the databases.”
[int7_16.03]
For the first time in three years, the overall reach of ULS training has increased significantly.
In previous years, the University performance indicator of embedded IL training increased in
the number of students reached from 39% in 2005/6 to 48% in 2006/7 before reaching a
fairly static level of about 56% from 2007/8 to 2009/10.
The Information Literacy group also provide a resource bank which can be incorporated
informally into curriculum design. The Information Literacy resource bank is available to
everyone within and outside the university.
For the minority of taught courses that do not have embedded Information Literacy from the
University Library Service, some teaching staff are able to use these resources to support
the school based Information Literacy that they deliver.
“I have a two hour lecture on secondary research and I also give them a two hour
computer lab which is around the use of the different technologies and we start
with how do you search, effective searches and stuff. All about Boolean operators
and stuff like that.” [int7_17.00]
More information on Cardiff University’s Information Literacy provision can be found at the
following locations:
15

Information Literacy in Cardiff University15

Handbook for Information Literacy Teaching16

Information Literacy Resource Bank17
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/educationandtraining/infolit/index.html
16
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/educationandtraining/infolit/hilt/
17
https://ilrb.cf.ac.uk/
Page 24 of 80
The University Library Service (ULS)
provides ad hoc Information Literacy
support to students and researchers
in addition to the Information Literacy
provision which is embedded in the
curriculum (see section 5).
Expert
support from librarians is accessible
by phone, email, in person or through
the virtual librarian service.
(Cardiff University, 2009b)
4.3
Learning and Teaching Support
The Learning and Teaching Support Unit, which is part of Registry, works to support
teaching staff in a variety of ways and across a number of themes. For example through
standardised curriculum design, through the management of the Postgraduate Certificate in
University Teaching and Learning (PCUTL)18. The Learning and Teaching Support Unit have
long been advocates of technology enhanced learning and provide support and consultancy
upon request. For more information see the Learning and Teaching Support website19.
4.4
Technology Enhanced Learning
The Registry provide a Technology Enhanced Learning Support Officer to help staff to make
better make use of technology enhanced pedagogy. However it is clear that the capacity and
demand are not in balance and that demand is ever increasing.
18
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/humrs/training/pcutl/index.html
19
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/learning/
Page 25 of 80
Registry has provided training in the past in how to create modules on the VLE and the
Learning Central Support team in Information Services are currently reviewing ways to
improve support for staff and standardisation.
Supporting students to make use of emerging technology is sometimes incorporated into
Information Literacy provision where appropriate. However this is naturally driven from an
Information Literacy and content perspective.
Currently, there are a wide variety of practices across the University that contribute to
developing the Digital Literacy of staff and students. These are being provided both from
within schools, from central service directorates within the University and the Student Union.
Due to the rapidly changing nature of technology and the enormous variety of working and
learning practices that it has to affect, there is a clear requirement for a consistent and joined
up institution-wide approach.
4.5
IT User Training
A regular programme of IT training courses and workshops is offered through
insrvEducation (on a cost basis) to help enable best use of centrally provided computing
facilities and software applications. Courses are generally taught in an instructor-led
classroom environment and often form an integral part of the staff development programme
for schools and Directorates. Course content ranges from beginner to advanced levels and
customised training sessions can be tailored to the needs of individuals or groups.
Scheduled courses cover common tasks, like the use of the University email system,
calendaring and collaboration tools, which all form part of the services available in the Cardiff
Portal. In addition, insrvEducation provides hands-on training for commonly used software
applications including Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Access, PowerPoint) and SPSS along
with support to help you upgrade to newer versions of applications as these are rolled out
throughout the University.
For staff and students wanting to prove their IT knowledge, insrvEducation is the accredited
Cardiff University testing centre for the European Computer Driving Licence (ECDL). For
more information please see the education and training website20.
20
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/educationandtraining/ittraining/index.html
Page 26 of 80
4.5.1 European Computer Driving Licence (ECDL)
Central Information Services run ECDL as part of course modules for the school of Nursing
and Midwifery and the Social Work course in the school of Social Sciences. These are the
only courses where ECDL has been made mandatory and result in over 500 students taking
the course each academic year. The school of Dentistry also runs ECDL as part of the
Dentistry course. Quite a few staff, more than students, study ECDL as a standalone
personal development activity.
4.6
Wider Literacies
With regard to the development of traditional study skills (other than those related to
Information Literacy), such as reading and writing, in most schools these are not taught in
any formal way. They are generally addressed through the process of tutorials and feedback
on written assignments.
“... you can do these things in isolation but unless they’re actually involved in
doing something. I mean everyone complains at the standard of literacy at 5th
year dissertation level. At the beginning of the year is pretty dire but by the end
when they’ve completed it they improved a 100% from where they were. To some
extent, part of that is that they are actually up against it and they’ve got to get it
sorted.” [int3_13.01]
International studies are provided with extra English language classes provided by the
central English Language Teaching Centre.
Page 27 of 80
5 Processes
5.1
Staff Development Processes
The majority schools do not run any kind of in-house locally run staff development
opportunities. Teaching staff are in the main completely reliant on centrally provided staff
development opportunities. Centrally run courses were identified by many of the teaching
staff as the most likely method for achieving a contextualised introduction to Digital Literacy.
In most schools there is no official forum for discussing teaching related practice other than
the Board of Studies, although people report making attempts to bring staff with a significant
teaching role together, largely without success.
“Staff have no training whatsoever on anything … other than voluntarily turning
up for QUILT sessions and doing those things that [Registry Staff] and others put
on. You know, I do those things, but they’re all voluntary.” [int10_1.04.11]
A number of interviewees reported that their school was in the process of reviewing how
they could improve staff development opportunities. [int20_26.00]. There was also
recognition that more could and should be done through the staff appraisal process. It was
felt these were areas that could significantly support the use of Digital Literacy in Cardiff
University.
5.1.1 Sharing Good Practice
Most schools periodically hold Learning and Teaching Away Days (in most cases these are
once or twice a year). These are usually initiated by the Head of School and coordinated by
a Learning and Teaching Committee. These were identified as presenting opportunities for
raising awareness about the use of new technologies for learning and teaching.
“We regularly have teaching away days for the department. They are an
opportunity where ideas can be discussed. ...Discussions there we have changed
the way our undergraduate scheme runs quite significantly. “ [int20_19.45]
Informal and occasional internal meetings, such as lunchtime ‘brown-bag’ events, were on
the whole poorly attended and usually only by those who are already converts and
enthusiasts. As a rule workshops are only run as when there was something of interest. For
example, to promote uptake of Audience Response (Clicker) technology in lectures.
In some schools, especially those with a small and/or close group of teaching staff, much
discussion and exchange of ideas happens informally face-to-face in corridors and shared
Page 28 of 80
teaching spaces. There was strong support of the need for physical collocation of teachers
and more opportunities to meet together.
“We do have formal meetings, but I think any innovation comes through the
informal.... But there’s also a lot of corridor coordination and communication,
which is informal. There is a very small core of staff in [the school]. We’re not a
big department in terms of the number of core teaching staff. All the staff are
either located in this space or along a gallery on the other side of the building. So
everyone’s close by and everyone’s bumping into each other all the time. We get
that informal communication.” [int3_24.07]
“There's more individual innovation, we don't interfere with each others' methods
of teaching.” [int3_26.00]
[How does practice evolve?] “Very slowly [laughs]. Well, practice evolves because
there is always a handful of people who would be interested in research it, and
interested in moving things forward.” [int10_47.50]
Examples were given of some quite radical top-down initiatives within a school. The Head of
school had initiated staff development events where it was mandatory for all staff (teaching
and non-teaching) to attend. This is a regular forum where learning and teaching practice
related issues are discussed. This is coupled with an internally run Teaching Excellence
Network. A group of seven teaching staff regularly gather together to disseminate ideas and
new practices. Other schools expressed a desire to establish something similar with the idea
of creating an action group. The intention is to bring together a number of lecturers who have
completed or are currently doing the university’s PCUTL course, to coordinate and
disseminate information and ideas about learning and teaching practice.
One school reported that students are now invited to provide end of semester feedback,
ratings and comments, on the teaching of individual members of staff. In a bold step, this is
made publicly available and the intention is for it to be used in a constructive way to highlight
where attention and effort needs to be focused [int21_51:50].
5.1.2 Postgraduate Certificate in University Teaching and Learning
(PCUTL)
In Cardiff University, it is mandatory for all new tenured teaching staff to enrol in PCUTL.
Other than that there is very little in the way of top-down driven approach to staff
development for learning and teaching within schools. If staff identify that they need training,
schools are generally very supportive. Several schools identified the lecturers who were
doing or had done PCUTL as the people most likely to generate ideas and innovate. Some
schools specifically sought out these people because they were recognised as being the
Page 29 of 80
most likely people to create internal groups and networks to facilitate communication and
catalyse new practices with other teaching staff.
“The course was very long. When I did it was the old course. It was a lot of effort.
And they are supposed to give you the equivalent time off teaching. ... So, I did
find it very hard. I found it very hard to keep my research profile up when I was
doing that and the teaching. But there are lots of things that have totally flipped
my way of thinking.... I thought it was really good.” [int12_48:40]
“I’m actually doing module two right now. I personally have found [PCUTL] very valuable. I
think the uptake [in the school] is about 50% I would say. I would say about a dozen staff
have done it.” [int30_21.20]
5.2
Student Development Processes
5.2.1 Study Skills
Not every school provides structured formal sessions on basic study skills. These are most
commonly taught as a module in the first year of undergraduate studies or as part of their
initial induction to the university. Content and format varied considerably, with the length of
sessions varying from a few days, to a whole semester and in rare cases much of the first
year of undergraduate studies was understood to be an orientation to Higher Education, e.g.,
in the School of Bioscience study skills sessions are provided at the start of every academic
year.
“They have an information session as part of their induction week. Where the
students are told everything about the library, schedules, their programme, books,
bookshop, and there’s an induction thing in their about technology and Learning
Central [Blackboard VLE]. Very brief. If anything they learn more about how to use
it in their classes. If their lecturers are using Learning Central quite a lot, like
[lecturer] does, in year one [of course] she does virtual tutorials. She uses the
discussion boards.“ [int7_9.30]
“... they get it at the beginning of each year and the final years ... tailored to
where they are at. So, we get our library representative ... in at the different levels
of complexity, information literacy stuff. So, obviously more complex for final year
students than the incoming students.” [int20_21.31]
In most cases specialists are brought in from elsewhere in the University to teach specific
topics, e.g., from the Library Service, Careers Services and Student Union. Most often these
take the form of brief introductions with varying degrees of contextualisation to the discipline.
Sessions concerning Information Literacy are commonly delivered by Subject Librarians as
part of an orientation to Library Services. See Section 4.2 on Information Literacy.
Page 30 of 80
Innovative example: Bioscience ‘Shadow Modules’
The School of Biosciences recognise the importance of the ‘student voice’ in teaching and
curriculum development, especially with regard to the role of IT. The school is currently
piloting an approach they referred to as “Shadow Modules”. This seeks to involve students
as active participants in the teaching-learning process (for more background information
see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_p2fytsD80s). The student-led working groups are
run in parallel to the mainstream academic curriculum. It encourages students to
collaborate to locate useful course related resources, consolidate what they find and
create new resources for study. They are led by student leaders who are responsible for
organising the collaborative process and liaising with teaching staff. A variety of IT
solutions are used to assist sharing and collaboration and to help develop key Digital
Literacies. Although limited to students who volunteered to participate, this has result in a
considerable amount of useful course content for ongoing learning and revision. Initial
studies suggest that the approach has had a positive impact upon the students’ learning
experience. Limitations to this approach, for example the prevalence of students’ strategic
approaches to study and the level of digital literacy developed, were identified and
solutions are currently being investigated.
Page 31 of 80
5.2.2 Student CPD, PDP and Employability related initiatives
