NTFS Projects Final Report Template · 2011. 10. 23. · NTFS Projects Final Report Template Page 4...

NTFS Projects Final Report Template of 94

Contexts

The final report documents what the project has done and achieved and will be made publicly available. For

most projects, it will be a report of publishable quality for the community and should draw out

recommendations for the HE sector.

Where the completion report simply signs off on the project work, the final report gives a more detailed and

considered account of the project‟s achievements that will be of interest to the broader HE community. The

report will be made available through EvidenceNet (http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet). Please can

you also highlight to us any other suitable materials for inclusion in EvidenceNet.

Projects should submit a draft of their final report at the end of the project to allow the Academy to make

any comments or requests for revision. The Academy reserves the right of editorial control. Projects should

resubmit the final revised version of the final report no later than three months after the formal end date of

the project. The final grant payment will be made once the final version of the report is received and

accepted.

Please bear in mind that the final report will be made publicly available and should be written to maximise

its accessibility to as wide an audience as possible.

Please complete the sections below. If you have any queries regarding the completion of the forms please

contact the NTFS project strand Project Officer at [email protected] or 01904 717500.

Final Report Project Information

Project lead institution University College Falmouth

Project title Creating Academic Learning Futures

Lead contact name Anne George

Authors Dr. Sandra Romenska, Dr. Karenanne Knight, Robert Cane,

Jaideep Mukherjee, Anne George, Prof. Gilly Salmon

Project lifespan August 2008 – July 2011

Submitted by Anne George

Anne George

Anne George

Anne George

Date submitted

Date submitted

15th

July 2011

NTFS Projects Final Report Template

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/evidencenet

mailto:[email protected]


1. Table of contents

1. Acknowledgements p. 3

2. Executive summary p. 4

3. Background p. 5

4. Aims and objectives p. 6

4.1. Aim p. 6

4.2. Objectives p. 6

4.3. Research questions p. 7

5. Methodology p. 7

5.1. Exploratory component p. 7

5.2. Descriptive component p. 7

5.3. Explanatory component p. 8

5.4. Methodology for the exploratory component p. 8

5.5. Methodology for the descriptive component p. 9

5.5.1. Maximum Difference Scaling p. 9

5.5.2. Scenario Development p. 13

5.6 Methodology for the explanatory component p. 16

5.7. Summary of methodologies used in the CALF research project p. 17

6. Implementation p. 17

6.1. The CALF implementation model – Learning Futures p. 17

6.1.1. Hindsight p. 18

6.1.2. Insight p. 18

6.1.3. Foresight p. 18

6.1.4. Learning Oversight p. 18

6.2. CALF workshops p. 19

6.3. Identifying, approaching and motivating students for participation in the project activities p. 19

6.3.1. University College Falmouth model of student involvement p. 19

6.3.2. University of Leicester model of student involvement p. 19

6.4. Motivation of students to participate in CALF p. 20

6.5. Recommendations for replicating the CALF implementation process p. 21

7. Outputs and findings p. 20

7.1. Findings from the horizon scanning p. 22

7.1.2. Future Trends: Change p. 22

7.1.2. Future Trends: Stability p. 24

7.1.3. Opportunities to promote change p. 25

7.1.4. Risks and challenges p. 26

7.1.5. Conclusion of the horizon scanning p. 27

7.2. Findings from the student participation component p. 28

7.2.1. Employability p. 33

7.2.2. Personalisation and flexibility p. 34

7.2.3. Open access and visibility p. 36

7.2.4. Diversity p. 39

7.2.5. Quality of the physical environment for learning p. 40

7.2.6. Length and cost of study p. 41

7.2.7. Student services p. 42

7.2.8. International mobility and greening of learning p. 44

7.2.9. Risks and threats p. 46

8. Outcomes p. 47

9. Conclusions p. 53

10. Implications p. 54

11. Recommendations p. 55

11.1. Recommendation 1 p. 55




12. References p. 56

13. Technical terms p. 58

14. Appendices p. 59


The Creating Academic Learning Futures project was the result of the National Teaching Fellowship (NTF)

Scheme project strand, funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and

managed by the Higher Education Academy.

NTF Prof. Gilly Salmon directed the conceptual development of the Learning Futures model and provided

creative insights, strategic and operational guidance for the CALF project. Her work resulted in a high

profile for CALF‟s operation and findings, greater visibility of the deliverables with corresponding

opportunities for expanding the network of partners and interest in implementing the project‟s outcomes by

the two partner institutions.

Strategic lead on project management as well as the integration of e-learning and learning technologies

within creative disciplines and creative approaches to imagining the future of learning was provided by the

Director of Academic Services at University College Falmouth Anne George.

Work on the project benefited from the strategic direction provided by members of its Steering Group –

Geoff Smith, Deputy Rector of University College Falmouth (UCF); Christine Fyfe, Pro Vice-Chancellor of

the University of Leicester (UoL) and NTF Dr Liz Anderson.

Design and implementation of the research model of the project, conceptual analysis of the results and

reporting of the outcomes were supported by the expertise and guidance of Prof. David Hawkridge and Dr.

Alejandro Armellini. Collaboration with Dr. Palitha Edirisingha enabled dissemination of CALF findings

and models to a larger community of interest.

Analysis of policy reports and other documents relevant to the future of learning was carried out and written

up by Robert Cane.

The project evaluator, Andrew Comrie, provided valuable objective feedback.

CALF‟s thanks and acknowledgement of their invaluable contributions go to the lecturers, course leaders

and learning technologists at UCF - - Katrina Brown, Malaika Sarco-Thomas and Susanne Thomas (BA

Dance); Rebecca Lloyd (BA English); Christina Bunce (MA Professional Writing); Ben Bull, John Sumpter

and Oliver Scott (Learning Technology); Andrew Harbert (BA and MA Design); Steve Braund (MA

Illustration: Authorial Practice; Alan Male (BA Illustration); Charlotte Barry (MA Journalism); Russel

Clarke (BA Media and Communication) and Fiona Hackney (20th

C Art and Design). Essential for the

organisation and running of the workshops at the University of Leicester was the help of the Media Zoo

Keepers at UoL, Matthew Wheeler and Simon Kear.

Dr. Sandra Romenska was CALF‟s Research Associate at the University of Leicester. The smooth running

of the project was result of the work of CALF‟s Project Manager Dr. Karenanne Knight at UCF and Jaideep

Mukherjee at UoL.

The most important contribution to the project was that of the students from the two partner institutions who

dedicated their creativity and energy to generating insights and understanding of the possible futures of

learning.

1. Acknowledgements

Note that the project was a result of the National Teaching Fellowship Scheme project strand initiative

funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and managed by the Higher

Education Academy. You may also want to list the project partners and acknowledge any person or

organisation that was helpful during the project or in writing the report.


Creating Academic Learning Futures (CALF) is a collaborative research project, led by

University College Falmouth. NTF Gilly Salmon provided academic guidance and support to the

full time researcher on the project Dr Sandra Romenska. CALF aimed to create, explore and

present for discussion a variety of plausible „alternative futures‟ for learning and teaching in

Higher Education (HE). Creation, exploration and presentation of alternative futures was

achieved by capturing emerging issues which may influence the future of student learning and

by engaging student voices. The project focussed on three research questions:

1. What are the factors which may influence the future of teaching and learning?

2. What are the ideas about the future of students from University College Falmouth and the

University of Leicester?

3. What are the preferred futures of the students who participated in the project?

The findings of the project revealed factors that will influence the future of education, as well as

opportunities and threats, student preferences and expectations:

The Future of Learning and Teaching – Summary of CALF Findings

Employability: Learning and teaching in the future will make use of strong links with leading local

and international employers.

Personalisation: Learning processes will be personalised to the needs and preferences of individual

students with institutional support and guidance provided for the students‟ personal choice of learning

technologies.

Openness: There will be increasing openness of learning resources, sharing of learning resources,

networking across disciplines and blurring of institutional and disciplinary boundaries.

Quality: Provision of high quality learning environments, learning resources, student facilities and

student accommodation will be a prominent characteristic of future learning and teaching.

Diversity: There are signals for increasing diversity in student demographics in the future with greater

number of mature, part-time, disabled and international students.

Mobility: Innovation, as well as internationalisation and globalisation trends, will support the

increasing importance and availability of transnational education, the mobility of students and

universities.

Non-state funding: The funding structure of higher education will change, with more emphasis placed

upon private funding and student contributions, leading to a higher education sector that functions

more like a private than a public sector.

Technological and pedagogical innovations: Development of new technological platforms and tools,

and their increasing use, will create significant opportunities for the adaptation of such technologies to

meet educational needs. HE institutions will seek to improve their teaching and learning strategies as a

result of student demand for new and more flexible courses, methods of delivery, support services.

2. Executive summary

Summarise highlights of the project (one page), including aims/objectives, overall approach,

findings, achievements, and conclusions. The full report may include technical terms, but try to keep

the executive summary in plain English.


This rich picture of future learning and teaching was developed as a result of the development

and implementation of a set of innovative research methods. The data collection within CALF

was guided by a research model called Learning Futures, developed for the purposes of the

project by NTF Prof. Gilly Salmon. The model structures a process for pro-active application of

analytical and creative skills for envisaging the future of HE. The outcome of the application of

the model is an understanding of what may happen in the future of teaching and learning in HE

and a clear, shared commitment to creating the preferred future for a higher education institution

(HEI). The Learning Futures model was implemented in 44 collaborative workshops for

imagining the future of learning and teaching. Data was collected using a combination of three

research methods: scenario development, maximum difference scaling surveys and cognitive

mapping interviews. Data was collected from 320 students from UCF and UoL and from 209

contributors from the wider research and teaching communities. A range of literature sources

and policy reports reporting ideas about the future of education were analysed.

The findings were widely disseminated across a community of interest through conference

presentations and workshops, the newsletters and web portals of the two partnering institutions,

the two project blogs and a variety of other web-based dissemination channels.

These achievements ensured that the project met its planned aims and objectives and delivered

its expected outcomes. The added value of the project‟s deliverables lies in the development of

models of learning futures; designing frameworks of how learners can be involved in the

planning, re-shaping and assessment of learning and technologies; development of the capacity

of students and staff at both institutions to imagine and analyse the future of learning; informing

the planning of new structures for the delivery of UCF's courses and new strategies for teaching

and learning at both institutions.

Despite debates as to whether universities have remained “medieval organisations,” unchanged

over the 700–800 years of their existence (Clarke, 1996; Kerr, p.152, 1982) or have been

transformed by major changes (Clarke, 1996; Kyvik, 2004), consensus seems to prevail about

intensifying pressures for reform in HEIs today (Aghion, 2007; LERU, 2006). Technological,

financial, political, regulatory, demographical, cultural and psychological factors bring major

challenges to twenty-first century higher education. These challenges can be viewed as both

threats and opportunities, and it is important that planning and management are not dominated

by short-term thinking about immediate problems and maintaining established practices. In order

to be able to look beyond the constraints of the present, especially when the investment of

significant resources is concerned, HEIs need to sharpen their capacity to systematically explore

and interpret complex trends and influences so as to imagine and prepare for alternative futures

(Lancrin, 2004, Notten, 2006).

At the time of the launch of the CALF project in 2008 three major international initiatives on the

future of higher education were announced. The Centre for Educational Research and Innovation

(CERI) of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) launched the

project “University Futures”. It explores the opportunities offered to countries by new trends in

higher education. The research work of CALF was informed by the outcomes of previous work

by the OECD on the future of secondary school learning and future learning environments. Also

in 2008 The Steering Committee of the Intersectoral Platform on Anticipation and Foresight of

UNESCO initiated a series of debates which highlighted the growing need for developing a

3. Background

Summarise the background to the project (and how it builds on previous work) and the need

it for it (and why it is important).


capacity for foresight analysis of higher education by intergovernmental organisations,

governments, higher education institutions. The same year the European Science Foundation

(ESF) launched a European Collaborative Research Scheme on Higher Education and Social

Change aimed at developing further the achievements of the ESF project “Higher Education in

Europe beyond 2010: Resolving Conflicting Social and Economic Expectations” (ESF, 2008)

Despite the increased attention directed to the future of higher education students are often

uninvolved in policy deliberations and largely inactive in shaping the future of their educational

processes. Few authentic voices from learners have been interpreted into feasible approaches to

learning or included in projects aiming to create visions for the future of learning and teaching.

Meanwhile, higher education institutions, with their natural conservatism and concern for

tradition and quality, change slowly. They need to look beyond the obvious if they are to prepare

for the future in unknown and uncharted territory.

Involving today‟s learners in a dialogue about the future of learning is essential for ensuring that

strategies for the future of higher education take into account changes in students‟ expectations

and cultures. Students have a unique contribution to make in the developing of realistic visions

of future directions and pathways for learning and teaching. The student perspective is a vital

component in envisioning any possible futures for higher education and the opportunity for

student representation in the efforts for constructing strategies for the future of learning and

teaching can enable greater and more fruitful cooperation.

4.1. Aim

The aim CALF started with the aim to create, explore and present for discussion a variety of

plausible „alternative futures‟ for learning and teaching methods in HE. The scenarios for the

future needed to be grounded and context specific, based on „student voices‟ and regularly

communicated to managers and university teachers for securing their feedback. The project‟s

aim remained unchanged for the duration of the project and guided its development and

implementation.

4.2. Objectives

The objectives agreed at the start of the project are presented in the table below. The right-hand

column indicates changes in the objectives, if such occurred during the project.

Objective Change

1. Surface and capture signals which may influence the future of student

learning.

1.1 Undertake trend analysis about the potential impacts on HE.

1.2 Undertake emerging issue analysis about the potential impacts on HE.

1.3 Present the results to the partners and the sector.

No

2. Involve a wide variety of CALF contributors in developing, understanding

and examining possible, preferred, viable and achievable futures for learning

in HE

2.1 Engage student voices and surface and articulate views about the future

of learning in HEIs at Falmouth with its creative practice-based courses

No

4. Aims and objectives

List the aims and objectives agreed at the start of the project, and note if they changed during

the project.


4.3. Research questions

The aims and objectives of the project were translated into three research questions:


2. What are the ideas about the future of students from University College Falmouth and the

University of Leicester?

3. What are the preferred futures of the students participating the project?

The research questions guided decision-making regarding research approaches, methods for data

collection and analysis.

The research strategy of the CALF project was developed on the basis of the research questions

that the project set out to address, the project‟s objectives and the research setting within which

the project operated. The overall aim of the research strategy was to produce valid, credible and

useful insights about the future of teaching and learning in higher education. This aim led to the

formulation of a research strategy which combined exploratory, descriptive and explanatory

components.

5.1. Exploratory component

The exploratory component of the strategy sought to discover students‟ views about the future of

teaching and learning, as well as capture signals, trends and emerging issues in the HE

environment which may influence the future of teaching and learning.

5.2. Descriptive component

The descriptive component of the research strategy aimed to portray accurately the ideas and

emerging issues identified by the exploratory component.

within a rural environment

2.2 Engage student voices and surface and articulate views about the future

of learning in HEIs within the highly-diverse campus, work-based and

distance learning communities at Leicester

3 Interpret, model and represent ideas emerging from all CALF activities and

secure feedback on ideas

3.1 Involve a wide variety of technological and pedagogical partners,

together with forecasters to interpret results

3.2 Publish to the sector usable ideas and pathways for the future of

pedagogy and learning design

No

5. Methodology

Summarise the overall approach taken and why this approach was chosen over other options

considered. Then describe the methodology in more detail. Depending on the project, this

might include the methodology for research you carried out, technical design or

development, evaluation, etc. Finally, note any specific issues that had to be addressed by

the methodology, e.g. standards, interoperability, scalability, etc.


5.3. Explanatory component

The explanatory component was directed towards interpretation and modelling of the ideas about

the future, uncovered by the exploratory component and articulated in the descriptive

component.

5.4. Methodology for the exploratory component

The choice of methods for this component was determined by the need to capture and analyse

data from two sources – the wider HE environment and from students from the two partner

institutions – University College Falmouth and University of Leicester. Two research

approaches were selected in order to satisfy this requirement which led to the application of a

range of research methods.

In order to accomplish the capturing of signals, trends and emerging issues in the HE

environment which may influence the future of teaching and learning, a horizon scanning

approach was adopted. Its purpose was to provide a conceptual overview of published research

reports and policy documents related to the future of higher education in order to identify future

changes in the higher education landscape. The aggregation in a systemic review of future-

relevant materials allowed a special emphasis to be placed on possible opportunities or threats

which might arise in the future but are not visible in the present. The research method of choice

for data collection and data analysis for the horizon scanning was meta-ethnography.

Meta-ethnography was proposed by Noblit and Hare in 1988 as a solution to the problem of

“putting together written interpretive accounts“ (Noblit and Hare, 1988, p.22) where simple

integration is not sufficient. In meta-ethnography the integration is replaced by synthesis as an

activity where separate parts are combined to form a “whole” which is greater than the sum of its

parts (Strike and Posner 1983). The application of the meta-ethnography method involves

selecting for synthesis relevant published research reports and policy documents. These

documents are read in sequence and key concepts are noted down. The key concepts constitute

the raw data for the synthesis. The synthesis is performed by examining the previously identified

key concepts across documents and trying to derive concepts which run through more than one

of the documents being synthesised. These newly derived concepts may not have been explicitly

articulated in any of the original documents but emerge as a result of the meta-ethnographic

synthesis.

The meta-ethnography method in the CALF project was used to review and analyse 24 reports,

summaries, and other policy relevant documents related to the future of higher education, with a

particular emphasis on the UK higher education sector and the growing importance of learning

technologies. In order to compile the relevant literature sources a “pearl-growing” literature

search was undertaken (Hawkins and Wagers, 1982). The Pearl Growing technique involves the

following procedure as proposed by Schlosser et al (2006):

(a) identify a relevant document;

(b) identify the terms under which the article is indexed in a database (in CALF‟s case this was a

Google search);

(c) repeat steps 2 and 3 in other databases;

(d) repeat steps 1–4 for other relevant sources;

(e) finish when the retrieved sources are of diminishing relevance.

The criteria for selection were that a document needed to be produced by sources which were

credible, authoritative, based on expert-opinion and related to the future of learning, teaching,

higher education or students. The documents examined as part of the meta-ethnography study of


the CALF project came from a range of sources, including UK government departments, the EU,

the University and College Union (UCU), the HEA, JISC, and a number of other policy-relevant

bodies and organisations. The period that they cover stretches from Franklin and van Harmelen‟s

May 2007 report on Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education to

Lord Browne‟s report on Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education, which was

published in October 2010. The list of analysed documents is enclosed in Appendix 1 and the

main themes the documents cover is in Appendix 2.

The compiled documents were analysed using the meta-ethnography method, Lines-Of-

Argument (LOA) synthesis. It involved building a representation of the whole – the future of

learning and teaching in higher education – from studies of separate trends, components or

factors identified by published reports and policy papers. Britten et al (2002) and Campbell et al

(2003) studied the use of this method for synthesis and report its successful application for the

generation of middle-range theories with stronger explanatory power than a narrative literature

review could produce.

LOA synthesis of the CALF project involved the careful reading of the chosen documents in

order to identify the main concepts. Then the relationships between the concepts arising from the

different papers were considered by a cross-examination of the different papers for common and

recurring concepts. At this stage the synthesis focussed on four key dimensions.

The first two describe the future trends predicted by the analysed documents in terms of

expectations for future changes and expectations for future factors which will remain constant.

The third dimension relates to identified opportunities presented by the identified trends towards

change or stability. The fourth dimension identifies limitations, risks and challenges that the

analysed documents point to.

The four dimensions were placed in a table, synthesising all 24 documents in a way that

represents the main contribution of each of the documents towards each of the four dimensions

of interest for the horizon scanning – expectations for future changes, expectations for future

stability, opportunities and risks.

The difference between meta-ethnography and a traditional narrative or systematic literature

review lies in the systematic identification and charting of the key concepts in the documents

being examined. In the meta-ethnography carried out by the CALF project, the concepts of each

policy report were compared one by one with the four key dimensions in order to test the extent

to which they endorsed or contradicted them. The conclusions of each policy paper were

extracted in the form of an explanation, interpretation or description as appropriate. These

explanations, interpretations and descriptions were then compared across the whole set of

studies. The results of the meta-ethnography component of CALF informed the design and

implementation of the next stage of research activities of the project.

5.5. Methodology for the exploratory component

5.5.1. Maximum Difference Scaling

The research objective of identifying preferred futures for higher education required the use of a

research method which could yield data about the choices which participants in the project

would make from a set of possibilities for the future. A method that addresses this particular

requirement is maximum difference scaling.

The maximum difference scaling method was first proposed by Finn and Louviere (1992) who

applied it to a discrete choice task where a respondent in their study had to choose both the best

and worst option in a given set of options. Maximum difference scaling is a form of the well-


established methodology of paired comparisons (Liem et al. 2004) where instead of only

selecting the best option from a pair (binary choice), participants identify the best and the worst

option from sets with more than two options. The maximum difference approach offers a

solution to one of the perennial problems in preference rating research – the difficulty that

people usually have in articulating their preferences (Finn and Louviere, 1992). Presented with a

long list of attributes of a particular object, product, idea, etc. on a scale of 1 (“completely

unimportant”) to 10 (“extremely important”), participants tend to rate many or even most of the

attributes as being of some degree of importance.

In addition it is often impossible for the researchers to estimate the difference between any two

points on the scale as perceived by the respondents. Depending on individual perception the

degree of importance assigned to option 7 “quite important” by one respondent may equal the

degree of importance assigned to option 9 “very important” by another respondent and

traditional rating scales have no means of estimating this difference in perception. Preference

rating instruments are often too blunt to capture the distinction or similarity between responses

given by participants, i.e., they lack in discriminatory power (Louviere et al. 2000).

The decision to use the maximum difference scaling method for identifying preferable futures

brought a number of advantages. Firstly, it offers a more discriminating way to measure attribute

importance than either rating scales (like Likert scales) or the method of paired comparisons

(Cohen 2003). In addition it offers better predictive validity than either ratings scales or the

paired comparisons (Cohen 2003). Thirdly, like other choice-based methods, it has significant

discriminatory power, making it ideal for studies asking participants from a variety of

backgrounds and cultures to select among complex characteristics of a phenomenon (Cohen,

2003), as is the case with the CALF project.

The maximum difference scaling method works on the assumption that the phenomenon of

interest – the future of learning in the case of CALF – has a set of traits, positioned along an

underlying subjective dimension where each trait‟s position along the dimension is determined

by its perceived importance (Auger, Devinney and Louviere 2004). Participants are presented

with questionnaires containing combinations of the traits of interest and asked to choose the

most and the least important trait from each combination.

The design removes any bias from the rating scale since there is only one option to select a

“most” or “least” important trait (Cohen and Markowitz, 2002). It produces individual ordinal

rankings of the importance of the characteristics under study for each participant in the study and

an interval ranking of the same characteristics, indicative of the preferences of the participants as

a group (Louviere et al. 2000).

The method enables participants to decide on the importance of different characteristics of a

phenomenon by multiple comparisons and a number of studies indicate that participants find the

task easy and quick to complete (Louviere et al. 2000). The analysis of the collected data is

relatively simple, consisting of the calculation of a coefficient for each choice. The importance

of each characteristic is then derived by comparing their coefficients – the larger the value of a

coefficient, the higher the importance of its corresponding characteristic. If the coefficient has a

negative value this will indicate that participants have perceived the corresponding characteristic

as unimportant.


In order to address the CALF project objective for identifying preferable futures for learning and

teaching, a questionnaire was designed, using the maximum difference scaling method. A total

of 102 questionnaires were completed by students participating in the CALF project, as shown in

Table 1 and Table 2 below:

Table 1

Number of students who completed maximum-difference questionnaires, presented by course and institution

Total number of questionnaires UCF 72

Total number of questionnaires UoL 30

Total number for both institutions UoL and UoF 102

Table 2

Total number of students who completed maximum-difference questionnaires,

The participating students were asked to choose between eleven “most important” or “least

important“ options. The instructions to the students in the questionnaire were:

“ Imagine that it is the Year 2025. Imagine that you have just finished secondary

school and you are considering studying further. Which of the features described in

the questions below would MOST make you want to choose a university or a

college for your further studies and which would LEAST make you want to enrol?”

A copy of the questionnaire is enclosed in Appendix 3.

The eleven options were derived from results of the horizon scanning study as well as the future

scenarios developed by students participating in the exploratory CALF research events and are

presented in Table 3 on the next page.

No. of students Institution Course

55 University College Falmouth BA English with Creative Writing

12 University College Falmouth MA Design

5 University College Falmouth MA 20th Century Art and Design

9 University of Leicester Medicine MBChB 4th

year

21 University of Leicester Post-graduate and research students


Table 3

Options for the future of learning and teaching that students had to choose from when completing the questionnaire

Questionnaire Options

1. Quality student accommodation, on-campus student facilities for learning and

leisure, library buildings and library collections of physical books.

2. Strong links with leading edge local and international employers for learning on

the job and work experience while studying.

3. Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living costs, earlier

entry into job market and quality degree.

4. Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or to gain a joint

degree with an overseas institution.

5. Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning and teaching.

6. Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local teachers.

7. Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers, practitioners and

researchers in online tutorials and computer-based virtual reality environments at

low cost.

8. Guided unlimited online access to internationally renowned quality learning

resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and constantly updated in real-time

archives quality educational content for all subjects studied from leading teachers

and researchers.

9. Learning process personalized and supported for the needs of each individual

student, delivered using learning styles, new or traditional technologies, preferred

by the individual student, support provided for the students‟ personal technology.

10. Courses and institutions recommended by other students from your social network

and friends, with possibilities to give constant feedback for your satisfaction and

recommendations.

11. Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for meeting

diversity and special needs.

The design of the maximum difference scaling questionnaire in CALF followed the model

proposed by Finn and Louviere (1992) where participants are asked to complete a questionnaire

with 11 options for the future of learning and teaching, arranged in 12 sets of choices. The

arrangement of the options and sets of choices ensures that each of the options appears 6 times

across all choice sets of the questionnaire. The results of the maximum difference scaling

produced a ranking of the 11 options from “most important” to “least important”. The place of


each option in the ranking of all options is calculated by subtracting the number of times that

option has been chosen as “most important” in all questionnaires from the number times it has

been chosen as “least important.” The result is divided by the number of questionnaires

multiplied by the frequency with which each option has appeared in the questionnaire – 6 in the

case of the CALF questionnaire. In this way the level of importance of each option is

standardised and comparable across the sample since it is determined by the number of

participants and the frequency with which each option was listed in the choice sets. The formula

for calculating the standard score is:

A worked out example is as follows: if option 1 is rated “most important” 73 times and “least

important” 14 times in a total of 20 questionnaires where option 1 appears 6 times in each

questionnaire then:

A positive score indicates “important” options and negative scores indicate “unimportant”

options.

The ease of analysis and comparison of options, offered by the use of the maximum difference

method presented a potentially powerful advantage since it enabled straightforward reporting

and presentation of findings, as demonstrated in the Findings and Outputs Section of this report.