The
Student
Union
have
a
Student
Development Unit that offers a range of
workshops for students designed to develop
social and communication skills and build
confidence. The courses are very popular
with students and they are able to join any
time throughout their studies. The main
focus
is
on
skills
for
employability,
regardless of profession. The unit works
closely with a number of schools, such as
Engineering, Mathematics, Social Sciences,
Business
School
and
Chemistry
by
contributing to their Induction and Study
Skills modules and school based CPD
programmes.
There
is
very
close
collaboration with some schools to develop
and adapt the content and format of courses
to meet curriculum specific requirements.
For example, in undergraduate year one of Engineering, students do professional studies
module that incorporates communication skills. The Student Development Unit contribute by
teaching the students presentation skills. The presentations produced by the students are
subsequently assessed by academic staff in the school. The same sessions form a
component of a Communication Key Skills Award that is offered independently by the
Student Union.
There are a variety of school based initiatives that have established Continuing Professional
Development programmes for students. In most cases, student participation isn't mandatory
and the run programmes are in parallel with an academic course. The School of Social
Sciences and the Department of History both provide similar CPD type programmes for
students that result in a certificate upon completion of agreed level of attendance and
participation. These courses are currently exploring methods to achieve better crossmapping and integration with the formal academic curriculum, through such activities as
placements.
Page 32 of 80
5.2.3 Student focused seminars, workshops and clubs
There were examples of weekly ‘clinics’ being run for final year students, where
postgraduate and local IT support staff jointly assist final year undergraduate students with
technical issues concerning their final year projects [int20_23.30]. Although intended for final
year students, in practice the sessions were open to students from all years. There are plans
to develop similar ‘Career Clinics’ focusing on employability related matters. Teaching staff
have suggested that this ‘clinic’ based approach would provide opportunities to introduce a
range of Learning Literacies. However, whilst providing Digital Literacy sessions in this way
would undoubtedly be of benefit to students the challenge would doing so in concert with the
mainstream curriculum, and it would also have to be made available to students earlier their
course to have any significant impact on learning.
It was suggested by one interviewee that there might be a benefit in having some form of
student/staff exchange across school on the use of digital technologies. Where lecturers and
students come as a group to describe their approach to developing Digital Literacy and work
with staff and students in another school to cross-fertilise ideas and practices. In principle
this approach sounds like an excellent idea, especially for courses that are linked through
their vocation, such as Medicine and Nursing, Engineering and Architecture, however, there
would most likely be a significant administrative overhead as it would require careful
coordination and planning.
Student focused clubs and societies outside of formal curriculum were mentioned as
providing excellent opportunities for students to explore new developments and ideas. A
good example of this is the Computer Club run by the school of Computing that attracts
students and staff alike from all over the University. This was described as a very popular
forum for raising awareness and experimenting new technologies, and at the same time
provided a way of disseminating developments throughout the school. It was also described
as providing students with a ‘sandbox’ environment where they were free to try out things.
However, unfortunately, this was thought to have negligible correspondence with formal
courses and teaching practice within the school. [int21_1.11.35]
Page 33 of 80
6 Practices
6.1
Course Management
The vast majority of teaching across schools takes the form of traditional didactic forms of
lecture to large numbers of students with problems/assignments presented through
coursework.
“As far as lecture delivery has been concerned there’s been no innovations really
with regard to moving away from the traditional lecture. It’s still very much we
get up there, we give our traditional delivery.” [int10_16.03]
“[The style of teaching is] classic, I mean it’s standard. I think our guideline is two
hours of lecture and two hours of lab. So, it’s a standard science curriculum. You
know, classic old school. Lecturer comes in stands up and talks for two hours.”
[int30_20.12]
A range of examples were described by individual teaching staff within schools doing
innovative things with technology but usually working in isolation and with very little
dissemination or discussion about their work with other educators. Examples were given,
such as student groupwork and assignments to develop multimedia content on some aspect
of their course, e.g., in the School of Bioscience and the School of City and Regional
Planning. A key challenge for educators seeking to integrate technology use into learning
activities has been devising appropriate forms of assessment. Examples were given where
staff have sought to change the nature of assessment in order to enable collaborative use of
wikis for learning [int7_18.30].
“As a result of our restructuring of our undergraduate degree, there’s more
freedom and flexibility in our final year options compared to before. As a result of
that the module organisers can incorporate all sorts of different ways of teaching
into a final year option that wasn’t there before. That happens at module level.
It’s up to the person leading that to come up with ideas.” [int20_21.10]
The comment above reflects an initiative to create flexibility at module level, but it still
presents a challenge as to how best to raise the awareness and provide support for
lecturers. Currently, it very much depends of individual staff taking the initiative. More needs
to be done to find more effective ways of raising awareness, disseminating ideas and
showcasing novel practices.
Page 34 of 80
Illustrative example: The new medical curriculum
The Medical School is currently designing a completely new undergraduate
curriculum. Curriculum designers are taking the opportunity to develop an innovative
approach to embed Learning Literacy themes throughout each undergraduate year
and across all phases of the programme. In partnership with the Library, the Digidol
project has been invited to work with clinical teaching staff to establish what kinds of
Information and Digital Literacies should be embedded in the course. In addition, a
new Clinical Education course is being devised for staff who will be teaching the new
medical curriculum. It is envisaged that the project will also have an opportunity to
inform how Learning Literacies for teaching staff are addressed through this course.
Furthermore, a detailed case study of embedded Information Literacy in the MSc in
Computing can be seen in Appendix A
6.1.1 Teaching
Even though there is tacit acceptance that most students will have access to smartphones
whilst in lectures, there is a prevailing attitude amongst teaching staff that if laptops are
brought into lecturers they will not be used for learning. It has become an unwritten rule
within certain schools that laptops are not allowed in lecture theatres. Whilst this practice is
frowned upon by some of the newer teaching staff it is usually accepted.
“We don’t allow laptops in lectures. Because the idea is, although I’m sure they’re
doing it on their phones, we think if they’re writing stuff on their laptop during a
lecture then they might not be working. So, it’s a bit like when you attend a
conference and you see everyone on laptops whilst you’re giving a talk and you
think they must be looking at the paper and most of them are looking at BBC
news, or email. But some of them are actually looking at the paper. I’d like to be
able to say in a lecture, ‘So, ok, I’ve told you about this go and find something out
and tell me in five minutes what you’ve found out’. It’s not a spoken policy in the
school it’s just frowned upon.” [int12_56.41]
“Most of the students I interact with have access to laptops. I would say most
have laptops, but they don’t bring them to the lectures. My impression is, we
provide them with hand written notes, so, it’s easier for them to hand write.
Students might be required to use their laptops in practicals but not in a lecture.”
[int30_19.11]
Although mentioned by lecturers in more than one school, it is difficult to assess how
prevalent this attitude is across the university. If widely shared, it could potentially represent
quite a challenge to encourage teaching staff to explore the potential of technology in
traditional teaching contexts.
Page 35 of 80
There are complex issues influencing the motivation of lecturers to innovate around their
teaching practice and consequently investigate the potential of technology in this context.
Reports from a number of schools indicated that people who were engaged with or had
completed the PCUTL course were generally more interested and enthusiastic about trying
out new tools and ways of teaching. Much faith seems to be placed in these members of
staff as the primary means for future change. This is in contrast to the perceived greater
challenge of changing the teaching practices of the more established and research focused
staff.
“All I know is that whenever there is discussions of technology, be it our Postgrad
or our Undergrad at Board, I’m always surprised at the limited understanding of
integration. In the sense where having to actually explain its benefits from a
learning perspective relative to it being a support or some place I just put my
PowerPoint slides or what have you. I’m always quite surprised at that attitude. …
I think the school has a very old world way of thinking in how we administer
education. Obviously, email is our main social communication in the business
school.” [int7_18.30]
“Ooh Gosh, it feels sometime like the world outside is moving on and the [ ] school
is like... yes, that’s interesting, lets keep doing what we’re doing.” [int7_18.45]
The observations reported by some lecturers reveal widely differing appreciation of, and
attitudes, towards technology. It is generally the newer and younger members of staff who
are more aware and keen to try new ways of working with technology. The strong impression
is that schools are slow to assess and respond to developments in technology.
6.1.2 Electronic Submissions and Marking
A number of schools have made significant movement towards full electronic submission of
assignments and marking. But this hasn’t been without resistance from some members of
staff [see under Culture Related]. One school has invested substantial resource in building
their own bespoke solution to streamline the process for staff and students. Students use
Learning Central to upload their assignments as MS-Word documents in a template that is
provided. An in-house developed script transfers the files to a network drive with separate
folders for staff to download documents for marking as annotations in MS-Word which are
then uploaded to a separate folder on the network drive.
6.1.3 Digital Course Evaluations
A number of schools make use of Audience Response (Clicker) technology to obtain
feedback from students. However, in the main this is used to obtain student evaluations of
Page 36 of 80
lectures and courses. There were reports of a few staff using them for teaching purposes but
this was on very rare occasions.
“I was very enthusiastic when we got them and I thought of many ways of using
them, but what puts me off is the time. The extra time, the overhead in terms of
adapting to it but I’m also concerned about how much time it takes away of my
50 minute lecture slot. If I have 200 students and they all need to pick up one of
those things and then it needs to work. There’s easily 10 minutes gone with
nothing, or noise where I can’t really lecture while they’re picking up these
things.” [int21_20.21]
“This year, for the first time, we now have a Clicker system in operation. The
students had to pay £20 for a card and they keep it all the way through. And we’ll
be using MCQs and stuff like that in the lectures. That was instigated via our low
score on feedback in the NSS. … It’s definitely about feedback. I encourage people
to break up their lectures with it. If you know you’ve got a dull lecture, well give
them some MCQs 20 minutes in it’s another way of forming a break and waking
everybody up.” [int10_15:49]
6.2
Technology and Tasks
6.2.1 Presenting
Staff voiced their school’s reluctance to be too prescriptive towards teaching staff over their
use of technology. Virtually all schools reported that some staff were reticent to use
technology and for a variety of different reasons. There were frequent reports of a minority of
staff in schools still refusing to use PowerPoint and preferring instead to use acetates and
OHPs, whiteboards or give lectures without any aids at all. One school in particular reported
that most of its teaching was still being done using OHPs and others report that students
prefer it to the use of PowerPoint for things like mathematics related teaching. The students
report that they liked to see the lecturer develop solutions and show their working out as
calculations unfold, which are then copied down by students using pen and paper.
Observations such as these reveal staff and student preference for more traditional teaching
practices. At face value there appears to be good justification for doing so. However, neither
teachers nor students have been exposed to viable digital alternatives, such as the potential
use of tablet devices to display what is being written and at the same time record/upload
outputs. Significantly, there is currently no straightforward means in the University for
exposing staff/students to the art of the possible with new digital devices.
Page 37 of 80
6.2.1.1 Student presentations
Some courses only require that students give a presentation of their final year dissertation,
whereas other schools, such as Architecture, require students to present continuously
throughout their course as it integral to their future vocational practice. In Architecture,
students are required to present in front of an audience every three weeks or more and are
considered to be reasonably expert by the time they finish their course. Students receive
feedback in the session from staff and their peers [ar_wj_13.40]. The Architecture course
provides a good example of how the development of Digital Literacies is emerging naturally
out of the requirements of the discipline and the demands of their profession. Students are
required to develop an understanding of complex digital workflows involving the use of a
range of technologies during the process of developing visual and oral communication skills.
This course would provide an excellent showcase for illustrating desirable practice for
developing Digital Literacy.
6.2.2 Communicating
6.2.2.1 Digital Profiles, Social Media and Web 2.0
Where social media is concerned, feedback from the interviews reveals a mixed and
complex picture. The indication is that for some schools it is perceived that students don’t
want academic staff anywhere near Facebook, whilst for others it is positively encouraged.
In a recent survey of their students the School of Architecture found that almost 100% of
their students were using Facebook, with many also blogging and using Twitter. In some