The data from the questionnaires was analysed on two levels. The first level was the two partner

institutions which produced two sets of results – one from analysing the questionnaires

completed by University of Leicester students and one from the questionnaires completed by

University of Falmouth students. A comparison of the resulting rankings of preferences was

performed, revealing interesting differences between the two institutions. The second level of

analysis was the calculation of scores from the combined responses of participating students

from both institutions, which looked at their aggregated preferences as one larger group.

5.5.2. Scenario Development

The second aspect of the exploratory component of the CALF project research strategy was to

enable students to generate and articulate ideas about the future of learning and teaching. One of

the challenges that the project set out to tackle was that few authentic voices from students have

been interpreted into feasible approaches to learning and that students are often uninvolved in

policy deliberations and largely inactive in shaping the future of their educational processes

(Butler, 2007). The exploratory component of the research therefore required a methodology

which would enable students to engage in the creation and discussion of views about the future.

In addition, the methodological decisions for this component were guided by the need to ensure

that students‟ ideas of the future were captured, analysed and reported without loss of richness

and authenticity. These considerations led to the selection of the scenario methodology from the

range of methodological approaches offered by the field of futures studies.

option each of appearing ofFrequency iresquestionna ofNumber

least rated timesofNumber -most rated timesofNumber =n ScoredardSta

0.491 =120

59 =

620

14- 73 = Score Standard


Scenarios are defined as “A quantitative or qualitative picture of a given organization or group,

developed within the framework of a set of specified assumptions” (MacNulty, 1977) which are

then “presented in coherent script-like or narrative fashion” (Schoemaker, 1993). The scenario

method is used for stimulating creative thinking about the future of individuals, organisations or

societies.

On the continuum of analytical tools, scenarios come between deterministic quantitative models

of the future and purely narrative descriptions (Nakicenovic et al. 2000). The generation of

future scenarios in collaborative activities is one of the richer, more accessible and useful

approaches to futures studies compared to conventional questionnaires or interviews (Wildman,

lnayatullah, 1996; Salmon, 2008 ) therefore the scenario methodology used by the CALF project

was applied in group settings.

The scenarios addressing the second strand of the CALF research strategy were generated during

workshops – CALF creative events. The workshop format has been identified in the literature as

appropriate for the creation of scenarios based on broad, interdisciplinary, current and socially

oriented questions about the future (Notten, 2006). The CALF creative events were aimed at

enabling students to develop scenarios for the future of teaching and learning, focussing on the

following set of questions:

1. What aspects of teaching and learning (practices, roles, technologies, content, location)

will change the most in the next 15 years?

2. What factors in the present (social, cultural, economic, environmental, demographic) are

likely to influence the envisaged changes?

3. What aspects of teaching and learning (practices, roles, technologies, content, location)

are likely to remain the same in the next 15 years?

4. What concepts or ideas best describe the future of learning in 15 years time?

5. What actions in the present can help today‟s learners and education practitioners to

prepare for the future of learning and teaching?

The format of the CALF events was adapted for workshops of varying duration – 3 hours, half a

day, whole day and a three weeks course. The workshops consisted of three components – a

presentation of the CALF research model, scenario development session and group presentation

and discussion. During the first part of the workshops the workshop facilitator plays a key role in

introducing the participating students to a variety of ways of thinking about the future of

learning and helping them build a vocabulary which would support discussions about the future.

The scenario development part of the workshop is structured as a competitive game, set up in

Google Maps. The participants are divided into groups and given locations on a Google Map

prepared in advance for the workshop. Screenshots of the Google Map CALF game are provided

in Appendix 4. At each location on the map the participants have to solve a challenge which

would give them an answer to one of the questions above, in this way gradually constructing a

scenario narrative.

The workshops conclude with presentations by each group of participants of their scenarios and

a discussion. Participants discuss the application of digital and web technologies and possible

ways in which they could change the future of learning and are encouraged to think about the

likelihood of future scenarios.


The number of students who participated in CALF creative events, their institution, the number

and the type of workshops which took place during the project as well as the total number of

workshops and participants are presented in Table 4 below.

Number of students Institution Workshop type Number of

workshops

105 University College

Falmouth

Half-day workshop 20

24 University of Leicester Half-day workshop 3

60 University of Leicester 3 hours workshop 6

14 University of Leicester 3-weeks course 2

Total number of workshop participants Total number of workshops

203 31

Table 4 – Number of participants and workshops according to institution

The student generated scenarios produced at the CALF creative events yielded data which were

very rich with meaning and often pointed to sometimes contradictory views. An approach to data

analysis similar to the one adopted for the analysis of policy documents was used to analyse the

student-generated scenarios. The approach consisted of five stages:

a) Developing familiarity

b) Recognising significance

c) Emerging themes

d) Clustering themes

e) Uncovering meaning

The stage of achieving familiarity involved the reading and re-reading of the student scenarios.

During this familiarising process the aim was to reveal a holistic picture of what the data pointed

to, without reaching conclusions too early about significant or critical patterns within the data.

The next stage was recognising significance or identifying and highlighting those key parts of

the accumulated data that the researcher saw as significant on the basis of their relevance to the

subject of the study.

At the third stage of analysis the data identified as significant were grouped together and

assigned themes. At the fourth stage data belonging to each theme was identified, in order to

attempt to discover the „functions‟ of the theme in the narrative. Data that represents the

identified themes from stage three was clustered together. The last fifth stage involved critical

reading through the data identified as belonging to each theme, in order to describe the themes in

specific terms and attempt to „discover the „functions‟ of the theme in the talk‟ (Alexiadou,

2001, p. 60).


5.6 Methodology for the explanatory component

Students‟ ideas about the future, uncovered by the exploratory component and articulated in the

descriptive component, provided rich material for the interpretation and modelling of networks

of key concepts about the future of learning and teaching. The method of cognitive mapping was

used to achieve the aims of the exploratory component.

The cognitive mapping method emerged on the basis of a theory from cognitive psychology, an

area of knowledge studying how people receive, record and utilise information (Hodginson et

al., 2004). The theory is Kelly‟s personal construct theory, according to which people make

sense of the world and their experience through the development of constructs or internal

representations of reality (Kelly, 1955). The constructing of internal representations enables

them to plan their actions and anticipate the future. Cognitive mapping attempts to capture and

document this process of sense-making through a set of qualitative interviewing techniques,

designed to elicit thinking about causes and effects as well as to explain causal links (Eden and

Ackerman, 2004). It is used for the analysis of complex problems and the exploration of values,

concerns, goals and possibilities for actions.

The term cognitive mapping refers to the process of eliciting, graphically representing and

analysing a person‟s thinking about an issue or a problem (Eden, 1992). The resulting product is

called a cognitive map which is a type of directed graph, consisting of brief verbal statements

called nodes, connected by unidirectional arrows which represent causal relationships between

the nodes as perceived and expressed by the person whose thinking is being mapped. The

direction of the arrows implies causality of the relationship believed to exist by the participant.

Cognitive maps are prepared through a process of interviewing and represent the subjective

thinking of the interviewee (Eden and Ackerman, 2004). They usually have a hierarchical

structure where statements expressing overarching goals and aims appear at the top of the graph

and statements representing deeply held beliefs, motivations and convictions occupy the bottom

of the graph. The statements between the top and the bottom of the graph express actions and

options for actions and consequences, connecting the beliefs and motivations of a person‟s

thinking to their goals and aims. The statement from which an arrow originates (the tail) is

judged to be the cause of the statement to which the arrow leads (the head).

The analysis of cognitive maps uses simple procedures involving the number of concepts or

nodes, the number of arrows and their directionality as determined by the number of heads and

tails (Eden and Ackerman, 2004). The first type of analysis describes the complexity of the map

by calculating the ratio between nodes and arrows. Idealised thinking about an issue is

characterised by a cognitive map where the number of heads (consequences) is smaller than the

number of tails (causes), indicating that the person‟s reasoning is dominated by a single or a few

overarching goals (Eden and Ackerman, 2004). Other analyses include the identification of

clusters and central concepts – nodes with a large concentration of incoming and outgoing

nodes, indicating that the issue captured in that particular concept dominates the person‟s

thinking. The analyses of potent options uncovers concepts from which many arrows originate,

suggesting that these concepts are seen by the person being interviewed as having great potential

for action (Eden and Ackerman, 2004).

Cognitive mapping interviews were carried out with 8 post-graduate students from the

University of Leicester and 7 students from University College Falmouth. The University of

Leicester students participated in the cognitive mapping interviews as part of a consultation on

the future learning and teaching strategy of the university and the interviews focussed on their

views for the future of teaching and learning at the University of Leicester. The participants from

University College Falmouth were BA students in Dance, BA students in Choreography and BA


students in Music who prior to the interviews had taken part in 5 days of activities for exploring

the role of technologies for the future of art education. The shortest interview was 45 minutes

and the longest lasted an hour and 20 minutes. The mapping was done during the course of the

interview and the interviews were recorded using a voice recorder. The recordings were used

later by the project‟s Research Associate for refinement and double-checking of the maps

produced during the interviews. A cognitive map from an interview with a participant in the

CALF project is included in Appendix 5 as an example of the methodology.

5.7. Summary of methodologies used in the CALF research project

The project used a combination of four research methods in order to find answers to the research

questions regarding the future of learning and teaching. It used horizon scanning of policy

documents and reports relevant to the future of learning and teaching; maximum difference

scaling for establishing students preferred futures; scenario development for generation of ideas

about the future and cognitive mapping for interpreting and modelling students ideas about the

future. The multitude of research methods provided a form of methodological triangulation of

the trustworthiness and authenticity of the research findings. In quantitative studies the results

are often measurable statistically, which facilitates the measurement of success of the study.

Qualitative studies are built on words and do not involve any formal measurement such as

statistical analysis, but support analysis of the concepts found in the theory and practice (Leedy,

1993)

The implementation process of the project was guided by the need to resolve two key challenges.

First, it needed to develop means for identifying, approaching and motivating students for

participation in the project activities.

Second, it needed to design a technique for eliciting students‟ ideas about the future of learning

and teaching, avoiding the main shortcomings of futures studies, identified by O‟Brien (2004,

p.715):

- Predictability of the themes, events and influencing factors in the future envisaged by

participants.

- Tendency to develop overly optimistic or pessimistic scenarios.

- Focus on current/next/big issues and “future myopia.”

- Typical implicit assumptions.

- Unimaginative presentation of scenarios.

6.1. The CALF implementation model – Learning Futures

The project‟s implementation was based on the assumption that the solution of the second

challenge – adopting an approach for eliciting students‟ ideas in creative and imaginative ways,

may show the way to solving the first challenge and motivate students for participation. A model

“Learning Futures” was developed and implemented in the form of workshops – creative events.

The model structures the pro-active application of analytical and creative skills and tools for

generating ideas about the future of individuals, educational institutions or practices. As a result

a shared understanding emerges of what may happen in the future of teaching and learning, and

6. Implementation

Describe how you planned and implemented the project work and the activities it involved.

Depending on the project, this might cover technical development, processes, how you

conducted user studies, etc. Include any problems or issues that arose and how you handled

them, where readers can learn from your experience. Tell the story of what you did rather

than listing detailed activities.


a clear, shared commitment to creating a preferred future. The model can be described in terms

of its four components. A graphical representation of the model is provided in Appendix 6.

6.1.1. Hindsight

As the future has no place to come from but the past (Neustadt & May, 1986), this component

encourages participants to use past information and experiences in order to reduce uncertainty

regarding future decisions and actions. The knowledge stored in organisational memory helps

participants to understand linkages of causality and chronology, to look behind the occurrence of

specific events and look for patterns and structures that underpin their occurrence. The Hindsight

component brings several advantages to the Learning Futures model, according to the literature

on futures studies (Neustadt & May, 1986). Firstly, ideas for the future that are critically

analysed in the context of an institution‟s history and the past‟s impact on the present are likely

to be more effective than those created in a historical vacuum (Kaivo-oja et al. 2004). Second,

the implementation of future strategies and plans framed within the context of an institution‟s

history are less likely to meet with resistance (Kaivo-oja et al. 2004). Third, plans and strategies

for the future that ignore the inertial power of an organisation‟s history are more likely to fail

than those that consider it (Neustadt & May, 1986).

6.1.2. Insight

The Insight component takes the form of an analysis of a broad range of issues internal to HEIs

as well as an environmental scan of the present, including global, political, economic,

technological, environmental and social trends. It identifies a wide range of individuals,

organisations and factors which can have an effect on or be influenced by the future under

consideration. Taken-for-granted assumptions are uncovered and participants discuss values and

rationalities beyond their present day-to-day context.

6.1.3. Foresight

The foresight component emphasises the importance of not attempting to predict, but analysing a

range of possible futures. It focuses on comprehending the variety of possible future situations

for learning and teaching by interweaving the layers of information uncovered in the Insight and

Hindsight components, including forces that shape the future, scenarios, future opportunities,

and potential trend changes. The outcome is tangible recommendations for future actions,

grounded in common perceptions of the present and the past, and unfolded, logically, from the

perceived present into a rich picture of a future via a believable progression (Wright et al. 2009).

As a result a strategic conversation within the HEI is enabled which prompts renewed scrutiny of

both the institution and its current success formula and current strategies – the viability of which

is tested against the future foresight outcomes.

6.1.4. Learning Oversight

An overarching component brings together the outcomes of the Insight, Hindsight and Foresight

components to tap into existing capabilities within the educational institutions to inform

planning. The Learning Oversight component serves a double function in the Learning futures

model, reflected by the double meaning of the term – 1. „to manage and direct‟ and 2. „to

overlook and underestimate.‟ The component emphasises that the future cannot be predicted and

that it will always present surprises. At the same time it denotes the possibility to determine the

decisions that can be made in the present to create the best of the possible futures. The improved

understanding of an educational institution‟s past, present and possible future enables users to


build a picture of the future from new data, information and experiences. The success of the

Learning Futures process is made possible by ensuring that the new knowledge gained and

interpreted by participants through the Insight, Hindsight and Foresight is shared, thus enabling

their organisations to implement changes, make new decisions and take new actions.

6.2. CALF workshops

The four components were translated into workshop activities aimed at encouraging creativity,

collaboration and learning. Participants engage in group exercises that include each component

of the model - Hindsight, Insight, Foresight and Oversight. Participants use the internet as a

resource for information on relevant issues, learn to use technologies for collaboration and

learning such as wikis, Google Maps, Google Docs, word cloud applications, blogs, Second

Life, Twitter, etc. The activities are guided by the facilitator to ensure that participants learn to

use these tools in ways which will be relevant to their work and studies outside of the workshop

and to emphasise the expectation that the scenarios will result in creative output. The model

emphasises the development of action-oriented scenarios and the importance of creating

scenarios which the participants can communicate and advocate. The model achieves this

outcome by asking the participants to devise alternative ways of presenting their ideas – by

creating podcasts or videos of their scenarios, presenting them and discussing them as part of the

workshop in order to promote their impact.

The emphasis on group work and collaboration in the choice of futures workshops as one of the

research instruments in CALF is helps to establish a shared sense of ownership of the created

scenarios for the future of learning, as to what is feasible and desirable (da Cunha et al., 2007).

6.3. Identifying, approaching and motivating students for participation in the project

activities

Two different approaches to identifying and approaching students for participation in CALF

events were successfully used in the implementation of the project at the University of Leicester

and at University College Falmouth.

6.3.1. University College Falmouth model of student involvement

At University College Falmouth student participation was achieved as a result of fostering a

close collaboration with course leaders and raising their awareness of the aims of the project and

the potential benefits of participation for students and for the institution. Achievement of this

result allowed the integration of activities designed according to the Creating Academic

Learning Futures model into the curriculum of existing courses with large number of students

participating, organising special CALF events in collaboration with course leaders with a focus

on questions about the future of learning in their particular area of expertise.

6.3.2. University of Leicester model of student involvement

At the University of Leicester the key to maximising student participation was tapping into

existing student-created and run networks, such as clubs and societies, and collaborating closely

with the members of their committees. In this way event plans were developed where the CALF

model components were modified in a way which brings the content and activities of the CALF

event in line with the interests and needs of the particular student society or club while at the

same time ensuring that the CALF research outcomes are achieved. Opportunities for integrating

CALF into university-wide initiatives were sought and successfully utilised, such as inviting

students presenting at the annual Festival of Postgraduate Research to participate in CALF

events. Close collaboration with the sabbatical team of the Students‟ Union and the student

newspaper also proved fruitful for attracting participants to CALF events.


Following the example of successful integration of CALF activities in the curriculum of existing

courses at University College Falmouth a collaboration between the project and the University

of Leicester medical school was launched on the initiative and with the support of one of the

project Steering Group members. The collaboration resulted in the running of a three-week

module in learning futures for medical students for two consecutive years in 2009 and 2010. The

students learnt to use a range of new technologies for learning and collaboration. Feedback from

the students included:

“It was great to be outside the hospital, take a step back from practical

medicine and learn about something new.”

“The best thing I have done at Medical School”

“Good perspective on demographics, economical, ethical and future of the

medical profession. Encouraged more creative use of computers. Gave me tools

of how to prepare for the future.”

Quotes from feedback from UoL students who participated in the CALF Medical Special Component

6.4. Motivation of students to participate in CALF

Embedding learning activities in the CALF creative events, articulating and discussing the

expected learning outcomes with participants was part of the solution developed by the project to

address the problem of attracting and motivating students to participate in the CALF events at

the University of Leicester. At the first two events which took place before the CALF

implementation model was developed students were given book vouchers as an incentive for

participation. After the learning model was implemented nine half-day workshops and two three-

week courses were run in which no material incentives were given and students participated for

the opportunity to acquire new knowledge and skills and practise the preparation of future

scenarios and strategies, which led to budgetary savings for the project. The ethical perspective

to this aspect of the project implementation was that students could benefit from participating in

the project in a way that acknowledged their intellectual contributions to the development of

ideas and scenarios. In line with this aspiration and as a way of demonstrating to students that

their ideas about the future matter and are being taken into account an immediate follow-up to

participants‟ ideas about employability was integrated into the project. The scenario

development and learning activities at UoL were aligned with the University‟s programme for

employability skills – the Leicester Award for Employability. The award can be achieved by

students participating in programmes designed to help students to develop, assess, recognise and

record the employability skills they are gaining through extra and co-curricular activities. A

CALF module of learning futures activities was approved as a programme eligible for the

Leicester Award for Employability Skills to participating students. The CALF employability

module would have been another channel for recruiting and motivating students to participate in

the project activities. Unfortunately, the process for achieving approval took a considerable

amount of time and by the time it was awarded, the data collection stage of the project was near

completion and launching the employability module would have been unsustainable. The

approval of the proposed programme by the university, however, indicates that integrating a

process of consultation with students about the future of their university into an institutionally-

supported employability skills award programme may be a cost-effective feasible option with

mutual benefits for participating students and their university.


6.5. Recommendations for replicating the CALF implementation process

- Ensure that the futures with which we ask the students to engage are personal to them,

i.e. relevant to the students‟ own context, aspirations and ideas, as well as usable and

actionable for the students in planning their own future in and after university.

- Ensure the Learning Futures process is legitimate and institutionally-supported for the

students through interaction, dialogue and institutional recognition of the students‟

learning outcomes in the Learning Futures process.

- Enable students to express their highest aspirations for what they want to create. The

Learning Future vision aims to engage students at the level of their highest aspirations for

„making a difference‟ for their own learning and for the learning and teaching in the

future.

- Create and facilitate activities which enable students to stretch beyond the limits of their

current realities. Challenges that are easy to achieve never bring out the best efforts of a

group and students are motivated by activities which make them ask themselves "Is this

really possible?" The Learning Futures activities enable students to articulate the future

as a bold adventure with important outcomes, which gives them a sense they are

empowered to make important contributions and stretch beyond what they perceived as

personal limits.

- Present the Learning Futures as a process which is achievable or will have an impact

within a specific time-frame. Students‟ ideas for the future may push the boundaries of

change in teaching and learning but they have to believe that they can make it happen.

The research findings reported in this section address the research questions which guided the

activities of the CALF project:

While the research strategy adopted by the project had different methodological components

corresponding to the different research questions, the analysis of the data from the application of

the different methodologies produced similar results which complement and enhance each other

as themes, describing the future of learning and teaching. The agreement across the results is

seen as evidence of successful methodological triangulation, increasing the authenticity and

trustworthiness of the research findings.

The research findings of the project are presented in two stages. First, findings from the meta-

ethnography on future-related policy documents are discussed. The discussion sets the context

7. Outputs and findings

Explain the end results of the project work in an objective way. Depending on the project, it

might include research results, findings, evaluation results, data, etc. If the project created

something tangible like content, a portal, or software, please provide a website link/reference

or indicate how it may be accessed by the wider community. Engage the reader, and avoid a

long list of deliverables.


2. What are the ideas about the future of students from University College Falmouth and

the University of Leicester?

3. What are the preferred futures of the students participating the project?


for the second stage, presenting the findings generated from research work with the student

participants. The findings from the analysis of student-generated data are presented according to

emerging themes rather than according to research methodology. The themes allow the weaving

of ideas about the future of learning into a story told by the voices of the participating students,

which was one of the primary research objectives of the project. The themes emerged from the

ideas in the student scenarios, then their importance was rated using the maximum difference

questionnaires and the use of cognitive mapping revealed the values, aims and decisions

underlying the students‟ thinking about the different themes.

7.1. Findings from the horizon scanning

The findings relevant to the first research question were the result of a horizon scanning meta-

ethnography of 24 reports, summaries, and other documents related to the future of higher

education, with a particular emphasis on the UK higher education sector. The analysed

documents came from a range of sources, including UK government departments, the EU, the

UCU, the HEA, JISC, and a number of organisations. The findings of the meta-ethnography are

reported below in four sections, in accordance with the adopted research design:

- Expectations for future changes;

- Expectations for future stability;

- Future opportunities;

- Future risks.

7.1.1. Future Trends: Change

- Increased diversity in student demographics

A number of trends were identified by the documents as signals for impending change in higher

education. Amongst the most commonly identified is the fact that the student body, at least in the

UK, is becoming more diverse and will probably continue to do so (see, for example, National

Student Forum, 2009; Bradwell, 2009). The increased diversity will include a greater number of

mature, part-time, and disabled students who may have different needs to the rest of the student

body (Callender et. al., 2010; Pollard et. al., 2008). In fact, it is notable that several of the official

government reports placed significant emphasis upon issues concerning diversity, particularly in

terms of methods of access to higher education (Mandelson, 2009; Browne, 2010).

Another group that is set to grow is international students. Many of the documents reviewed

identify the globalisation of the higher education as a particular driver for change (see, for

example, European Commission, 2009; Mandelson, 2009; Bone, 2009). They point out that, in

order for institutions in the UK (and EU) to compete, they will be forced to expand the focus of

their operations beyond a narrow national base. One EU report even points out that this is a

particular problem in the EU as there will shortly be a decline in the number of young people

across Europe (High Level Expert Forum on Mobility, 2008). The new global focus is predicted

to include both the recruitment of international students and the undertaking of higher education

activities abroad, particularly in partnership with institutions in the target country (Humfrey,

2009; UKCISA, 2010). Within the EU, there is a particular focus on increasing the ability of

learners to achieve mobility between the higher education systems in different countries,

particularly different countries within the EU (European Commission, 2009; High Level Expert

Forum on Mobility, 2008).


- Mobility of students and mobility of universities across borders

The predicted expansion of functions for higher education institutions is not limited to

internationalisation. The Edgeless University report (Bradwell, 2009), in particular, suggests

that, faced with new, extensive and widely accessible information networks (on the internet),

universities will need to expand beyond their traditional role as campus-bound providers of

knowledge. Instead they will experience a „sprawl‟ in their functions, as new forms of teaching,

knowledge dissemination and public outreach extend beyond the campus into the unbounded

(„edgeless‟) realm of the internet.

- Growing importance of technology

Indeed, most of the examined documents predict that changes in technology will be significant

for the future form and function of higher education (see, for example, Learnovation, 2008;

Browne et. al., 2008; Cooke, 2009). The Horizon Report (Johnson et. al., 2010), in particular,

describes a number of technologies that are predicted to be most important to education in the

future, including mobile computing, open content, e-books, augmented reality, gesture-based

computing and visual data analysis. Many of the other analysed documents also pick up on some

of these developments, such as e-books and open content (see, for example, Carpenter, 2010;

Learnovation, 2008; Browne et. al., 2008). Particularly important amongst the widely discussed

developments is the increasing prevalence of interactive and social computing technologies and

Web 2.0, which allow for more collaborative interaction and social learning opportunities (see,

for example, Melville, 2009; Armstrong and Franklin, 2008; Franklin and van Harmelen, 2007).

Related to the development of these technologies is their widespread use amongst younger

generations (future students), and the extent to which they are now generally familiar and

comfortable with a wide range of new technologies, including Web 2.0, and, indeed, expect such

technology to form a central plank in their lives (Bradwell, 2009; Sutch, 2010). One report, for

example, points out that young people now spend more time online than they do watching

television (Melville, 2009). Another suggests that students, used to the instantaneous nature of

the internet, now expect to have 24-hour access to support services (Ramsden, 2009). It must be

noted, however, that this transition is not always described as a radical step change. One report

examining the academic practices of research students from „Generation Y‟ (those born between

1982 and 1994) suggests that the students who have not been surrounded by this technology for

their whole lives have more traditional information-seeking behaviours than those who have

grown up with the wide availability of the internet, although they remain very familiar with

modern technologies (Carpenter, 2010).

- Increased role of non-state funding of HE and student contributions towards

funding

Finally, and particularly amongst government reports, it is predicted that the funding structure of

higher education will change, with more emphasis placed upon private funding and student

contributions, leading to a higher education sector that functions more like a private than a

public sector (Mandelson, 2009; Browne, 2010). Such predictions are often made in light of both

the current poor economic climate and existing trends in UK higher education funding.

Furthermore, some of the documents suggest that these factors may lead to a reduction in the

levels of higher education financing (UCU, 2010; Bradwell, 2009).


7.1.2. Future Trends: Stability

- Continued drive towards excellence in teaching and learning

In addition to suggesting how the future might differ from the present, many of the documents

suggest aspects of teaching and learning as well as educational institutions that are not expected

to undergo significant changes in the future. One of these aspects is presented by the Edgeless

University report (Bradwell, 2009) as a limit to the change brought by the predicted growth of

higher education functions. That is, that the place of the university as a store of expertise and

knowledge capital and a space for the development of such expertise will not be sidelined, even

though new technologies and societal attitudes allow for learning and knowledge building

outside official higher education structures. In fact, this is an assumption implicit in all of the

documents as they attempt to predict and shape the form of higher education into the future, and

is given particular prominence as many of the government-commissioned reports place

significant emphasis upon the need for the UK‟s higher education sector to remain a world-class

provider of teaching and learning and a significant driver of our knowledge economy

(Mandelson, 2009; Browne, 2010).