cases Facebook has been successfully used to organise social events jointly, between staff
and students, and this has had a positive impact on community spirit within a school.
“We have an undergraduate social group called Chaos and they have a Facebook
page that is part of the school... we’ve found that little things, nothing to do with
revision, but just making things for staff and students on Facebook actually has
made a huge difference to the way students feel about their undergraduate
degree.“ [int12_30:10]
Some schools reported that they didn’t believe Facebook was being used for doing
academic work [int3_17.18], whilst others said they were aware that it was being commonly
used for such purposes, e.g., in the School of Computer Science, Architecture and Social
Sciences. There is evidence of Facebook being used by students to exchange content and
communicate about assignments as the extract below illustrates.
“There was an incident last year when I sent an email around to all the students
about two days before a hand-in, just confirming the procedure for handing it in
and that they were going to go through TurnItIn. And I just put in, almost as a
Page 38 of 80
postscript, I said and once it’s gone into TurnItIn it will check it for plagiarism. And
apparently Facebook went absolutely wild that night. He’s checking us for
plagiarism! And they all ended up staying up all night checking their work, which
wasn’t my intention, but they were all sending stuff around on Facebook.”
[int3_18.50]
An anecdotal comment from a student observed that in one school lecture handouts were
only being given in hardcopy form to students who attended lecture. Apparently, much to the
consternation of the lecturer in question, the students took the initiative to scan the handouts
and upload and distribute them via Facebook. This is a fascinating illustration of students
exploiting Digital Literacies they’re already proficient with to bypass the constraints that
conventional academic practice is imposing. The reality is that it will be virtually impossible to
prevent students acting in this way and the question is how might academic staff adapt their
practice accordingly.
In rare instances, Facebook was being actively promoted and engaged with by academic
staff and used for educational purposes, e.g., in the School of Bioscience. In this case,
because teaching staff were aware that students were doing academic work in Facebook,
they took the bold step for a particular module of uploading resources to both the institutional
VLE and a Facebook group. In practice, academic online facilitation primarily took place in
Facebook.
Several members of staff reported that students feel differently about doing academic work
in Facebook compared to university provisioned collaborative environments like Learning
Central (Blackboard VLE). It seems to have more to do with the perceived formality of the
environment and the more official relationship students have with their lecturers.
“I have asked students why they don’t do discussions on Blackboard. I’m happy to
be logged into Blackboard all day. They’re scared that if they say something
stupid everyone will see it. The difference is that they think it’s so formal, or so
academic that if they write, ‘Oh, I’m really stuck on this question’, everyone in the
class will see them as being very thick. Whereas in a Facebook group, it’s very kind
of, I’ll have a chat with someone it doesn’t matter who sees me being stupid. It’s a
really different attitude.” [int12_33.08]
We have a situation where students feel far more comfortable in their external online social
space, and we have teachers who are willing to explore working in these environments but
are reluctant to do so for a whole range of political and governance related reasons.
Because of this lecturers are asking for guidance and advice from senior management within
the school and from the University.
Page 39 of 80
Observations were made by teaching staff about the potential significant additional work for
them if they were to engage with students in these social spaces.
“I like that students can help each other. I’ve really wanted to do it for a long
time. ... The reason I haven’t done it is because I’m a bit worried that if I started it
up and the students did like it then they’d be, well, why isn’t that available for all
lectures. I don’t want to start that. There needs to be a much higher-level decision
about whether we do it. “ [int12_31:30]
“The thing about it is that if you have eighty, ninety students a year how many
man hours does it take to just monitor and feed into? It’s significant.”
[int10_22.47]
Lecturers reported making use of Twitter to keep in touch with students doing dissertations
[int3_16.36], but overall microblogging services are not yet widely used by teaching staff or
students across the University. However, this method of communication has been use to try
and keep students informed. For example, one lecturer ran an experiment designed to keep
students on placements informed of their visits. However, only a very few students were
prepared to follow their Twitter updates [int3_18.05]. The lecturer interpreted this as students
wanting to reserve social services such as Twitter and Facebook for their own personal use.
This observation serves to reinforce the concerns teaching staff have about engaging with
students in their personal online social spaces.
As a rule students are not thought to check for email messages on their university account
very regularly. The need for an efficient means of targeting communication to students is
driving the adoption of SMS messaging in a number of schools.
[The] school is currently running a pilot on the use of SMS messaging for getting
contact with students about changes in timetables. Now conditioning them
[students] with that expectation to receive SMS as a means to communicate with
them for short messages. [int7_8.00]
6.2.2.2 Professional development
Some teaching staff reported using digital media technologies outside the university (both on
a professional and personal level). There were frequent reports of academics using digital
media to create a professional profile for example by creating a presence on LinkedIn,
Academia.edu and Google Scholar. [e.g., int12_34.50] but this was still overall a very small
sub-set of staff. Active research staff are required to profile themselves and their work on the
University’s publicly viewable website. Other than this there were no reports of any schoolwide directive or policy encouraging staff to manage or develop their digital presence and
identity.
Page 40 of 80
In addition, there were no reports to indicate that students were being encouraged to
develop their social media profiles for professional development purposes. The only
significant engagement students had with social media was for private reasons using
Facebook. Academic staff on the whole expressed a reluctance to engage with students
through this medium, therefore there was no formal guidance or education concerning how
students should conduct themselves online; nothing is being done to help students
understand the issues concerning privacy, security and etiquette online. This is identified as
a potentially significant issue, especially with regard to ensuring appropriate professional
conduct online. It would be useful to find out to what extent teaching staff recognise this as
an important graduate attribute.
6.2.3 Disseminating
6.2.3.1 Staff Blogging
Teaching staff were asked whether they, their colleagues or students used external web
services, such as blogging platforms. Very few examples were given and the strong
impression was that blogging was not widely practiced across the University.
“We have someone [a member of staff] who does a blog that that
undergraduates adore. Half the time they have no idea what he’s talking about
because it’s at such a high level, but they love it. They love it that an academic,
who is a professor, is writing all sorts of cheeky things about science. They all read
it.” [int12_35.42]
The above example illustrates the positive effect academic blogging can have on students
and staff alike within a school, yet it is not actively encouraged amongst staff or taught to
students. In some schools people reported that staff blogging is widely frowned upon as
anyone doing so is judged to have too much spare time on their hands.
[Is that encouraging any other members of staff to blog?] “No. Because all the
other members of staff say, ‘Well they must have too much spare time on their
hands’. It’s not even just educational. I read it regularly because it informs me of
the higher decisions being made by the government, by politicians, in some
meeting that people have had that I had no idea about, new jobs, new results. I
comment on his blog and so do students. It’s absolutely brilliant. “ [int12_35.30]
Comments such as these reveal some strong negative attitudes towards the use of these
technologies, even in the face of positive feedback. If the majority of teaching staff within a
school feel this way, it puts into perspective the challenge of promoting student use of these
tools. However, there are several examples where blogging has been successfully
incorporated into undergraduate studies.
Page 41 of 80
6.2.3.2 Student Blogging
Undergraduates in the School of Architecture use blogging extensively to showcase their
work and to manage and share resources. No particular blogging platform is prescribed for
students but most appear to choose to use Tumblr for its simplicity.
“In the module that I’m teaching ... it is a requirement that they submit all their
work digitally to an online blog. We regularly send them links to online resources
that they can use. Yes, we set them up specifically for the module, on Tumblr. The
module has its own blog. We add stuff to it and we encourage them to add their
own.” [int3_16.21]
“I think most years have got a module that has some sort of blogs as a key
element. The fifth year hasn’t yet but will do. Some of the studios may do. This is
something that has taken off in the last couple of years. [int3_16.00]
Blogging is also fully integrated as part of a module in undergraduate Computer Science
where it is one of a number o§f different social technologies investigated.
[Do students blog?] “No. I know that Nottingham do that as part of their third
year. They get the students to do a blog about the stuff that they’re learning and
they get marked on their blog. But we don’t do anything like that.” [int12_36.30]
In one course a year one undergraduate module was design so that students would develop
their use of blogs. The aim was to get students to write entries to sharpen their critical
thinking, used for reflection and for content sharing. Students read an article and then wrote
a reflective piece about it on their blog. Within their tutor groups, of between 5 to 7 students,
and with their personal tutors they were able to see each other’s blogs and comment on
them.
Another school reported that their attempts to get students to blogging using Learning
Central had failed three years running because of technical difficulties with the VLE. This
was reported to have had have had quite a negative impact on staff perception of technology
within the school even though it was still recognised as being a valuable way to get students
reflecting on their work.
“I think if [blogs] worked well it could satisfy many things. You could use it for
personal development and career [planning] also.”
6.2.4 Creating MultiMedia
6.2.4.1 Video
Teaching staff make use of video-recording technologies to provide feedback on procedural
skills, communication and interaction with other people.
Page 42 of 80
“It would really nice if we had recording equipment that was easy to use. Video
equipment so that you could actually record bits of patient interaction. It would
be great feedback for the students as well, for them to be recorded. Look back
over it afterwards and critique it. So, just a simple video setup. Cheap and
cheerful.” [int10_59.00]
Below is a good illustration of how teaching staff are able to work on a case by case basis
with students on research projects to give them opportunity to develop their Digital Literacy
skills and at the same time provide something that will have subsequent value for the
course.
“One of my third year students is doing a project specifically on videoing patients
with [a condition]. And what she’s doing is not just videoing it, she’s videoing it
with a view to how you would storyboard how to do a video clip for educational
purposes. So, it’s no just point the camera and run, it’s think about it. And she’s
going to break it down into steps; do this, pause, do this, pause. Here are the
editable gaps that you can split it into.” [int10_1.01.07]
“Part of this third year student’s project is to review some of the video clips that
are out there from an educational point-of-view and see how bad they are. What
happens … is that you get practitioners recording it not educators and they don’t
see that you just can’t take a picture of something you’ve got to think about
what’s in the picture and how you present it from an educational point-of-view.”
[int10_1.09.48]
Teaching staff concerns over privacy and security mean that video resources aren’t
uploaded to publicly accessible servers, and the institution doesn’t yet provide a secure
video streaming server, which means educationally valuable resources are not easily
accessible to students and staff.
“There’s an issue with accessibility. So, when you have a professional context and
patients, and even if it’s the students’ are videoing each other you could say
something that in later life you really regret. So, for now she’s just going to put it
on a CD.” [int10_1.02.17]
6.2.4.2 Audio
It was reported that a number of teaching staff across the institution use of audio feedback
for student assignment and successfully use short podcasts as a way of introducing and
orienting students to topics. Teachers in the Schools of Optometry and Chemistry have
provided audio feedback on assignments for students that appears to have been well
received. However, there were reports from other lecturers who were not convinced that
such an approach added any value for the students. [int20_8.10]
The problem is giving feedback constructively and usefully. It’s the time. The shear
time of sitting down with somebody. What I’m thinking of doing, and I may try out
this year, is I have a module where they do a lab report in second year and I’m
going to podcast the feedback… And then just go through thinking out loud what I
Page 43 of 80
think of it, and to see whether they can use that. And that could be interesting. It
could be a nightmare [laughs]. [int10_38.30]
“I’ve edited podcasts and I’ve used Audacity to do that. It’s so, so easy. For me
what’s the minimum that we need to do to get a usable 5 minute podcast. And for
me, it’s record in 1 minute bursts. I learnt to edit simply so that I didn’t have to
start again. If I mucked up a sentence I could just go, leave a big gap, so I can see
where the gap is and I know I mucked up around that area, and then just continue
recording.” [int10_1.03.40]
The above commentary was from a lecturer who self-taught themselves to use the freely
available audio recording and editing programme Audacity. It illustrates the technique they
developed to simplify their practice. There were many examples reported of simple practical
methodologies developed by teachers working in isolation and with no mechanism and no
incentive for them to disseminated their practice more widely within the school or elsewhere.
6.3
Fragmented Practice
There were examples of strong culturally embedded ways of working within schools that are
at odds with the institution’s recommended practice.
“We do have a culture within the school - and this is one of the things in the past