- Students’ preference for face-to-face interactions in learning and teaching

Several of the analysed documents maintain the stability of the tradition of the pursuit of

excellence in teaching and learning which they expect to continue (see, for example, Franklin

and van Harmelen, 2007; Ramsden, 2009; Bradwell, 2009). Furthermore, it is worth noting that

several of the documents that are concerned explicitly with the importance of technology for

learning emphasise the fact that students do not (and, it is suggested, will not) wish to see

technology dominate their education. The reports maintain that students still place great

emphasis upon the face-to-face aspects of learning and often struggle to imagine how recent

technology might be helpfully used in their education (Bradwell, 2009; Melville, 2009; Sutch,

2010). One report concerning adult learners and their engagement with higher education points

out that even though students value flexibility, they still generally prefer direct contact to online

or distance provision (Pollard et. al., 2008). Despite the introduction of fees and subsequent

focus on the financial benefits of higher education, students have not adopted a consumerist

view of their education as a commodity, and continue to highly value education and their

learning experiences (Ramsden, 2009).

- Funding constraints

Finally, despite this continued focus on the quality of teaching and learning, another constant

that is predicted to extend into the future (particularly in light of the financial crisis) is

constrained funding. The nature of this trend is unclear, as is evidenced by the fact that it has

also been mentioned above with relation to future change. It is clear that many of the documents

argue that higher education funding is an important issue moving into the future and that the

current economic climate will mean a reduction in government funding (Browne, 2009;

Bradwell, 2009; Cooke, 2009). Indeed, some of the more negative responses to the government‟s

proposed higher education policies place great weight on the fear that it will lead to

underinvestment in teaching and learning (UCU, 2010), whilst even the reports upon which such

policies are based place significant emphasis on financial restraint (Browne, 2010; Mandelson,

2009). However, whilst many reports fear insufficient funding, several of them suggest that it is

a historic trend, particularly with regard to the development of technology-enhanced learning,

implying that such underfunding could be accurately characterised as change (see, for example,

Cooke, 2009; Armstrong and Franklin, 2008).


7.1.3. Opportunities to Promote Change

- Technological innovations

Building on the trends described above, the documents identify a significant number of

opportunities through which positive change can be promoted in the higher education sector. In

particular many of the trends are frequently described as enabling innovations and the

development of new teaching and learning techniques and methods. The most significant

example of this across the documents relates to changes and developments regarding technology.

Given the development of new technological platforms and tools, and the increasing prevalence

of their use in the lives of future (and current) students, there are significant opportunities for the

adaptation of such technologies to meet educational needs, especially when students and staff are

given time to experiment and innovate (see, for example, Bradwell, 2009; Learnovation, 2008;

Sutch, 2010). Two of the documents stress the fact that since students still value traditional

modes of teaching and learning, this opportunity ought to be conceptualised as technology-

enhanced learning, rather than technology-dominated learning (National Student Forum, 2010;

Melville, 2009)

Many of the documents specifically identify Web 2.0 technologies as potentially important

elements in the development of a higher education system that will place particular focus upon

social and collaborative learning and will enable the personalisation of the learning experience

of any individual student, an issue that is particularly important to students as demonstrated in

the 2009 annual report of the National Student Forum (Franklin and van Harmelen, 2007;

Melville, 2009; Armstrong and Franklin, 2008). Another technological development identified

as particularly important is the increased prominence of open content, which provides the

opportunity to institutions and the sector as a whole to develop a set of resources that are more

widely available (perhaps even to the wider public as part of the university‟s „sprawl‟) and more

easily accessible to a diverse range of students and other individuals (Bradwell, 2009; Bone,

2009; Redecker et. al., 2009).

- Opportunities for pedagogical and student-support innovations

Alongside the impact of technological innovations many of the other trends identified above also

encourage institutions to improve their teaching and learning strategies. For example, many of

the reports argue that increasing diversity in the student body creates demand for new and more

flexible course structures and methods of delivery, as well as properly focused support services.

It is believed that this will create possibilities for the reform of support services, and the

introduction of new course structures (particularly modular ones with the possibility of

transferrable credit) and new educational methods, especially “technology-enhanced learning”

(National Student Forum, 2009; Pollard et. al., 2008; Callender et. al., 2010).

- Transnational provision

The globalisation of education can also open up new opportunities by creating a demand for

support (and particularly careers) services that focus upon the specific needs of international

students, which is often done by using the internet to connect with employers and mentors in

their own countries (UKCISA, 2010). Several of the documents highlight the increasingly

important concept of transnational education (education in one country, which is primarily

overseen by an institution in another), which can promote the development of more flexible

courses (for example, two years at a partner institution in the student‟s home country and one at

the central institution in the UK) and more flexible modes of delivery and support (through

distance and online learning) (Bone, 2009; Humfrey, 2009).


- Opportunities for student empowerment

New forms of education delivery will provide opportunities for the renegotiation of the roles of

both teachers and students, with the student becoming more active in shaping their own, unique

education, and the teacher becoming less of an instructor and more of a guide and mentor in this

process (Sutch, 2010). Similarly, the introduction of technology into education can provide a

stimulus for the development of new pedagogical method. The analysed documents focus on the

development of new modes of assessment and feedback for work that is provided online and is a

collaborative effort (Redecker et. al., 2009). The generation of new modes of assessment and

feedback is particularly important as students, through the National Student Forum, have

expressed a desire for more constructive feedback (National Student Forum 2009).

The opportunities for change described above are further supported by several factors that are

already present in the higher education system. Many of the recommendations made by the

analysed documents put an emphasis on the ability of sectoral bodies, such as JISC and the

HEA, to promote and support change while at the same time highlighting the importance of

enthusiastic practitioners in continuing the progress that has already been achieved (see, for

example, Melville, 2009; Browne et. al., 2008). Since many of the documents reviewed aim to

promote and encourage change are part of government attempts to review higher education

policy, it is reasonable to assume that there is a will at governmental level to bring about change

and to enhance and support the quality of teaching and learning in higher education.

7.1.4. Risks and Challenges

- The digital divide

There are also elements of the current higher education system (and the wider world) that serve

to impede the possible progress described above. With regard to technology-enhanced learning

the foremost of these is what is often referred to as the „digital divide‟. Amongst students (and

staff) there is a wide range of levels of skill, familiarity, comfort with, and access to modern

technology. Not all students are completely computer literate, and many staff do not have the

skills to develop or adopt new, technology-enhanced teaching and learning methods. In fact,

several of the documents note that although most students can use the internet, many of them do

not know how to use it in an efficient and rigorous manner to locate information relevant to their

learning. These deficiencies in skills, access and information literacies must be rectified if the

development of new forms of education is to be successful (see, for example, Sutch, 2010;

Redecker et. al., 2009; Franklin and van Harmelen, 2007).

- Lack of strategic foresight and planning on institutional level

However, many of these documents suggest that the systematic and strategic plans and visions

necessary to eradicate these difficulties and enhance the possibilities of progress beyond the

capabilities of isolated forward-thinking practitioners are not in place at either institutional or

more central levels (Melville, 2009; Browne et. al., 2008; Cooke, 2009). Furthermore, the

strategic plans for teaching and learning that do exist are, in some of the documents, criticised

for failing to take into account the increasingly diverse needs of their increasingly diverse

student populations (National Student Forum, 2009; Pollard et. al., 2008). Progress, therefore,

requires new and better focused strategic plans at both institutional and central levels. In fact, the

development of such plans is a central component of the recommendations of many of the

documents (Melville, 2009; Browne et. al., 2008; Cooke, 2009). Such plans are particularly

important given the technical difficulties of implementing a wide-ranging ICT strategy, and the


complex ethical and legal issues surrounding open content, attribution and intellectual property

(Franklin and van Harmelen, 2007).

- Inadequate funding mechanisms

Even with suitable strategies and plans, progress may be impeded by a lack of funding. Some of

the documents argue that more funding is necessary if new models of teaching and learning are

to be successfully developed (see, for example, Franklin and van Harmelen, 2007; Mandelson,

2009). In response to potential government policy based on the Browne Report, the UCU even

argue that new models of higher education funding will leave teaching and learning dramatically

underfunded (UCU, 2010). The analysed documents are not united on this point. The Browne

Report itself, for example, suggests that its reforms will actually increase the funding directed

towards teaching and learning as funding will follow student choice, which will create

competition and encourage improvement (Browne, 2010).

- Inadequate incentives for learning and teaching innovation

A final problem identified is that appropriate incentivisation and career rewards are not provided

for those who focus on improving teaching and learning. Although this is in part a problem

related to the lack of sufficient funding for such rewards, it is also identified with inflexible and

research-focused institutional cultures (Browne et. al., 2008). Such cultures may also serve to

inhibit the development of new styles of teaching and learning, as they are often backward-

looking and focused upon traditional methods (Melville, 2009).

7.1.5. Conclusion of the horizon scanning

The meta-ethnography of the analysed documents concludes that certain trends (in particular

those that reflect increasing diversity in the student body and greater use and availability of

increasingly advanced technology) can create significant opportunities to develop innovative

teaching and learning activities in higher education in the UK. The achievement of these

innovations will not be without challenges, and the last section of this analysis identified several

such challenges, among which poor institutional planning, skills gaps and under-funding. With

regard to the latter of these, it is worth noting that opinions, trends, challenges and opportunities

related to financial issues are the least clear amongst the documents.

Many reports do not even mention them beyond the implicit assumption that their

recommendations might be funded. For example, whilst the UCU (2010) fear underfunding,

Browne (2010) sees a bright future with greater private investment creating competition and

more than off-setting the reduction in public funding. Similarly, it is unclear whether any

constraints on funding for the development of teaching and learning would be a change in the

system or provide consistency, as, whilst many of the documents celebrate the world class higher

education system in the UK (Mandelson, 2009; Browne, 2010), others lament under-funding of

teaching and learning (UCU, 2009), and highlight the ways in which the UK is falling behind

with relation to investments in ICT infrastructure (Cooke, 2009).


7.2. Findings from the student participation component

Since the emerging themes for the future of learning and teaching were articulated for the

purposes of the maximum difference questionnaires, each theme is presented first in terms of its

importance and then discussed in light of the findings from the scenario development and the

cognitive mapping interviews.

Where there is conflicting evidence with regard to a theme from the three different research

approaches the contradiction is highlighted in a discussion. Also discussed separately are

findings from the scenario development or cognitive mapping which do not fall into the themes

studied by the maximum difference questionnaires but which can offer interesting insights into

individual student‟s thinking about the future of learning and teaching.

The analyses of the questionnaire data revealed some interesting results regarding students‟

preferences towards the set of options for the future of learning and teaching, derived from the

previously generated student scenarios and the analysis of policy documents. Table 5 on page 30

shows the ranking according to importance for the eleven possible aspects of future learning and

teaching studied by the maximum difference scaling questionnaire survey.

The items in the table are arranged from the ones which students from both institutions

considered as most important at the top to the ones considered least important at the bottom with

negative scores. The scores are calculated by adding together the questionnaire results for both

institutions. Tables 6 and 7 present the scores for University of Leicester and University College

Falmouth respectively. Graph 1 on the next page illustrates the distribution of combined scores

for all questionnaire items and the preferences of the students from the two institutions.

The scores for the individual questionnaire items comparing the preferences of the students from

the two institutions and the combined importance score are provided in Graphs 2 to 9 together

with discussion and interpretation of the score.

Bars on the graphs positioned to the right of the zero axis indicate the corresponding item has

been ranked as “most important”. Bars on the graphs positioned to the left of the zero axis

indicate that the corresponding item has been ranked as “least important”. The length of the bars

corresponds to the size of the score that item has received – the longer a bar, the stronger the

reported importance of its corresponding item in the questionnaire and the shorter a bar, the

weaker its importance according to the participants in the study.

It is interesting to note the institutional differences illustrated by Graph 1 on the next page, with

particular reference to items 4, 6, 7, 8 and 11. In the case of item 4, which concerns the

importance of quality accommodation, the graph reveals that while for UCF students this item

was among the most important, for UoL students it was among the least important. The data

analysis points to similar conclusions with regard to items 6, 7, 8 and 11 which are discussed in

more detail individually in the following sections of the report.


-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

Scores

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Qu

esti

on

nair

e I

tem

s Combined UoL and UoF

UoL

UoF

Graph 1 Distribution of combined scores for all questionnaire items and the preferences of the students from the two institutions

1

1 Questionnaire Items corresponding to the numbers in the vertical axis

1. Strong links with leading edge local and international employers for learning on the job and work experience while studying.

2. Learning process personalized and supported for the needs of each individual student, delivered using learning styles, new or

traditional technologies, preferred by the individual student, support provided for the students personal technology.

3. Guided unlimited online access to internationally renowned quality learning resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and

constantly updated in real-time archives quality educational content for all subjects studied from leading teachers and

researchers.

4. Quality student accommodation, on-campus student facilities for learning and leisure, library buildings and library collections

of physical books.

5. Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers, practitioners and researchers in online tutorials and computer-

based virtual reality environments at low cost.

6. Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree.

7. Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or to gain a joint degree with an overseas institution.

8. Courses and institutions recommended by other students from your social network and friends, with possibilities to give

constant feedback for your satisfaction and recommendations.

9. Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local teachers.

10. Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning and teaching.

11. Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for meeting diversity and special needs.


Table 5 Ranking according to importance: combined score for UCF and UoL

Scores

Rank Questionnaire Items UCF & UoL

1 Strong links with leading edge local and international

employers for learning on the job and work experience

while studying. 0.620

2

Learning process personalized and supported for the needs

of each individual student, delivered using learning styles,

new or traditional technologies, preferred by the individual

student, support provided for the students personal

technology

0.174

3

Guided unlimited online access to internationally renowned

quality learning resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks)

and constantly updated in real-time archives quality

educational content for all subjects studied from leading

teachers and researchers

0.053

4

Quality student accommodation, on-campus student

facilities for learning and leisure, library buildings and

library collections of physical books. 0.039

5

Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers,

practitioners and researchers in online tutorials and

computer-based virtual reality environments at low cost. 0.029

6 Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less

living costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree. 0.021

7 Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying

abroad or to gain a joint degree with an overseas institution. -0.029

8

Courses and institutions recommended by other students

from your social network and friends, with possibilities to

give constant feedback for your satisfaction and

recommendations.

-0.065

9 Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own

local teachers. -0.071

10 Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of

learning and teaching. -0.109

11 Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven

record for meeting diversity and special needs. -0.160


Table 6 Ranking according to importance: University of Leicester score

Scores

Rank Questionnaire Items UoL

1 Strong links with leading edge local and international employers for

learning on the job and work experience while studying. 0.172

2

Learning process personalized and supported for the needs of each

individual student, delivered using learning styles, new or traditional

technologies, preferred by the individual student, support provided for

the students personal technology.

0.133

3

Courses and institutions recommended by other students from your

social network and friends, with possibilities to give constant feedback

for your satisfaction and recommendations.

0.117

4 Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for

meeting diversity and special needs. 0.105

5


practitioners and researchers in online tutorials and computer-based

virtual reality environments at low cost.

0.072

6

Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or to

gain a joint degree with an overseas institution.

0.061

7

Guided unlimited online access to internationally renowned quality

learning resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and constantly

updated in real-time archives quality educational content for all

subjects studied from leading teachers and researchers.

0.038

8 Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local

teachers. -0.133

9 Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning and

teaching. -0.161

10 Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living

costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree. -0.161

11

Quality student accommodation, on-campus student facilities for

learning and leisure, library buildings and library collections of

physical books.

-0.189


Table 7 Ranking according to importance: University College Falmouth score

Scores

Rank Questionnaire Items UoF

1

Learning process personalized and supported for the needs of each individual

student, delivered using learning styles, new or traditional technologies,

preferred by the individual student, support provided for the students personal

technology.

0.219

2 Quality student accommodation, on-campus student facilities for learning and

leisure, library buildings and library collections of physical books. 0.153

3 Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living costs, earlier

entry into job market and quality degree. 0.111

4 Strong links with leading edge local and international employers for learning on

the job and work experience while studying. 0.108

5

Guided unlimited online access to internationally renowned quality learning

resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and constantly updated in real-time

archives quality educational content for all subjects studied from leading

teachers and researchers.

0.068

6

Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers, practitioners and

researchers in online tutorials and computer-based virtual reality environments

at low cost.

0.013

7 Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local teachers.

-0.052

8 Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or to gain a joint

degree with an overseas institution. -0.076

9 Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning and teaching. -0.100

10

Courses and institutions recommended by other students from your social

network and friends, with possibilities to give constant feedback for your

satisfaction and recommendations.

-0.161

11 Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for meeting

diversity and special needs. -0.283


7.2.1. Employability

The combined ratings of the most important and the least important characteristics of future

learning institutions for all participating students from both institutions suggested that the most

important one was:

Graph 2 illustrates the distribution of scores ranking this option as most important or least

important across the two institutions and compares it with the combined score for this item.

Graph 2 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students from the two institutions regarding employability

The above finding was perhaps not surprising given the current climate of economic insecurity,

rising unemployment and perceptions of a manifold increase in the cost of higher education, as

evidenced by the meta-ethnographic analysis of policy reports. It suggests that while academic

literature rarely emphasises preparation for the workplace as an essential function of higher

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7Importance

Strong links with leading edge local and international employers

for learning on the job and work experience while studying.

“Strong links with leading edge local and international employers for learning on the job and

work experience while studying.”


education, students adopt a realistic view of not only the future of higher education but the future

after higher education. Students appreciate the importance of finding routes into employment

while still at university and hope that their institutions will facilitate the development of

employability skills, work experience and connections with employers.

The results regarding this option differ between the two participating institutions. Students from

the University of Leicester rate this option as first in their preferences but it comes fourth in the

preferences of University College Falmouth students. Further research is necessary in order to

reveal the reasons underlying this divergence in results.

Possible explanations are differences in economic status between students of the two institutions

or differences in the expectations towards the employability outcomes of creative practice-based

courses compared to the courses delivered at the University of Leicester. In particular there may

be differing expectations towards the role of the higher education institution as an employability

gate-keeper where the nature of a creative practice discipline encourages individualism and

independence, also with respect to finding employment while a course like medicine as offered

by the University of Leicester has significant work-based components, perhaps encouraging

students to expect their institution to widen their access to employment after graduation.

In addition, maybe students from the two institutions have differing experiences of the practical

implementation of this characteristic by their own institution. Perhaps if the institution is already

providing connections with employers, learning on the job, etc. students take it for granted and

therefore do not rank it very high. An alternative explanation is that they rank it as the most

important precisely because of positive experience with the career services at their institution

which make them appreciate the importance of help in obtaining work placements, etc.

The difference between the two institutions with regard to employability was interesting also

because it was not supported by the evidence from the cognitive mapping study. Employability

concepts were present in all 8 cognitive maps of University College Falmouth students and in 6

of the maps employability concepts had a high centrality score, meaning that these concepts

were directly and indirectly related to a large number of other concepts in the map. Possible

explanation is the individual students‟ characteristics in the two institutions. The maximum

difference scaling questionnaires were completed mainly by BA students in their first year while

the cognitive mapping interviews were conducted with BA students in their final year, i.e., the

cognitive mapping students were near the completion of their degrees and were perhaps more

motivated to think of their next steps after university. In conclusion, this finding again

emphasises the need for further research with a larger, representative sample of participants from

University College Falmouth using a research tool specifically refined to capture nuances of

opinion with regard to future employability.

7.2.2. Personalisation and flexibility

The second most important characteristic of learning and teaching in the future according to the

combined results of the questionnaire was:

“Learning process personalised and supported for the needs of each individual student,

delivered using learning styles, new or traditional technologies, preferred by the individual

student, support provided for the students‟ personal technology.”


There was almost complete agreement regarding the importance of this option between the

students of both institutions, with University College Falmouth students ranking it first in

importance and University of Leicester students ranking it second in importance. The result is

illustrated by Graph 3 below. The discussion of this finding will benefit from highlighting its

connections to a number of other ideas emerging from the cognitive mapping interviews and the

scenarios prepared by the students.

Graph 3 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students from the two institutions regarding personalisation

In 7 of the 15 cognitive maps concepts related to personalisation were part of loops involving

concepts of flexibility of learning and teaching provision. The loops mean that personalisation

was seen as a causal factor, enabling flexibility in learning provision and at the same time as its

consequence, meaning that flexibility in learning provision leads to personalisation of the

learning process.

Loops in cognitive mapping (where a number of concepts are linked in such a way that concept

A leads to concept B and concept B in turn leads to concept A) are often sign of “muddled

thinking” and always require closer examination. It was necessary to check whether the loop

represents a genuine self-reinforcing feedback mechanism between two concepts (as for example

when a market signal for increase in the price of a stock leads to further increase).

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25Importance



technologies, preferred by the individual student, support provided

for the students personal technology.


The feedback loop identified between personalisation and flexibility in the cognitive maps of the

CALF project appears to be genuine, i.e. students believe that the personalisation of the learning

process leads to increased flexibility which in turn reinforces further personalisation. A quote

from the student scenarios illustrates this finding:

“I worked with Abel from Argentina and a Katya from Russia on a task that

Glaxo Welcome had posted on the examination discussion board on

Facenote. We used translation software for the online discussions so all

three of us could speak our native languages and still understand each

other.”

Quote from the student scenarios (UoL students)

Related to the finding about the importance of personalisation is evidence from the student

scenarios that there is an expectation among students that the use and importance of technologies

for education would increase and that the role of user-generated content, social-networking, peer

assessment and referencing, and the use of interactive and participative approaches to teaching

would also grow. For example, some of the student scenarios said that:

“One of my Facenote contacts also has an interest in Shakespeare; we got

in touch after we discovered we had tagged the same course components on

Youtube.”


“Anybody can add to and change educational resources. You can check

their quality by the number of times they have been favourite, tagged and

recommended.”

Quote from the student scenarios (UCF students)

As part of this process students expected a rise of learning technologies, which instead of

becoming outdated with use will become more valuable as more user-generated content is

invested into them, and that the technologies will become “truly learning” in that they learn

about their users and constantly morph / adapt to their users‟ needs - the way that Amazon,

iTunes or Youtube recommendations work today. One student gave his iPod as an example of “a

technology that learns” because he had invested time, effort and resources to personalise it and

now the device “knows” about his preferences and style, thus becoming more valuable with use.

7.2.3. Open access and visibility

Third in importance in the ranking of future characteristics for learning and teaching in the

combined results from the two institutions came the questionnaire item:

“Guided unlimited online access to internationally renowned quality

learning resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and constantly updated

in real-time archives quality educational content for all subjects studied from

leading teachers and researchers.”


Graph 3 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students from the two institutions regarding openness

The importance of openness both as open access to resources as well as to people was

emphasised by the fact that the other option for the future related to openness in the

questionnaire came a close fifth in the combined ranking results of the questionnaire:

The questionnaire results from University College Falmouth supported the association in a

common theme between the two characteristics, with open access to learning resources coming

fifth in importance followed immediately by technology-facilitated access to teachers, ranked

sixth as visible is in Graph 1 with the comparison of all scores calculated for the questionnaire

items.

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07Importance


learning resources and constantly updated in real time archives

quality educational content for all subjects studied from leading

teachers and researchers.

“Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers,


virtual reality environments at low cost.”


Graph 4 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students from the two institutions regarding access

There are a number of components to both these ideas for the future, highlighted in the cognitive

maps and the student scenarios. Openness and access to learning resources was closely related in

the maps to a desire by students to be more involved and informed about their lecturers‟

research:

“I want to know what research they are doing at the moment, what

happened today in their lab for example, or interesting research article they

have come across, even if it is not directly relevant to today‟s class, I think it

definitely helps me learn more and better.”


The cognitive mapping interviews revealed that students are attracted to the potential of online

learning to enable them to interact with students from different backgrounds and countries and

break away from the “bubbles” of their own physical institutions. Openness was a “potent”

concept in the cognitive maps, closely related to learning technology which in turn was seen as

causally linked to the concept of visibility. In the scenarios students gave examples of learning

from the visibility of their lecturers‟ research and previous experience with lecturers‟ podcasts,

Twitter feeds, Facebook pages (not profiles) or blogs.

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08Importance

Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers, practitioners and researchers in online tutorials and computer-



In terms of the openness of learning the cognitive maps showed that students expected it to work

both ways – not only allowing students to access educational resources but creating

opportunities for students to make products of their learning visible outside of the institutional

environment and to be guided and supported if they wanted to take these opportunities:

“I want to be able to show what I have learnt, not just my degree certificate…”


Many students feel comfortable and even expect that significant aspects of their lives are and

will be visible and shared through social networking, etc. Participants felt that there exist

opportunities for “learning networking” (student quote) which should not be missed and that if

their social lives are visible, their learning lives should not be hidden. Cognitive mapping

showed that students from both institutions felt that in the future they will need more

opportunities to “see learning and show learning” (student quote). Examples given were the

need for more opportunities for students to showcase their work beyond the institutional

boundaries, using a variety of platforms (including technology). Supporting this finding is the

finding from the cognitive maps of perceived strong causal connections between the openness of

learning resources, leading to an increased visibility of the learning process, linked in turn to

expectations for enhanced employment opportunities.

Interestingly, the questionnaire results showed that in terms of access to teaching and resources

in both institutions students valued excellence and quality in teaching and learning as more

important than the mode of delivery. The questionnaire options emphasising quality in online

teaching and learning ranked higher (third and fifth in the combined results, fifth and sixth in the

results for UCF; fifth and seventh for UoL) than the option “Personal face-to-face tutorials with

the institution‟s own local teachers” which was ranked as unimportant both in the combined

results as well as the results of the two institutions.

7.2.4. Diversity

The cognitive maps showed that the openness and accessibility of learning, facilitated by

technology, were seen as causally linked to increased diversity both in terms of educational

content, student profiles and participation in education. Some of the scenarios developed by the

students suggested that the increased flexibility in the provision of education will lead to

increased accessibility and participation in higher education which would lead to an increase in

the diversity of the available educational content and the student demographic profile.

“80% of the population today is enrolled in a programme of study and since

all learning content became free, producers receive their income from

advertising and donations.”


The finding regarding the importance of diversity is in agreement with the projections

of the policy papers analysed in the meta-ethnography for increased participation and

increased diversity of the student population. In contrast to the visions of the policy

reports however students envisaged that the stake of non-traditional providers in HE

would grow and the competition between higher education institutions (HEIs) would

increase, leading to a fall in the cost of education.


7.2.5. Quality of the physical environment for learning

The results on this questionnaire item were quite interesting because of the discrepancy between

the results from the two institutions. The option was worded as follows:

The combined scores from the two institutions placed the quality of student accommodation and

campus facilities as the fourth most important characteristic for future learning and teaching. In

the rankings according to institution UCF students ranked it second in importance while UoL

students ranked it last, i.e., the least important of all options listed in the questionnaire.

Graph 5 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students regarding quality of the learning environment and facilities

The discrepancy in the importance ranking for this item merits investigation in future research.

Further studies are needed to confirm or exclude possible relationship between the importance

attached to the learning environment and facilities and the percentage of students living in

university-provided or private accommodation, student social background, mix of international

and home students, number of courses requiring specialised facilities such as media, design,

medicine, engineering, etc. It will be informative to examine the extent to which this finding

corresponds to the results of surveys on student satisfaction with IT facilities and support as well

as library services in their respective institutions, if such surveys have been conducted.