that has been standardised - and that is teaching materials go onto the shared
drive on the network. Students have access to it and can see content. Staff have
access and it’s very easy to drag and drop files in there. We’ve done that for years
ever since we were given the shared drive.” [int3_20.59]
In one school, the most widely adopted practice for distributing and sharing files is a shared
file storage space (referred to as the ‘shared drive’) on the local network. However, a
minority of teaching staff choose to upload their content to Learning Central instead of the
shared drive. Since the vast majority of the school’s teaching content is stored on the shared
drive students expect to find it there and complain if they have to go to Learning Central to
find it. So, even within a relatively small school it proves difficult to achieve uniform and
consistent practices.
7 Skills
7.1
Recognition
It was recognised by the majority of interviewees that it is increasingly important for a
rounded graduate to be equipped with a range of literacies including Digital Literacy in order
to be effective in the workplace and competitive in the jobs market.
“The Welsh Assembly is very keen on degrees being about training people. They
want all the Universities to show the degree will take someone, whoever they are,
Page 44 of 80
into a job. And you can’t do they just because they know maths and physics!”
[int12_41.00]
Feedback such as this further serves to emphasise how the student employability agenda is
seen as a key driver for promoting the development of Digital Literacy.
7.2
Student IT Skills
Across all schools, teachers report that there is wide spectrum of IT awareness and skills
amongst students arriving at University. Whilst some have particular expertise with specific
forms of technology, there’s broad recognition of the need to bring everyone up to the same
level. Whether and how this is achieved varies considerably across disciplines and schools.
“Most of them [students] are adequate. We get a fair amount of mature students
and sometimes they struggle. They might manage the email and the wordprocessing, but that’s about their limit. You do get some of them who are quite
whizz-kids and clearly love it. We also get overseas students and their experience
can be variable. But by and large I’d say they cope. What they can’t do we soon
sort out.” [int10_18.35]
As might be expected, there is extensive use by staff and students of standard office type
applications, such MS-Word, PowerPoint and Excel. In the main, schools expect students to
arrive at University with what are commonly considered to be these basic IT skills. However,
most schools do not provide any formal help for students to develop these skills if they are
lacking. Usually, any individual problems are addressed as they arise throughout the course
and appropriate action taken as and when required. If needed, students are directed to
central support services or a courses run by the Students Union.
In one school, any skills deficiency was addressed by agreeing (amongst teaching staff) a
baseline requirement and then instructing students that they just had to work hard to develop
them. Training was done through a variety of methods, ranging from informal workshops
outside of regular work hours and internal sessions as and when needed by students. It is
reactive and demand driven and arises due to particular course requirements and hence
tends to be responded to by individual lecturing staff.
7.3
Student Basic Skills
There is noticeable variation between disciplines. In Physics, for example, it is recognised
that even before you seek to develop newer kinds of literacy such as Digital Literacy, there is
a significant issue with traditional literacies with new undergraduates. Many first year
students are identified as needing remedial Maths as well as support for writing and
communication skills generally.
Page 45 of 80
“The majority of our students do not like to write. And they think that science
means you don’t write. They think actually doing things is fine. They’re happy to
do physics and get in the lab, but they don’t like the writing side. So I know that in
my tutorials I have to get them doing writing and get them thinking about
different ways of communicating.” [int12_6:49]
Others lecturers mentioned the need for more discipline specific forms of digital skills:
“What we found lacking in the student population are basic skills, not so much the
general productivity skills like word-processing and spreadsheets and all of that. I
think they can handle that. But in more specific things like digital image
processing, computer aided drafting, illustration software, illustrator or whatever,
desktop publishing. You know making beautiful pamphlets etc. So we are trying to
introduce that. My sense it that these types of skills are really basic skills that
should be introduced as early as possible. I would like to see them come in from
High School. [int3_8.51]
The focus here is on the requirements arising from the discipline and the future vocational
expectations of what students are studying for. For some courses it is the set of digital skills
required for future professional practice that is the main driver determining the development
of technology skills in undergraduate studies.
“So, we’ve had a number of young staff. We’ve basically brought with us things
like GIS [Graphical Information Systems] and stuff like that which have become
essential tools for us. That’s very much discipline focused. And so with that will
come assumptions about literacy. And so from that comes all of the other stuff.
What you would call more generic skills. You know research on the Internet, use of
Excel for example and spreadsheet manipulation, databases and all of that stuff.
I’ve seen the change over the last five years.” [int30_6.15]
Other examples were given of more generic data and information management skills, that
aren’t necessarily determined by the use of specific kinds of technology.
“If you think about what we want students to be able to do, I want students to be
able to produce a good graph, that makes sense and you could present to
someone and say look there’s a graph, that’s what it’s all about. So, it’s all basic
data gathering, management, analysis, visualisation, presentation, they get a bit
of stats somewhere, thrown in.” [int10_28.30]
The above observation implies that students aren’t arriving with what are considered to be,
in the context of this discipline, basic skills. And currently there is no embedded form of
education to develop these required skills or any kind of remedial help.
So, I would characterise undergraduates and pretty much novices. My experience
is that new undergraduates don’t arrive with an acceptable level of proficiency in
these skills. May be some proficiency in Word, but still very much a mouse click
kind of proficiency. So, surface level. And Excel they have almost none, and
PowerPoint almost none. And with the Internet, it’s not very much beyond
Google.” [int30_12.19]
Page 46 of 80
Overall, teaching staff assume that new undergraduates will arrive at university with basic
proficiency in Office type applications, such as MS-Word, PowerPoint, Access and Excel,
and with a reasonably broad understanding of how to use internet based services. The
reality is that many students do not arrive at university proficient in these applications and
there is very little in the way of dedicated and targeted IT skills support provided by the
schools. The general expectation is that students will gradually become skilled through
receiving feedback on assignments.
7.4
Staff IT Skills
Across all schools it was reported that the vast majority of academic staff discover
technologies on their own, for example, Blogs, Twitter, Prezi, and Issue.com
“I use the tool I’m most comfortable with. For example, if I want to write a tutorial
on how to use a piece of software or whatever or a skill. And I want to publish it. I
put it on issue.com. It’s a nice online reader and I can point them [students] to it.
And I have a library of tutorials. I don’t necessarily put stuff on the S drive or
Blackboard because I’m not happy with the presentation of it.” [int3_20.30]
“I tried using wikis last summer, just with a couple of our summer students, to see
if they would engage with it. And they didn’t engage with it then, and I didn’t
push it because I didn’t know much about it myself.” [int10_21.37]
Although rare, there was evidence in schools of the use of Twitter and active exploration of
its potential for communication [int20_28.00]. Some members of staff had attended
workshops and had formed collaborative partnerships with colleagues in other schools in
order to study aspects of Twitter use and with a view to exploring its potential for promoting
their work and themselves. However, there was no intention to use Twitter to facilitate any
kind of learning with taught students.
It should also be noted that in the Learning and Teaching e-learning benchmarking exercise
which was conducted in December 2009 the majority of staff members who responded
indicated that the main constraint upon them using technology in their teaching was the lack
of skills. The full report is available in Appendix B and there is further analysis in section
9.2.1.2 Constraints.
8 Attitudes
8.1
Cultural Attitudes to Digital Literacy
All schools have a formal committee structure concerned with learning and teaching
practices within the school. This is the primary mechanism for interfacing with the
University’s governing bodies for Education. In most cases these high-level committees
Page 47 of 80
meet infrequently and were reported to be overly bureaucratic and primarily concern with
policy and administrative concerns. This was not wholly the case as some schools reported
that practice related matters were often discussed at these meetings. The size of school may
have a bearing on this, as some staff reported that in their school all their teaching staff
attended their Board of Studies whilst others said it was a select few.
“We do have a Learning and Teaching committee but it tends to be dominated by
stuff that comes from the centre (university central administration). “ [int3_24.07]
“But then again it has always been trying to get people to agree and even to
agree on the fact that we needed to agree, if you see what I mean is a problem.
The feedback we used to get from other staff members is, ‘but that’s the way we
do it’. I like just, I know that’s the way you do it but it’s crap, and again, a lack of
interest in investing the effort into making a teacher any better. That’s just the
way we do it. … It’s never been put into the big picture.” [int10_45.00]
“There is a Board of Studies which meets two or three times a year where
everything is brought up. So, for example, if we wanted to put in a communication
module into our third year... and link it in with the school of Journalism because
they already run a Masters level course. That was given to Board of Studies as a
pitch and two years later it’s still not been decided. It’s still on the table. If I’m
being honest it’s being held back because of academic status quo [laughs]. They
don’t really like to change anything.” [int12_39.37]
Comments reveal the frustration being experienced by some teachers when faced with
entrenched forms of thinking and practice and with little apparent inclination to change. It
appears difficult to get the necessary consensus needed to bring about any change, and this
seems particularly so where technology is concerned.
“I don’t think top-down is going to work. Because you mention in your proposal
two methods, top-down and bottom-up, and it is going to have to be bottom-up
and engaging with people like myself. Because I lead two or three modules., we’re
[PCUTL educated staff] all responsible for a number of modules. So, the way that
I’ve seen change happen, what little has happened here, has been through
practice. So, somebody does something, the students like it. They [other staff]
hear people say their stuff is [bad]. [int_25.55]
“It’s good practice, followed by good student feedback, that then sort of drives it. I
would argue that in this department bottom-up would be the strongest, because
certainly there’s no true inspiration at the top. Either they’re immersed in their
research, or they are doing what they’re happy doing and they don’t need to
change. They’ve done it for 25 years and it’s worked fine for 25 years., so why
would we change it.” [int_26.35]
Because of the perceived lack of willingness to initiate change at the top of some schools,
some teachers suggest that the approach most likely to succeed would be to target the
newer and younger members of staff, and especially those who had done the PCUTL
course.
Page 48 of 80
It is very difficult to make generalisations across the schools as reports of the attitudes of
senior managers are quite varied. For example, in contrast to the above example, the School
of Computing as adopted a strong top-down approach encouraging all staff to engage more
with learning and teaching issues.
Certain schools revealed that were giving careful consideration to the strategic significance
of digital technologies by creating ‘threads’ for various aspects of undergraduate education,
whilst also working to ensure that traditional forms of literacy were being appropriately
addressed.
“We do have what we call threads that run through the school. One is the digital
thread and the other is the literacy thread ... we have [a] person who is
responsible for literacy and writing and things like that as a particular thread. And
that’s about making sure that we don’t up with a situation where some students
get to the end of their degree without writing an essay. And that might sound
strange in other schools but it could quite easily happen here. Because some years
they only write one essay a year because everything else is design based. So, we
do have a person who is responsible for checking that and making sure that
there’s a strategy that runs through the school.” [int3_26.30]
Generational differences within schools were also flagged as being a factor impacting on the
uptake of technology. The impression is given of a legacy mind-set operating in some
schools that isn’t being exposed to potential value and benefits technology might bring.
“I think we are heavily loaded with older faculty, there’s a generational shift here.
And a lot of those older faculty don’t necessarily understand the implications of
technology. I think it’s because they are not shown. But also there’s no champion
at the top level. [The school] is also very reactionary and opposed to pro-active.
We don’t have any IT or technology planning.” [int7_19.30]
However, in some schools senior members of staff were identified as being the main
instigators of e-innovation in teaching. It’s likely that the more significant factor is the greater
emphasis being placed on research by senior staff.
8.1.1 Teaching versus Research
A number of interviewees reported the difficulty they and their other colleagues experience in
balancing teaching and research related work. Many schools reported strong emphasis on
research making it challenging at time to push forward learning and teaching related
initiatives.
“There aren’t many teachers within the Professoriate. So, most of them are
research Professors. So, they don’t actually engage particular much other than
with research. The less senior staff are doing most of the teaching. The shift is
coming purely by new staff entering, that would be my impression. People are
Page 49 of 80
certainly aware of the students but it’s really seen as how do we keep them
happy. There’s not a change to a more pedagogic approach.” [int10_24.08]
“In the school, we’re still very research focused. I certainly interact with a number