-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2Importance

Quality student accommodation, on-campus student facilities for learning and leisure, library buildings and library collections of

physical books.

“Quality student accommodation, on-campus student facilities for learning and leisure, library

buildings and library collections of physical books.”


7.2.6. Length and cost of study

Another item in the questionnaire where there was difference between the two institutions was:

It ranked as sixth in importance in the combined results, third in importance in the results from

UCF and was the second least important item in the UoL results.

Graph 6 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students regarding length and cost of study

A possible interpretation of the discrepancy is that the questionnaire item lists a number of

factors, course duration, cost, quality and employability, each of which individually is important

for decision-making when embarking on a higher education programme. Asking students to

judge the importance of a particular combination of all these factors may have been seen as a

complex task, deterring some students from making a decision. Cognitive mapping data

confirms the complexity of concepts like course duration, cost, quality and employability, with

all of them having high centrality scores in all analysed maps, with a lot of outgoing and

incoming perceived causal relationships, linking them to most of the other concepts on the maps.

-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15Importance

Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree.

“Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living costs, earlier entry into

job market and quality degree.”


Students perhaps felt unsure of the likelihood of this option becoming reality in the future. The

student scenarios reflected the complexity of the issue, with some students describing a future of

life-long learning and an expectation that education will be a continuous process with the

concept of “completing education” disappearing. Interestingly, the driver for this disappearance

was not only the pressure of ever-increasing amounts of information that will come in the future.

The desire “to always learn new things” was also identified as a driving force, coupled with the

expected low cost of learning and the enabling power of technology to deliver learning

conveniently to meet the individual needs of the students:

“I found my grandmother‟s graduation photographs today. I keep thinking what

a funny thing this “graduation” must have been. How could they have assumed

they could “graduate” and finish “education”? If I want to be employable, I

need to spend at least ¼ of my week in learning new things, otherwise I will fall

behind.”

Quotes from student scenarios (UoL students)

“It is fun, learning new things. People like learning something new, always, so if

you can learn anything, I mean with technology, why stop learning? People will

learn more in the future.”

Quotes from student scenarios (UCF students)

Cognitive mapping data revealed that students were unsure of the future impact of technology on

the duration of study programmes, i.e., whether technological advances will lead to possibilities

to reduce the duration of study or whether technology will actually increase the length of studies

because it will allow the seamless integration of learning activities with all other aspects of life:

“The university will become like the Open University, students will complete first 2.5

years by virtual lectures, podcasts, group online discussion and virtual wards and

skills lab. The university will make more courses like the Open University today with

distant learning being the primary teaching manner.”


The student scenarios showed an expectation for an increase in the future role of

interprofessional, interdisciplinary education, driven by the future expansion of knowledge,

emergence of new professions and technology-enabled collaboration. The cognitive maps

demonstrated that students were unsure of the effect that these developments will have on the

future cost and duration of education, with the maps showing associated concepts appearing in

feedback loops and unfinished causal chains (where nodes containing options for action are

neither connected to underlying values, nor to overarching objectives).

7.2.7. Student services

The question about the expected nature and level of provision of student support services (other

than career services) in the future of learning and teaching was another one where the views of

students from the two institutions diverged. The questionnaire item was formulated as follows:

“Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for meeting diversity and

special needs”


It ranked as the least important option in the combined results as well as in the results from UCF.

Students from UoL however ranked it top fourth most important consideration for the future of

teaching and learning.

Graph 7 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students regarding student support services

The discrepancy may be due to the differences in the student body in the two institutions, with

UoL having a highly diverse campus. Valuing diversity consistently came among the top

institutional values UoL students included in their scenarios when describing the future identity

of their university. Ensuring there is support for a diverse community of learning to thrive in

educational institutions was seen as a distinctive characteristic relevant to learning and teaching

in the future. The cognitive maps revealed that participants from UoL felt that their learning and

teaching are supported by the interaction of two factors – diversity and community.

Community implies common values and beliefs, i.e. the opposite of diversity, yet participants

believed that UoL will be identified in the future by its model of “celebrating diversity” and by

using diversity as a resource to build a “learning community of diversities” (student quote)

which students felt would promote learning. Examples of diversity given by students usually in

contrasting pairs were: international students – home students; distance learners – campus-based

students; students from different cultural and religious backgrounds, research students and

taught-course students, students and staff, Students‟ Union and university administration.

-0.3 -0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15Importance

Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for meeting diversity and special needs.


Diversity as a factor facilitating learning came up prominently in the cognitive maps by UCF

students as well but they referred to it as disciplinary diversity. Based upon their experiences

with the interdisciplinary collaborative CALF creative events that the students had attended,

UCF students‟ cognitive maps highlighted their beliefs in the importance of future opportunities

to instil disciplinary diversity in learning and ensure opportunities exist for students to connect

and learn together across disciplines.

The analysis of the cognitive maps of the students from the two institutions therefore sheds light

upon the contrast in the questionnaire results. UoL students associated student services with the

support for enhancing and benefiting from the diversity brought by international students,

students from different religious and cultural backgrounds, etc. The maps revealed that

participants felt there is a strong causal connection between student services support for diversity

and learning and teaching benefits. The causal maps of UCF students showed equal appreciation

of diversity but diversity which was interpreted as interdisciplinary and cross-disciplinary rather

than one referring to the student body. The cognitive map demonstrated that UCF students

believed this kind of diversity is to be supported academically which perhaps led to the low

rating they gave to the importance of pastoral and other services. Possibilities for further

research into student preferences are opened up by this finding.

7.2.8. International mobility and greening of learning

The questionnaire items referring to international mobility and the greening of learning both

scored low in importance in the combined ratings.

Graph 8 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students regarding greening of education

-0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0Importance

Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning and teaching.


The importance of environmentally-friendly practices was ranked as the third lowest in the

results from both UCF and UoL. Student scenarios in both institutions however did include

elements demonstrating concern for the impact on the environment of teaching and learning and

in particular the impact of technology, for example:

“All learning is now done [partly] on campus since computers were banned

after the UN Commission on Climate Change discovered that computers

contribute greatly to global warming. “

Quotes from student scenarios (UoL students)

“I transferred my studies from Kyoto University to the Sorbonne after Kyoto

failed their recycling targets for 3 consecutive years.”


A possible interpretation of the questionnaire illustrates one of the key advantages of the

maximum difference scaling methodology. It enables the articulation of preferences which

would have remained hidden if participants were allowed rank all options as important or

desirable. Instead, participants were forced to make a choice and articulate and rank their

preferences. Thus, while students are concerned with issues for the future environmentally

responsible practices of their institutions, as evidenced by the data from the scenarios, the

importance of these practices is perceived as less than the importance of support for

employability, personalisation of learning, high quality facilities, etc.

The questionnaire item regarding preferences towards international mobility was:

Graph 9 Distribution of combined scores for the preferences of the students regarding international mobility

-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08Importance

Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or to gain a joint degree with an overseas institution.

“Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or to gain a joint degree with

an overseas institution.”


In both institutions as well as in the combined questionnaire the item was ranked in the middle

of the scale and the first of all questionnaire items to have a negative importance score. It meant

that while it was seen as unimportant, it was the least unimportant characteristic. Again, a

possible explanation is the forced choice imposed by the questionnaire instrument where while

students value international mobility if they have to choose they would prefer their institution to

prioritise support for employability, personalisation of learning, high quality facilities, etc. Some

of the scenarios suggested that students believed that advances in learning technologies and

virtual reality in particular might make redundant the need to physically travel to different

learning locations which offers another explanation of the low importance ranking of this option.

7.2.9. Risks and threats

Finally, in line with the framework for analysis of policy and research reports used in the meta-

ethnography, data was collected though cognitive mapping and scenario development on the

factors which students consider serious threats and risks for the future of learning and teaching.

The most central themes according to evidence from the cognitive maps, supported by the

scenarios, were as follows:

- Lack of vision (vision for the future which is not in line with new developments, vision

for the future which is too general/not updated regularly/too ambitious)

- Breakdown in communication between administration, staff, lecturers and students (not

targeting the needs of students/staff).

- Weak implementation of any vision for the future at the grass-roots or patchy

implementation.

- Lack of commitment to the implementation of ideas for the future at all levels (weak

leadership).

- A vision for the future of the institution which doesn‟t take into account the differences

between subject disciplines.

- Under-resourced implementation of changes (financial resources/inadequate time to

implement).


Objective 1

Surface and capture signals which may influence the future of student learning by

undertaking trend analysis about the potential impacts on higher education and

emerging issue analysis about the potential impacts on HE.

Achievement/Deliverable

24 research and policy reports relevant to the future of learning and teaching were identified

from a large range of published sources – academic journals, government department

websites, think-tanks. A framework for synthesis and analysis of the documents was

developed, aimed at uncovering signals, trends and emerging issues. The analysis revealed 15

emerging issues which are likely to influence the future of teaching and learning. The results

of the analysis were published on the project website:

http://bit.ly/kT6JCa

Impact

The understanding of factors which are likely to influence the future of learning and teaching,

delivered by the comprehensive analysis of trusted multi-disciplinary sources, provides a

valuable background for making decisions and judgements about goals, strategies and plans

in educational contexts.

Benefit

For the teaching community:

Awareness of emerging issues in learning and teaching delivered by the analysis performed

by CALF can help educational practitioners to identify possible future drivers of change in

their own context and to discover opportunities for innovation and improvement in their own

practice.

For the research community:

Awareness of emerging issues can help educational researchers challenge assumptions about

existing realities in learning and teaching, and point researchers towards questions about the

future which merit further investigation.

For the learning community:

Awareness of emerging issues in learning and teaching can help learners to make informed

decisions about the direction of their future educational and career development.

8. Outcomes

In this section, assess the value of the project work. List project achievements against the

aims and objectives set. Summarise project outcomes and their impact on the teaching,

learning, or research communities. Indicate who will benefit from the work, how, and why.

Also comment on what you learned that may be applicable to other projects, e.g. whether the

methodology worked.

http://bit.ly/kT6JCa


Objective 2

Engage student voices and surface and articulate views about the future of learning in

higher education at University College Falmouth and the University of Leicester.

Involve a wide variety of CALF contributors in developing, understanding and

examining possible, preferred, viable and achievable futures for learning in HE.


The research findings of the project provide insights into the ideas of students from

University College Falmouth and the University of Leicester of the possible directions in

which teaching and learning may change in the future. The findings are specific to the

experiences and visions for the future of the participating students. They were used to inform

workshops for the wider learning and teaching community and provided the platform for

discussions of pedagogic vision, values and institutional missions.

Students from University College Falmouth and the University of Leicester participated in

CALF creative events about the future of learning and teaching. The students shared their

ideas through 102 questionnaires, 15 cognitive maps and future scenarios.

Total number of participating students - 320

Total number of student workshops - 31.

Involvement of a larger community of interest in the future of learning and teaching was

achieved through dissemination of the CALF research model and organising CALF events for

education practitioners from a wide range of backgrounds:

1 CALF workshop for 30 participants at the HEA Annual Conference in June 2010;

1 CALF workshop for 15 participants of the World Future Conference in Chicago, USA, July

2009;

1 CALF workshop for 40 participants at the Online Educa Berlin 2009 conference in

December 2009;

2 CALF workshops for 10 participants at the international online Learning Futures Festival

2010;

4 CALF workshops for 50 practitioners and decision-makers in the Civil Service in March

2010;

1 CALF workshop for 9 participants from the University of South Africa, October 2010;

1 CALF workshop for 10 participants from the University of Bahria, Pakistan, October 2010;

1 CALF workshop for 15 participants at the international online Learning Futures Festival

2011;

1 CALF workshop for 30 participants at the Project Management Institute Forum May 2011;

Total number of contributors from the wider teaching and learning community – 209

Total number of workshops - 13

Impact

Outcomes of the research conducted by CALF had significant impact on a number of

developments within the two partner institutions.

An interactive research space for graduate students at the University of Leicester, The


Student Media Zoo, was launched during the second year of the project. The concept for the

Student Media Zoo was created by integrating the ideas of the Learning Innovation Strategy

of the university and the findings of the CALF project regarding students‟ expectations

towards a growing role of technology for teaching and learning in the future.

The CALF research model was converted into a three-week training module for medical

students at the University of Leicester, where the research process was aligned with training

students to apply the scenario building and foresight methods. The positive feedback from the

students who participated in the first training resulted in the doubling of the number of

students selecting the module in the next year.

The research outcomes pointed to possibilities to align the involvement of students in

consultations for the future of their universities with the provision of skills and knowledge

which can increase students‟ employability. As a result, programme for student employability

at the University of Leicester was developed, where students participating in CALF activities

could receive the institutionally accredited Leicester Award for employability.

The CALF Project influenced elements of the new Learning and Teaching Strategy of UCF,

in particular the designing of new academic courses and incorporating learning technologies

into the curriculum.

A new Learning Futures unit was established within Academic Services at UCF as part of the

institutional restructuring towards the aim of becoming Arts University Cornwall in 2015.

The project findings informed the conception and design of a new postgraduate course in

Innovative Education and Training at the Beyond Distance Research Alliance which has been

approved by the University of Leicester and was ready to launch in 2010. The course is being

currently revised to reflect changes in the Beyond Distance Research Alliance and will be

resubmitted for programme approval by the university in 2012.

Benefit


Increased awareness of the problems, intended interventions, anticipated outcomes and

expected impacts of possible future developments in learning and teaching so that they are

sufficiently well defined and meaningful to current students and staff.

Explicit discussion of pedagogic vision, values and institutional mission.

Revision of pedagogies and learning materials and approaches, to serve better the student

learning experience.

Improved capacity of groups of students and staff to imagine and assess the potential of

decisions made now to create a future for their institutions by putting values into practice.