of other people who are in my teaching team that have all done PCUTL. There is
certainly no desire as a whole School to try to come together, and we’ve tried to
do this. There’s just no desire. It’s been suggested. We had a teaching review just
recently and as part of that it was suggested to create this weekly forum of events
where we could look at practice and stuff like that. It was very much not the
flavour of the month. The traditional teachers are very sceptical of PCUTL. And so
the new, for good reason right, we tend to be young upstarts, relative to the 25 or
30 years probably most of our staff have been here. Because we’re very bi-modal
in age, there is absolutely a generational difference.” [int30_22.57]
A number of teachers expressed frustration over not being able to dedicate sufficient time to
researching and developing their teaching practice. They commented on the need for
greater continuity of support and the importance of being able to sustain initiatives.
“And another huge issue I have with my job is the difficulty in actually progressing
things. If you’re on a teaching contract, you teach until your eyeballs fall out for
half the year and then everything goes quiet. And during the summer when I
would have the time to do these things it’s difficult to coordinate things and get it
together because people aren’t here. The QUILT sessions only run in semester
time. And that’s when I need the support. I think there’s a huge, huge gap across
the summer where staff who want to could skill themselves up if the support was
there to do it.” [int10_1.06.22]
It is an aspect of the culture of the organisation to have more ‘down time’ in the summer
months, precisely when lecturers stop their teaching and are available to dedicate more time
to explore new ways of teaching. However, the rest of the University is not geared up for
supporting teachers at this time of year.
Teaching finishes about Easter for most people. Lets take it up to August where
most people take their holidays. Well, I know there’s marking and other stuff
going on, but you have April, May, June, July, four months where your timetable
doesn’t exist anymore. So, all those gaps have appeared. So, that to me would be
a prime opportunity. To get the ball rolling in March and keep it rolling in the next
four months, you’d actually achieve something. You would come out the other
end skilled up enough to be able to apply it. [int_10_1.07.09]
“If you could run developmental type workshops, where people have something
that they want to do and there’s other people who have experience of it and
they’re developing their own work and you sort of shadow or work with them,
then I think that would work quite well.” [int10_1.10.17]
A requirement identified by teachers was for someone to manage the organisation,
coordination and facilitation of getting teachers in different schools to share what they’re
doing and exchange ideas.
“And the other thing that could work well is if you actually had teaching groups.
So, if during that period March through to July, I could keep Tuesday afternoons
free, and other people from other schools could keep Tuesday afternoons free,
Page 50 of 80
and then you could actually work in groups to develop your teaching and get input
from other people that way. And that would be a rolling idea. You’d still be doing
your own development but in a richer environment. With peer support and you’ve
got somebody there to ask if you’ve already identified key areas where I could
really use some support in video editing. Then if you have a dozen people who
want that, then get them to work together an afternoon a week for six weeks.
Actually working on and producing in an environment where there’s help if you
need it.” [int10.11.32]
The need for a centrally facilitate peer-support network and collaborative projects.
8.1.2 Professional bodies
Several interviewees referred to the importance of the professional body’s influence
regarding the use of technology in their subject. This viewpoint is (naturally) most prevalent
amongst vocational subjects (such Medicine, Law and Engineering).
For example, in
developing the medical curriculum the school of Medicine is directly influenced by the
direction and guidelines detailed in the publication Tomorrow’s Doctors and also by the
regular course reviews conducted by the General Medical Council. Also, in the School of
Medicine, an academic has been appointed to oversee e-Learning.
“There is a professional body that sets our criteria for what’s in the course…They
have competencies. All competencies are patient based. They are not learning to
learn skills. Not at all.” [int10_47.00]
Schools also often follow guidance from these organisations when deciding how to invest in
specific forms of digital or educational expertise. For example, several years ago in the
School of Architecture they appointed a member of staff with the explicit mandate to bring in
new kind of digital strategy to improve the whole area of digital design. There was
recognition that undergraduates lacked digital design skills and the aim was to bring in digital
modelling. Experience from elsewhere (USA) was that students were arriving at University
with CAD skills. [int3_9.00].
Frameworks and guidelines provided by their professional bodies were priority concerns in
designing their curricula although there was some flexibility in terms of pedagogy.
“Our (course) materials are fixed because they are accredited by the Institute of
Physics. So, we can’t change the material too much. But what we can do is change
is types of learning activity. But it’s almost wholly lecture based, coursework
problems and that’s it. No one tends to step outside that box.” [int12_21:45]
Some professional bodies provide explicit direction when it comes to developing
competence with digital technologies. For example, the Royal Institute for British Architects
states:
Page 51 of 80
“Schools will: …
contribute to graduate employability by ensuring that students’ skills in digital and
-
analogue media, structured written work, and the exploration of design ideas through
making are thoroughly represented in all academic portfolios.” (RIBA, 2011)
The RIBA encourages a diversity of material in the academic portfolio, including 2- and 3D
work, representation of the full range of both digital and analogue media, and the exploration
of design ideas through making.21”
8.2
Staff Attitudes
8.2.1 Motivation
Teaching staff commented on what did or didn’t motivate them to change or develop their
teaching practice. In the absence of any intrinsic interest or enthusiasm, the students were
identified as key players in determining whether or not they initiated any developments. As
things currently stand, e.g., with regard to student feedback on teaching, there is little
incentive for lecturers to go beyond what is deemed to be sufficient to keep students
satisfied.
“Once you get adequate feedback from your students on a module evaluation
there’s no demonstrable mileage in getting better than that. People will do
[innovate] bits and pieces here and there because they quite like the idea of it.
Sometimes it sticks sometimes it doesn’t. But not very much happens.”
[int10_13:44]
Staff commented that because students weren’t demanding to be taught Learning Literacies
or study skills there was no driver. The impression is that students are primarily focused on
‘the end game’, i.e., to do as much as they need to ensure future employability. And since
most of the vocational courses result in full employment for their students there is no
justification to incorporate additional Learning Literacy elements into courses.
“They’re [students] are not interested in it [Learning Literacies], and therefore we
get away with not doing it, because they never push for it. They not interested in
developing their CV or their portfolio of skills. They just do as they are told. And
because there is a 100% employment, clearly they’re doing enough. They don’t
need to do any more. What would they gain? And it’s only afterwards when
they’ve been in practice for a while that they start to think I might want to do
something a bit different a bit more adventurous.” [int10_48.10]
It’s interesting to note towards the end of the above comment, that it is not until students
have graduated and are in employment do they realise that they would like to able to do
21
http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/Validation/ValidationProcedures2011.pdf
Page 52 of 80
things that had they acquired a broader range of Learning Literacies as an undergraduate it
would have enabled them to do.
It’s clear that many teaching staff are highly motivated and wish to teach well and are keen
to develop their teaching practice. This was reported to be most apparent in newer members
of teaching staff and those who had done the University’s PCUTL course. However, a
degree of frustration was expressed by a number of interviewees about how disconnected
they sometimes feel within their school, and the lack of support in being able to sustain any
new initiative.
“Staff also want to do good teaching. Particularly the ones who come on teaching
contracts value teaching. That’s what they want to do and they want to do it well.
But you can feel like a complete isolated fish out of water sometimes because you
know, well you might have an impact on one area of your module but to broaden
it out would be much better, and to follow it through is a problem. You can have
wonderful ideas in your second year module, but if that doesn’t get carried
through to the third year module they go backwards.” [int10_53.50]
This is illustrative of the challenge teaching staff face when acting independently. It also
highlights the need to address these issues at the point of curriculum and course design
and in ways that involve all staff who have responsibility for a course.
Reports were of a varied picture of prevailing attitudes to technology related change.
“Some members of staff are really resistant to technology. They resist doing
electronic marking. They said they didn’t want to. Then they were told they had
to. They made it work for themselves. They print things out for themselves and
mark it on paper and then scan it in and send it back, because they refuse to mark
on a screen. But equally, there are some who think it’s the bee’s knees and are
very happy. So, I think we have a spectrum.” [int20_34.11]
One reason that was often given by staff is that they want to be able to do their marking
away from a computer, for example, when they’re travelling on a train. One school sought to
address this by providing their staff with portable devices. So, if they wanted an iPad to do
their marking they could get one.
“It seems to me that these kinds of initiatives are generalised. When it comes to
specific skills for specific domains, like [reference to discipline], there is resistance
to university wide initiatives.” [int3_6.00]
Reports of innovators pushing for a ridiculously long time to get technology related changes
embedded as part of a module or course. With resistance reported not at a conceptual level
but to do with technical difficulties that held things back for a number of years. [int20_21.00]
Page 53 of 80
8.2.2 Constraints
The most commonly mentioned factor influencing whether staff engage positively with
technology is the perceived amount of time and effort it will take them to be productive using
it. Usually, they want to see demonstrable benefit before they try using it themselves.
“Where I think you need the key insight is from the staff. And until they recognise
the importance of these things…I always think the only way to engage staff is to
either give them something that will make their lives easier or less time
consuming. And if you can wrap it up in one of those two you’ll have everyone
doing it.” [int21_1:13:10]
“I mean anything that takes people more time tends to be frowned upon. The
ideal would be to take a bit of time initially but it would have to save time in the
long run and make things run more smoothly.” [int12_1;01:55]
There’s a sense that the overly bureaucratic and formal processes within schools is working
against any change and teaching staff find this very frustrating.
“I always think the only way to engage staff is to either give them something that
will make their lives easier or less time consuming. And if you can wrap it up in
one of those two you’ll have everyone doing it. People are feeling that they’ve got
way too much to do. So, I think by selling it that way you’re really on to a winner.
” [int21_1:13:10]
The main driver for introducing technology within a school is for administrative reasons,
primarily to save time and hassle. For example, Audience Response (‘Clicker’) technology in
one school is almost solely used for collecting student course feedback and very little for
facilitating learning and teaching. And when it is used, it’s by individual enthusiasts who, for
a whole range of reasons, struggle to disseminate their practice. There is quite a big push
across schools to adopt electronic submission and marking as a means of streamline the
administrative process and improving the timeliness of feedback. However, this has not been
favourably received by all staff.
One of the strong messages coming through from teaching staff was the need for specialist
technical support to enable them to develop new teaching practices. This concerns not just
the need for technical knowledge and skills, but just as much to not having the time to do it
themselves. Support staff within the schools was also identified as an important mechanism
for maintaining the awareness of teachers about new technologies and practices. It appears
that a significant amount of exposure to new technology and new practices is directly
through local school-based technical specialists. Teaching staff openly reported that they
would not being to undertake their innovative teaching work if it weren’t for the support of
technicians.
Page 54 of 80
This is corroborated by the research conducted in December 2009 by the Learning and
Teaching Support Unit to review Educational Requirements of schools. The review received
111 respondents from 21 schools (see Appendix C, Table 1). The range of staff responding
was broad, with the majority being teaching and research staff as opposed to learning
support and eLearning staff (see Appendix C Table 2). There were also a large number of
responses from staff with specific and senior responsibilities for teaching within their school
(see Table 3).
When asked what they perceived to be the most significant constraints inhibiting the use of
tools and technologies in their teaching the answer was overwhelmingly a concern that staff
themselves lacked the skills to implement technology effectively. The second greatest
inhibitor was time and it might be suggested that with greater Digital Literacy the time taken
to use technology in learning and teaching activities might be reduced.
35
Graph 12 - Challenges/constraints in the use of tools and
technologies
% Responses
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Furthermore, when teaching staff were asked where they find it most difficult to find support
and assistance in a particular area the results were again Digital Literacy related ( rather
than user skill, subject specific or information ltieracy based for example.)
Page 55 of 80
18
Graph 14 - What aspects do they struggle to find people with
the skills & expertise to support them?
Number of responses
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
12
Graph 15 - In what areas should more support be available?
Number of responses
10
8
6
4
2
0
Developing multimedia content
Training for eLearning
Blackboard
A voice to speak to
when you need help
Page 56 of 80
eAssessment
Video conferencing
Key findings of this review included the following:

Staff lack the awareness of what is already available within the University to support
their teaching, assessment and communication with students.“I don't really know enough
about some of the above to know how their use could be applied effectively to my
teaching.”

Staff would like to have more multi-media and interactive content available to support
their teaching, however they lack the ability to create these types of teaching materials or
an understanding of how to make them available to the students.“It's easy to produce
standard content (Blackboard, Powerpoint, Word, online assessments) but not to develop
online learning material which requires new skills (flash, html etc).”

Staff turn to people within their schools for support with education and technologyenhanced education.“Other teaching staff in my School.”

The preparedness of students can be an issue, particularly related to their ability to
perform peer and self assessment and IT skills.“ The main constraint is what seems to be
a limited IT skills of many of the students. Much of our time is spent teaching them very
basic skills. Many find it difficult to even navigate Blackboard.”
The full report and analysis can be found in appendix C
Some teaching staff were very aware that the uniqueness of their practice distinguished
them from their colleagues and signalled their USP. Their knowledge and expertise made
them stand out amongst their peers who were not doing as much as them to engage
students through technology. As a consequence that weren’t overly motivated to help or
support their colleagues because that would in effect dilute their visibility. It is difficult to
judge how prevalent this attitude might be amongst staff who are making the effort to try out
new approaches. The culture within most schools remains a highly competitive for both staff
and students.
“I would say you concentrate on staff who are on a learning contract. A really
useful one would be PCUTL type projects. … So that there’s a measurable benefit,
you know, I’ve now got something else on my CV.” [int10_53.20]
8.3
Student Attitudes
Student attitudes to their studies:
“The other problem that we have with that sort of progressive approach to your
portfolio and your teaching and your skills, is they all come in with the same goal
of being an [reference to profession]. And they just don’t see the point in anything
other than becoming an [reference to profession]. And one of the most common
questions we get is “Do we have to do this in practice?...That’s what I’m here for.
Now that I’m paying…” [int10_47.20]
Page 57 of 80
8.3.1 National Union of Student Survey
The National Student Survey (NSS) 2011 was conducted in January and February at most
Higher and Further education institutions across the UK. Student feedback is used to
compile year on year comparative data that is: Collation of this information is made available
to inform potential students and more extensive feedback can be used to facilitate best
practice and enhance the student learning experience.
Opinions were gathered from amongst final year undergraduate students at Cardiff.
Comments related the use of Blackboard, Learning Central and other digital media were
collated by school (NB not all schools had relevant comments on the use of technology).
These comments are available in full in Appendix D
Issues most commented upon appear to be commentaries on the Digital Literacy of teaching
staff specifically in relation to the use of Learning Central.
In some instances students
commented upon the experience of having a VLE which in general they appear to have
found useful. Most comments however talk about the use of Learning Central as a document
and information resource bank rather than its use as a communication tool. There is no
comment for example of the use of discussion boards and this is clearly an area where value
could be added and filtered through to the student experience.
9 Conclusion
Strategy and Policy

Clear guidance has been given across the university that Digital Literacy should be
developed in learning and teaching.

The employability agenda is identified as a key driver for promoting greater
awareness and engagement with Digital Literacy.
Infrastructure

Cardiff University has a wide variety of networked applications which are accessible
on and off campus and via mobile devices (which are becoming increasingly
prevalent across the student body).
Page 58 of 80
Support

Teaching staff have clearly identified a need for Digital Literacy support.

There is a need for clear information and support to enable teachers and students to
make better use of Learning Central.
Practices

Access to Digital Literacy provision is varied across schools, within schools and
between staff and student stakeholder groups.

There is value in enabling better idea sharing about teaching and learning practices
within and across schools.
Expertise

Staff identify skills as being the main inhibitor to technology enhanced pedagogy.
Within schools there is no formal structured staff development to improve teaching
practice. Across schools PCUTL could be used to support Digital Literacy.

Digital Literacy appears be more developed in schools where there is a strong
professional requirement for technology dependent practices.
Attitudes

Teaching staff believe that using digital technology will cost them time rather than
saving it. There is a need to developing a greater awareness and understanding of
value of Digital Literacy for efficiency.

Feedback on practices that have bearing on Digital Literacy is contradictory. An
agreed level of consistency for a core or foundation set of Digital Literacies across
courses and schools is desirable.

Students feel that use of Learning Central (Blackboard VLE) and other centrally
provisioned technologies are inconsistent within and across schools.

Students feel that communication with teaching staff could be improved in some
schools. Social media technologies could provide alternative mechanisms.
9.1 Next Steps
The project will continue to work on its objectives as defined in the project plan however the
information gathered in this baseline will be used to enhance the value and impact of the of
those objectives.
Page 59 of 80
We also feel that a focus model which looks at ‘Task’ first and then develops the skills to
evaluate and use technology effectively is the most future proof and durable solution and
one which will develop a meaningful and self sustaining digital literacy in staff and
students throughout the university. The tasks we believe are most significant based upon
the research conducted are the following:






Searching
Retrieving
Managing
Creating
Disseminating
Communicating22
Although findings from the semi-structured interviews revealed technologies were being
used to perform each of these tasks, the highest priorities appear to be for disseminating,
exchanging and communicating.
22
This list is inspired by the SCONUL seven pillars model for information literacy, however, for the purpose of this project
evaluation, identification, scoping and planning are not included because they are understood to be high-level cognitive
activities performed across many of the basic data/information tasks.
Page 60 of 80
Appendices
Appendix A. Case Study Learning Literacies in MSc Computing
The following case study was written by Joy Head as part of the Welsh
Information Literacy Project and provides an excellent example of Information
Literacy embedded within the curriculum.
It is also available on the Welsh
Information Literacy Project website23
Summary
MSc Computing at Cardiff
University is a conversion
course
that
transforms
graduates
from
all
disciplines
into
IT
professionals.
The course
has a diverse student intake
but all students must reach
high
professional
and
research skills in order to
meet the demands of the intensive course.
This is a good example of how
information literacy is embedded in the curriculum and how it is being used to
bridge the gap between academic learning and the world of work.
How did it start?
The School of Computer Science was ahead of the game in adopting state of the
art databases and e-journals in the early 1990s. However Ruth Thornton,
subject librarian at the Trevithick Library, soon realised that many of the
students did not have the skills to access and use this material. Professional
Tutor Pat Ryder also observed that information used was sometimes badly
evaluated for academic and contextual suitability and that citing and referencing
was not sufficient for Master’s level. Moreover, students were also not used to
working collaboratively in teams, which is a model used throughout the IT
23
www.welshinformationliteracy.org
Page 61 of 80
industry.
It was clear that change was essential in order to learn the
professional research and collaboration skills that would be needed in the world
of work.
What is being done?
The professional issues and skills module was introduced as a core element of
the MSc in the 2000-2001 academic year and has since undergone several
revisions.
Initially, Information Literacy was
incorporated as two standard one
hour lecture sessions incorporating
database demonstrations and an
explanation
of
citing
and
referencing. At this stage, there
was
nothing
practical
linked
to
module work and, as a result, the
Information Literacy skills, vital to
students’ academic success in their assignments were perceived as ‘a dull library
session’. A revised model was therefore developed involving hands-on activities
directly relevant to the MSc curriculum.
At the start of the module an Information Literacy questionnaire is given to all
students in order to ascertain areas of strength and weakness.
Three weekly workshops are undertaken using course-specific materials and
exercises.

Library and database basics: how to find information

Evaluating and using information

Finding information on a specific topic
For the three week period a workbook is used going though finding evaluating
and using course related subject matter on Voyager, Web of Science or SCOPUS
databases. Comparisons are also made with other search tools such as Google.
Students work in syndicate groups to develop their techniques in a personalised
learning, peer-to-peer structure.
Page 62 of 80
This means that each student receives 4.5 hours of interactive Information
Literacy training supported by librarian Ruth Thornton and by tutor Pat Ryder.
This partnership was a key factor in the success of the revised model, which
creates a curricular bridge between the Information Literacy skills and the course
content.
“The fact that both Ruth and I have been present in the sessions and that they take place in
sessions timetabled for the module means that the students view this as an integral part of their
degree programme and not as an 'extra'” Pat Ryder, Tutor, MSc in Computing.
The 3 sessions also directly lead to 2 assessments on a group research topic.
This makes up 30% of the module mark and includes a peer assessment mark
for individual-group contribution. The assessment underlines the importance of
Information Literacy as a professional and academic standard and the peer
evaluation underlines teamwork as an integral professional skill.
The module is central to the development of students into the IT graduates and
professionals of the future. It is also an excellent example of how Information
Literacy is equally central to graduate professional skills development.
Professional skills developed:





Co-operation to investigate a technical
subject.
Critical evaluation of sources
Assessing information to formulate a
position.
Planning an oral report presenting
information in a professional manner on a
technical topic.
Researching and writing a structured and
referenced report on a technical subject.
Why does it work?

Through the partnership between computer science and library staff, students
get the best of combined expertise.

Use of real examples: citing appears to have improved as a result of seeing
extracts from real essays.

Time to experiment, discuss and apply knowledge.
Page 63 of 80

The sessions are completely embedded into the module which emphasises
their importance to the students.
What difference did it make?
The programme has been so successful that Ruth now delivers a reduced version
with the undergraduates.
“Students seem to be better able to find and to assess the quality of a wider range of relevant
references than was previously the case.” Pat Ryder, Tutor, MSc in Computing.
Appendix B. Review of the educational requirements of schools at
Cardiff University
Following on from a recommendation arising from the Cardiff University eLearning
Benchmarking exercise completed in December 2008 (for the need for more emphasis to be
placed on the educational dimension of support rather than technology) a review of the
educational requirements of the University was carried out in 2009 through a partnership
between registry (Learning and Teaching Support Unit) and Information Services. . This
review was to identify how (or if) technology could be used to enhance the educational
experience. The review looked at education in general and how schools and Directorates.
The results are included below.
Aim
The aim was to give an evidence-based understanding of the educational requirements of
The schools that will form the basis of future investigations and decisions for technologyenhanced education in Cardiff University.
Objectives
In drawing out the educational requirements of the schools it was hoped to gain a better
understanding of a wider range of issues in relation to technology-enhanced education.
These objectives were to understand:
1. how technology is already incorporated in education, and also to generate examples
of where it is being used well within Cardiff University.
2. where existing services do not currently meet the needs of the user, and to identify
why this is the case.
Page 64 of 80
3. where users perceive that a service or technology is not available and provided by
Cardiff University, when in fact it is, however its existence has not been properly
communicated/published to users, or that it is available but that it hasn’t yet been
configured/enabled as a service to users.
4. where there are gaps in the provision, i.e. the technology is not in place in Cardiff
University that meets the needs of users.
5. how the use of technology-enhanced education is implemented and supported at
other Higher Education Institutions worldwide and to develop from this knowledge
good practice examples.
Stages of the Review
There were three stages to the review:
1. Gathering the required information from schools at Cardiff University.
2. Gaining a better understanding of how people support technology-enhanced
education at other HEIs and the provision available.
3. Creating a Gap Analysis; highlighting the provision already available in Cardiff and
where developments are needed.
Findings from the eLearning Benchmarking Exercise
The outcomes of the eLearning Benchmarking were:

The need for more emphasis to be placed on the educational dimension of support for
technology enhanced learning, and for this to be integrated with support for learning and
teaching in general.

The availability of a greater variety of support for technology enhanced learning and
teaching developments to be available in the future than is at present.

Communication strategies needed to be developed to ensure that schools, academics
and students understand: the decisions the university is in the process of making; that
decisions, once taken, are properly filtered down to all stakeholders; the developments
taking place to improve support for learning & teaching; where to go to receive the
support they require to carry out their work.

Formal guidelines on the design of learning materials to ensure accessibility are
developed and disseminated (in partnership with the work on the Inclusive Curriculum).

Further discussion is required on the possible need for minimum levels of provision of
learning materials to all students, to address comments raised directly from the students.
Page 65 of 80

The development and dissemination of case studies of practice of technology enhanced
learning are needed to encourage further academics to incorporate appropriate
technologies into their teaching.
Data Gathering
The first stage of the Review was to gather information from schools at Cardiff University on
how they teach, assess, give feedback, communicate with their students; the aim being to
begin to build an evidence-base on how they support the students’ educational experience.
The focus was on the education in general, rather than technology-enhanced education
specifically.
The method selected for the collection of user requirements was a survey of staff delivered
via the Bristol Online Survey tool.
A questionnaire was developed in partnership with
Registry and Information Services and made available to staff from 25 August 2009 to 18
September 2009. The information about the review and a link to the survey was sent directly
to all Chairs of School Learning & Teaching Committees (or equivalent), with a request that it
be circulated to all staff. There was also a direct email to all members of the Education
Community, the Blackboard User Group and the eLearning Network.
The review received 111 respondents from 21 schools (see Table 1). The range of staff
responding was broad, with the majority being teaching and research staff as opposed to
learning support and eLearning staff (see Table 2). There were also a large number of
responses from staff with specific and senior responsibilities for teaching within their School
(see Table 3).
Table 1: Responses by School
1
ARCHI
1
HISAR
14
BIOSI
2
JOMEC
9
CARBS
1
LEARN
6
CHEMY
4
MATHS
4
CLAWS
8
MEDIC
16
CPLAN
1
PGMDE
1
DENTL
3
PHRMY
8
EARTH
7
SOCSI
1
ENCAP
7
SOHCS
10
ENGIN
6
SONMS
1
EUROS
Page 66 of 80
Table 2: Roles of Respondents
Table 3: Specific Responsibilities of Respondents
Module Leader
72
Lecturer
44
Senior Lecturer
21
Professor
18
Course Director/Director of Studies
22
Reader
9
Admissions Tutor
13
Professional tutor
7
Year Co-ordinator/Leader
9
Learning Support
5
Chair of Learning & Teaching/Deputy
Research Assistant
2
Other
5
Programme
Leader/Deputy
Programme Leader
Chair
15
7
Head of School/Department
3
Other
12
Analysis of Responses
Graph 2 - Challenges/constraints on teaching methodologies
% Responses
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Page 67 of 80
25
Graph 4 - Challenges/constraints on assessment
methodologies
% Responses
20
15
10
5
0
Graph 8 - Challenges/constraints on communication methods
35
30
% Responses
25
20
15
10
5
0
Time available
Getting students to Would like more IT
Blackboard
use the set methods options available Discussion Board's
Capabilities
Page 68 of 80
Engaging remote
students
Graph 10 - Challenges/constraints to making content
available
30
25
% Responses
20
15
10
5
0
Own knowledge and Video streaming
ability
abilities
Conflict between
teaching and
research
Powerpoint
inadequate for
teaching
Firewall issues in
NHS/Plug ins not
installed
Graph 12 - Challenges/constraints in the use of tools and
technologies
35
% Responses
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Page 69 of 80
Graph 13 - Who do people turn to for support?
35
Number of Responses
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Colleagues in the
School
18
Colleagues in the INSRV Staff/Services Higher Education
Wider University
Academy Subject
Centre Staff
Graph 14 - What aspects do they struggle to find people with
the skills & expertise to support them?
16
Number of responses
QUILT Activities
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Page 70 of 80
12
Graph 15 - In what areas should more support be available?
Number of responses
10
8
6
4
2
0
Developing multimedia content
Training for eLearning
Blackboard
A voice to speak to
when you need help
eAssessment
Video conferencing
Findings from the Prioritisation of the User Requirements
In order of highest priority
Low
Medium High
34. Video
14
5
81
30. Wiki
14
14
71
25. Feedback
5
25
70
15. Notifications
10
24
67
11. Groups
15
20
65
35. Lecture Capture
21
16
63
28. Discussion Board
10
29
62
21. Grade Centre – SIMS integration
29
14
57
10
35
55
24. ePortfolios
30
15
55
29. Online Classroom Facility
21
26
53
14. Announcements
30
25
45
10. Calendar
35
20
45
45
10
45
33. Profiles
28
28
44
16. Access to modules
24
33
43
33
24
43
6. Guest Access
9. Timetables
2. BDA rights
Page 71 of 80
22. Turnitin
16
42
42
19. File size
32
26
42
32. Audio Discussion List
37
21
42
18. CPD Provision
23
36
41
45
15
40
13. Statistics
38
24
38
26. Audio Feedback
38
24
38
31. Scholar
47
16
37
3. Rollover
25
40
35
43
24
33
7. Appointments
58
11
32
8. TXTTOOLS
33
43
24
17. Facebook
41
36
23
20. Middle names
68
11
21
4. Early access to Blackboard
40
40
20
5. 24/7 Support for Blackboard
45
35
20
67
17
17
20
65
15
12.
School-level customisation of BB Home
page
27.
Presence
awareness
and
Instant
Messaging
23. Safe Assign
1. Back Up
Overview of Findings
Across the range of questions asked in the survey there were a number of key findings that
consistently emerged. These were as follows (highlighted with selected, direct quotes):
 Time was highlighted as the biggest issue and constraint in developing education
practices. “Time constraints to set things up.”
 The lack of recognition for teaching in comparison to research. This is also linked
back to time, as research was always seen to take priority over teaching in an
overstretched workload. “I am not rewarded for my teaching activities, only my research
activities. We don't even get praise for good student feedback or innovative teaching. I
am only rewarded for research publications. So all my time and effort are directed
towards the latter.”
 The lack of willingness to change by senior decision makers within schools, in terms
of policies around teaching and assessment methods.“For first year modules 85% of the
Page 72 of 80
assessment must be based on the final exam (which must be of a certain specified
form). The remaining 15% is to be based on coursework.”
 Class sizes - the ability to efficiently and effectively teach, assess, feedback and
communicate with large groups of students.“Class sizes. In Year 1 and 2 where
students may really benefit from small group teaching/subject tutorials etc. there is little
opportunity due to the size of classes.”
 Physical teaching space needs are not being met. Schools would like greater flexibility
in the layout of rooms (to help enable different learning styles) and a better range (and
more reliable) AV equipment in pool rooms, which are capable of running the required
software of the lecturer.“Lack of computing facilities in pool-rooms in Glamorgan. Every
room should have a computer, projector and web connection, and it should work.
Severely limits options with their absence.”
 Staff lack the awareness of what is already available within the University to support
their teaching, assessment and communication with students.“I don't really know
enough about some of the above to know how their use could be applied effectively to
my teaching.”
 Staff would like to have more multi-media and interactive content available to support
their teaching, however they lack the ability to create these types of teaching materials
or an understanding of how to make them available to the students. “It's easy to produce
standard content (Blackboard, Powerpoint, Word, online assessments) but not to
develop online learning material which requires new skills (flash, html etc).”
 Staff turn to people within their schools for support with education and technologyenhanced education. “Other teaching staff in my school.”
 The preparedness of students can be an issue, particularly related to their ability to
perform peer and self assessment and IT skills. “The main constraint is what seems to
be a limited IT skills of many of the students. Much of our time is spent teaching them
very basic skills. Many find it difficult to even navigate Blackboard.”
Many of these key findings map directly back to the outcomes of the eLearning
Benchmarking completed in December 2008.
Conclusions and Recommendations
As time, abilities and knowledge are a constraint to developing educational practices the
main question is: how can we put support in place that will help free up time whilst improving
the student learning experience?
Page 73 of 80
1. There is a need to support people with the understanding of practices, methods and tools
that are available for use in their teaching, assessment, feedback and communication
with students; and how to use these in an appropriate and educationally-sound way.
This should be both in terms of the practices, methods, tools and technologies that are
already available within the university, but also to include other solutions that are
available externally (as appropriate). For those currently available internally, an audit of
existing methods and tools is required, which can be used to develop an educational
programme that can help staff utilise what is already available appropriately. For tools
and technologies that are not already within the university there needs to be a watching
brief on developments within the sector, and to have the staff and equipment
(sandboxes) to test out and investigate the integration of such tools.
2. Staff have a requirement for more multi-media and interactive content for students.
However, due to the time required to learn the required software and the ongoing
exposure needed to keep the skills fresh, asking the academic staff to develop bespoke
computer-based learning materials for themselves is not usually time, and therefore cost,
effective. It would be far more efficient and effective to have support based centrally for
the development of multimedia educational content.
Alongside this support, the
University should have centrally supported software for different types of multimedia
engagement (such as sound recording, screen capture, video editing, etc.) to allow
training to be available on campus and a community of practice to be developed.
Investigations will need to take place to establish which packages are already most used
across campus so that there is a body of knowledge already available. The University
will need to ensure that it is able to deliver the wide range of multi-media content to
students, for example ensuring that there is a robust video streaming service available
that is able to take a range of video file types.
3. The evidence shows that staff predominantly turn to colleagues within their school for
advice, guidance and support. Therefore, to ensure these local “experts” have the
information they need to continue in this role and to ensure they are aware of the latest
developments, a support system should be developed that is co-ordinated by a centrally.
Further investigations will be needed to identify these people and to ascertain the types
of activity they support, e.g. curriculum development, teaching practice, Blackboard,
eLearning developments, etc. It will also be necessary for central staff to be available to
proactively disseminate the latest developments directly to schools, contextualised for
each discipline where possible.
This could be via roadshows, or by engaging with
existing seminar series or Learning and Teaching Committee meetings. These activities
Page 74 of 80
will help to highlight that using more varied methods of presentation, interaction and
assessment with students contributes enormously to accessibility.
4. An Academic Pool Room User Group should be established to provide more input into
the development of the physical education environment to ensure the requirements of
schools are being met.
When planning the refurbishment of pool rooms, a team
approach to the design of spaces should be taken to ensure there is input from Estates,
IT, Educational Specialist and Academic Staff, which will assist in making the space meet
the requirements of all stakeholders.
5. This review should only be seen as the first step in the ongoing capture of user
requirements and engaging staff in discussions and developments of educational
practices within the university.
Page 75 of 80
Appendix C. Student Responses to the 2011 NUSS Survey in
relation to the use of technology (by school)
School
Positive
Negative
BIOSI
“When available good IT
facilities. Use of email and
learning central very well
communicated”
“inefficient at correspondence via email …”
CARBS
“Good library facilities and
course communication.
Effective use of Blackboard
and some key staff that have
been influential: Thank You.”
“The use of Learning Central
and Blackboard were very
useful and further information
and lecture notes were posted
here.”
“Lecture slides are not put on Blackboard
immediately after the lecture so we have to
wait if we want to clarify things.”
“Blackboard is a general mess, many lectures
not uploaded on time or at all!”
“Learning central needs to be standardised!
and all lecturers need to be forced to use it
effectively.”
“Some modules could move forwards in terms
of the use of IT and computer resources. More
content on Learning Central.”
“Teaching material needs to be more available
on Blackboard.”
“It will help me in later life.
The teachers are good.
Learning Central is good.”
CHEMY
“In course assessment results are not always
uploaded to learning central.”
CLAWS
“Some lecturers do not help in that no lecture
documents are provided nor put on Blackboard
so scheduling is often unknown.”
“Blackboard while very useful to convey
information, lots and lots of lectures are not
only late but also completely missing and
poorly organised. The site is very difficult to
navigate and find material. Information passed
on by email and is much more helpful, but lots
of needless information is also sent.”
DENTL
Page 76 of 80
ENCAP
ENGIN
SHARE
“The staff that use electronic
tools for communication
(Blackboard etc) tend to do so
very well.”
“Good use of current
technology to assist learning in
Blackboard. Staff are usually
quick to respond to emails.”
“Most tutors use Blackboard
effectively, which is very
helpful. It is good that
someone will help you even if
they don't teach you.”
“There have been some problems with
Blackboard, which has made finding some
essential course documents impossible at
times. “
“Not all the PowerPoint and resources used in
the lectures were put on Blackboard.”
“My department are absolutely ridiculous with
their lack of use of Blackboard facilities. Out of
7 modules, only 1 of mine uses Blackboard (of
which he does very well) everyone knows
electronic resources benefit the students and
the complete disregard of this or lack of effort
to learn how to use it is dreadful for so called
academic professionals.”
“Not all staff fully utilize Learning Central
Access to online sources is reasonable, but not
as wide an access as we had in first year (e.g.
we no longer have Athens access).”
“A large proportion of lecturers don't use
online communication or "Blackboard"
facilities.”
“Sometimes use of visual aids/increased use of
Blackboard would have been beneficial.”
JOMEC
MATHS
“Communication with staff are
easy and accessible, and all
are very helpful. lectures and
lots of feedback on learning
central is ideal to progress and
do well with studies.”
“The Blackboard was the biggest problem, it
took over 2 years for it to be fixed, I had to
have written proof of my work or I was going to
be made to resit my year.”
“There has been difficulty in communicating
with the tutors efficiently. The Learning Central
system is not in anyway enhancing our learning
and our communication with the tutors.”
“Vast difference in lecturer's ability or
willingness to provide resources on learning
Page 77 of 80
central.”
MEDIC
“Big strides have been made
with regard to Learning
Central, and online services
have been made more userfriendly.”
“Blackboard (learning central) was very poorly
organised and staff expected you to be aware
of important documents that were hidden in
obscure folders.”
“it was almost impossible to find anything on
Blackboard”
“Blackboard is a useful
resource.”
“Blackboard is confusing, things not being
where they should logically be.”
“some placements do not have reliable
Internet access.”
“There is little opportunity to give feedback.
Blackboard is disorganised.”
“Particularly bad blackboards in the Music
Department. Some lecturers don't even use
them at all.”
MUSIC
“Many lecturers reluctant to make use of
Blackboard, PowerPoint etc.”
“Model answers of questions during workshops
should be put up on Blackboard.”
PHRMY
SOCSI
“Lecturers are good at putting
up notes on to learning central
lecturers are good at putting
readings up if they are hard to
get in the library. The new
service online, which allows
you talk to a librarian, is good
they give you useful
information.”
“Good correspondence
through Learning Central to
notify us about things.”
“Most lecturers were
enthusiastic about their
subject and gave good notes
to help on Learning Central.
Page 78 of 80
My dissertation tutor, in
particular, has been very
helpful.”
“Updated Blackboard
regularly.”
SOHCS
“Announcements regarding changes to
timetables etc are sometimes difficult to find
on Blackboard.”
“Feedback is slow. Blackboard is difficult to
navigate. Some elements of the course have
been left unexplained.”
Appendix D. References
Beetham and Sharpe (2009) Learning Literacies development framework. Available at
http://jiscdesignstudio.pbworks.com/w/file/40474958/Literacies%20development%20framework.do
c . Last Accessed 23 January 2012.
Cardiff University & Student Union (2011), Student Voice / student surveys Available at:
http://cardiff.ac.uk/studentvoice/student-voice/. Last accessed 15 December 2011.
Cardiff University (2011b), The Education Strategy. Available at
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/plann/strategicplan/index.html. Last accessed 23 January 2012.
Cardiff University (2008), INSRV Information Literacy Strategy 2008-2011 Available at:
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/educationandtraining/infolit/lecturers.html Last accessed January
2012.
Cardiff University (2009a), The University Strategy and Supporting Strategies. Available at:
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/plann/strategicplan/index.html Last accessed 10 January 2012.
Cardiff University (2009b), Information Literacy for Students Available at:
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/insrv/educationandtraining/infolit/students.html Last accessed 10 January
2012.
Cardiff University (2010), Employability and Enterprise Skill Strategy. Last accessed 22 November
2011.
Cardiff University (2011a), About Cardiff University: Facts and Figures. Available at
http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/about/facts/index.html. Last Accessed January 2012.
Page 79 of 80
Digidol (2011), Digidol Project Bid to JISC Developing Digital Literacies. Available at:
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearning/DigLit/DigLitBids2011/Cardiff%20D
igidol_Bid.pdf. Last Accessed 23 January 2011.
JISC (2011) DL baseline framework for projects. Available at:
http://jiscdesignstudio.pbworks.com/w/page/47831216/DL%20baseline%20framework%20for%20p
rojects. Last Accessed January 2012.
JISC (2011). Developing Digital Literacies Programme Available at:
http://www.jisc.ac.uk/developingdigitalliteracies. Last accessed 22 November 2011.
RIBA(2011). Procedures for validation for UK and International Courses and Examinations In
Architecture. Available at:
http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/Validation/ValidationProce
dures2011.pdf. Last accessed 24 January 2011.
Welsh Government (2011) Delivering a Digital Wales. Available at:
http://wales.gov.uk/topics/businessandeconomy/digitalwales/publications/framework/?lang=en .
Last accessed 22 November 2011.
Page 80 of 80