Participation in the Learning Futures events fosters creative dialogues between educational

researchers, learners and practitioners which leads to an examination of a range of possible

futures that can generate new ideas and directions for research. The output of the research can


help in the defining of future research questions related to impact on student learning of

emerging technologies.

Use of the CALF model developed as an outcome of the CALF workshop puts an emphasis

on planning from the future, where users of the model create a vision for the future of their

institution and systematically develop a strategy for creating this future.

Applying the CALF model facilitates a focus on the long-term preferred future. It balances

out the short-sightedness of many strategic and organisational plans in HE, which cover short

time periods, thereby often losing their innovativeness, narrowly restricting their options and

setting too-easily achieved goals.


Encouraged ongoing self-reflection and dialogue in order to increase accountability for the

achievement of individual development goals. Participating students acquired knowledge and

skills necessary for applying futures-oriented thinking for managing their day-to-day

learning, and for the advancement of their future education and career plans. They identified

skills and attributes they needed to develop in order to support their future aspirations.

Increased visibility and transparency of planning for the future at both partner institutions by

incorporating the student voice. The use of the CALF model ensured that students were given

a highly participatory platform for sharing their views on the future of their institution and

enabled them to play a role in the decision-making processes of their respective universities.

The collaborative creation of scenarios promoted the establishment of networks among the

participating students, allowing them to share awareness of each other‟s knowledge

resources, ideas, and visions of the future.

Objective 3

Interpret, model and represent ideas emerging from all CALF activities and secure feedback

on ideas.

Involve a wide variety of technological and pedagogical partners, together with forecasters to

interpret results.

Publish to the sector usable ideas and pathways for the future of pedagogy and learning

design.


Five models of how learners can be involved in the planning, re-shaping and assessment of

learning and technologies were developed, using the generic CALF model of Hindsight,

Insight, Foresight and Oversight:

Model of consulting learners through an illustration competition:

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/beyond-distance-research-

alliance/projects/calf/downloadable-resources

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/beyond-distance-research-alliance/projects/calf/downloadable-resources



Model of using social networking technologies for envisioning the future:



Model of using design principles for envisioning the future:



Model of aligning medical education with activities for envisioning the future:



Model of aligning employability skills development with activities for envisioning the future:



Innovative adaptation of collaborative web-based tools such as wikis and Google Maps for

encouraging creative thinking about the future of learning.

The innovative application of cognitive mapping and maximum difference scaling methods

for futures research.

CALF findings and activities were represented through more than 42 key note speeches and

addresses by NTF Prof. Gilly Salmon at national and international academic and policy

forums, impacting directly on institutional understanding and practice.

CALF findings and outcomes were represented by NTF Prof. Salmon through her

appointments as Vice-Chair of the Association for Learning Technologies in 2009 and to the

HEFCE Online Learning Task Force in 2009. The HEFCE Online Learning Task Force used

emerging findings from the CALF project and its Learning Futures model to inform its work

on supporting UK higher education.

The project activities and findings were presented in 7 papers accepted at international

conferences as well as 2 posters.

The UCF and UoL websites that allows dissemination of the findings of the project

highlighted events and provided information to students and staff.

http://learningspace.falmouth.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=644

www.le.ac.uk/beyonddistance/calf/

Publicity for the project was achieved through the University College Falmouth and the

University of Leicester newsletters.

The learning futures model of the CALF project and its findings were discussed with

academics from the University of Southern Queensland, the University of Manchester, the









http://learningspace.falmouth.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=644

http://www.le.ac.uk/beyonddistance/calf/


University of Liverpool and Deakin University in Australia during their visits to the Beyond

Distance Research Alliance.

Views of the CALF events and the story of the CALF learning futures were presented in

regular blog posts by the writer-in-residence throughout the duration of the project.

http://calfproject.falmouth.ac.uk/

The research blog of the project provided information for upcoming CALF events as well as

emerging findings.

http://calfutures.wordpress.com/

Other dissemination channels where the project maintained presence were Twitter and

Youtube, where the project has got its own dedicated channel with videos prepared by

student participants, commentaries from project partners, etc.

Twitter: http://twitter.com/#!/CALF_Project

Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/CALFProject

Impact

The dissemination activities generated „thought leadership‟ in the area of learning futures,

with contributions on the need for learner engagement and the pathways and change

processes needed to achieve this in HEIs of the future.

Benefit


The involvement of a wide variety of partners in the activities of CALF fosters the exchange

of knowledge, teaching approaches and strategies for creating informed visions for the future

of higher education.


Representing and disseminating the outputs of the project enables the reduction of the

existing fragmentation in the approaches to the study of the future of HE by promoting

collaboration and open learning.


Appreciation of what may happen in the future of teaching and learning in higher education

and ideas for developing of skills and knowledge which are usable and actionable for the

students in planning their own future in and after university.

http://calfproject.falmouth.ac.uk/

http://calfutures.wordpress.com/

http://twitter.com/#!/CALF_Project

http://www.youtube.com/user/CALFProject


The process of designing and carrying out the implementation of the CALF project suggests that

the application of its research model has a number of benefits for decision-makers, policy-

planners, practitioners and learners in the area of higher education:

- The model encourages its users to plan from the future, i.e. create a vision for the

future of their institution, with a strong emphasis on the long-term preferred future

and work from there towards evaluating specific strategies in the light of their

existing mission or organisational imperatives.

- The model ensures stakeholder participation and empowerment. Its process is highly

participatory, involving learners, teachers, lecturers, learning technologists, managers

and experts in a structured dialogue and decision-making process.

- The novel combination of research methodologies such as cognitive mapping and

maximum difference scaling, together with scenario development proved to be a

useful platform for discovering trends and emerging possibilities. The outcomes of

the application of these methods help participants recognise opportunities and threats

that are invisible to traditional planning.

Reflection on the CALF approaches for motivating students to participate in the project suggests

the conclusion that articulating the activities for imagining the future of learning and teaching,

where students will acquire new skills and knowledge relevant to their studies or future career

aspirations, can act as an excellent driver for student participation and acknowledges in an

ethical way the importance of their contributions. Integrating learning futures activities into the

curriculum through securing the support of teachers leads to high rates of participation, student

involvement in the process and awareness of its outcomes across the institution.

Finally, the research findings provide evidence of the richness of students‟ expectations for the

future of learning. The most prominent ideas were:

- Learning and teaching in the future will make use of institutional strong links with

leading edge local and international employers. It will provide greater opportunities


- Personalisation of the learning process and institutional support and guidance for the

students‟ personal choice of learning technologies.

- Increasing openness of learning resources, sharing of learning resources and

networking across disciplines.

- Provision of high quality learning environments, in terms of access to learning

resources, on-campus student facilities and student accommodation.

In conclusion, the Creating Academic Learning Futures project created, explored and presented

for discussion a variety of plausible „alternative futures‟ for learning and teaching. The process

involved analysing emerging issues which may influence the future of teaching and learning,

engaging students and other contributors in the development of ideas for the future and

interpreting and presenting the results for discussion within a wide community of interest. These

achievements ensured that the project met its planned aims and objectives and delivered its

expected outcomes.

9. Conclusions

Briefly summarise any conclusions that can be drawn from the project work.


Interpreting, modelling and representing ideas emerging from all CALF activities has been one

of the key deliverables of the CALF project. The learning, teaching and research communities

can benefit from adopting and implementing the project deliverables in their own contexts.

Leveraging the outcomes of the CALF project can be done on a number of levels:

- Implement the CALF frameworks of research activities for exploration of possible

futures for learning into institutionally-supported sustainable practices for collaborative

strategic planning, involving staff and students. It will enable a wider community of

higher education stakeholders to benefit from capturing and communicating effective

designs for the future of learning and enhance knowledge management and knowledge

transfer about best practices.

- Undertake further research into the spectrum of possibilities for application of these

methods for studying the future of learning and teaching. CALF adapted and tested novel

methods for student participation, creativity and research into the future of learning. The

research findings revealed a number of benefits of the application of these novel methods

but as innovations they are still in need of careful assessment by academics, practitioners

and learners. Insufficient availability of data and lack of a substantive theoretical

framework regarding both future studies and the pedagogical use of Web 2.0 tools are

major constraints for the wider application of these interesting approaches in educational

research and practice.

- Develop the model for creating academic learning futures through group work and the

use of web-based collaborative technologies has the potential into a tool for self-

assessment for future learning readiness. Indicators for future learning readiness can be

generated from the scenarios for the future of learning developed by the CALF project.

The tool will guide users – institutions, practitioners, researchers and students along a

process for identifying any gaps between current processes, technologies, practices and

capabilities in their institutions and the future scenarios resulting from the CALF project.

Use of the tool will contribute to the identification of future goals and aspirations at

institutional level as well as at the level of individual practitioners or students. It will

facilitate the development of plans and strategies for change in creative and collaborative

ways and generate evidence to support reviewing, comparing and evaluating possible

future directions for development of an organisation or an individual in higher education.

The availability of the tool will meet the recommendations from the external evaluator of

the CALF project for incorporating lessons learnt from the project into curriculum design

and planning processes and future learning strategies and policies.

- Collect and present the project findings and deliverables will enable collecting and

analyse feedback on the CALF research findings from students, practitioners and

researchers. The feedback will provide an evidence-based understanding of how adoption

of the practical recommendations of the project for HE policy and strategy can take

place. It will ensure sustainability and visibility of the best practices identified by CALF

in formats readily understandable and usable by higher education practitioners and

students.

10. Implications

Consider the future implications of your work and how others can build on it. What are the

implications for other professionals in the field, for users, or for the community? What new

development work could be undertaken to build on your work or carry it further?


The findings of the CALF research project informed the formulation of a set of

recommendations for the teaching, learning and research communities. These guidelines can be

used to incorporate students‟ ideas about the future of learning and teaching into present

practices and also to replicate the CALF model for creating academic learning futures in other

institutional and organisational contexts.

11.1. Recommendation 1:

Identify pathways for the development of employability skills which can be aligned with

existing academic courses and programmes. Encourage articulating and raising awareness of the

development of employability skills through established academic courses and programmes.

Establish a scheme for institutional recognition of time and effort that students put in activities

similar to the Learning Futures model where their involvement in strategic planning for the

future of their institutions develops employability skills. The scheme will represent a cost-

effective way to increase student participation in planning, strengthen the sense of ownership of

students of institutional strategies and visions for the future, encourage uptake and acknowledge

the importance that students place on the development of their employability.


Students‟ preferences change fast – ensure there are channels in place for continuous

institutional learning from students about learning and teaching which maintain the institution‟s

ability to flex and change rapidly without loss of quality, ensuring personalisation of the learning

process and institutional support and guidance for the students‟ personal choice of learning

technologies


Identify possible resources, activities and outcomes of increasing the openness of learning

resources, sharing of learning resources and networking across disciplines. There exist

opportunities for “learning networking” which should not be missed. Many students feel

comfortable and even expect that significant aspects of their lives are and will be visible and

shared through social networking - if students‟ social lives are visible, their learning lives should

not be hidden. Recognise the significance of promoting students‟ learning profiles (similar to

Facebook profiles), support opportunities for students to create resources and outputs of their

learning which they can share and demonstrate outside of the classroom, VLE or campus in

ways similar to those in social networking. Ensure student ownership of the resources (so that

they can be used and accessed after degree completion) but foster the sense of institutional

identity and belonging.


Developing the capacity of students and staff to imagine and analyse the potential of the present

and the past for the future and to create, rather than observe, the future. Increase the visibility

and transparency of strategy-making and planning by incorporating the student voice. Build an

awareness of the problems, intended interventions, anticipated outcomes and expected impacts

of institutional plans and strategies for the future so that they are sufficiently well-defined and

meaningful to current students and staff. Clarify students‟ and staff‟s ideas about the essential

logic and assumptions of the future strategy, linking strategic goals to possible interventions and

then to results. Finally, generate strategic insight without prejudicing the autonomy of future

students and staff to choose different options and adopt different values.

11. Recommendations

List any specific recommendations for the teaching, learning, or research communities.


Aghion (2007) Why Reform Europe‟s Universities? Bruegel Policy Brief, Available at:

www.bruegel.org.

Alexiadou, N. (2001) Researching policy implementation: interview data analysis in institutional

contexts, Social Research Methodology, Vol..4, No.1, pp.51 – 69

Auger, P. Devinney, T. Louviere, J. (2004). Consumer‟s social beliefs, an international

investigation using Best-Worst scaling methodology. Working paper, University of Melbourne,

Melbourne Business School, Melbourne, Victoria, AU.

Britten N., Campbell R., Pope C., Donovan J., Morgan M. and Pill R. (2002) Using meta-

ethnography to synthesis qualitative research: a worked example, Journal of Health Service

Research, Vol. 7, pp. 209-15

Butler, W. (2007) Learning from E-business. In The e-revolution and post-compulsory

education : using e-business models to delivery quality education, Eds. Boys and Ford, JISC

and Routledge, London and New York

Campbell R., Pound P., Pope C., Britten N., Pill R., Morgan M. and Donovan J. (2003)

Evaluating meta-ethnography: a synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes

and diabetes care, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 65, pp. 671-84

Clarke, B. (1996) Substantive growth and innovative organisation: New categories for higher

education research, Higher Education, Vol. 32, pp. 417–430.

Cohen, S. H. (2003) Maximum Difference Scaling: Improved Measures of Importance and

Preference for Segmentation, WA : Sequim

http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/maxdiff.pdf

Cohen, S. H. and Markowitz, P. (2002) Renewing Market Segmentation: Some New

Tools to Correct Old Problems, ESOMAR

da Cunha, J. Clegg, S. (2007). Management, paradox, and permanent dialectics. In S.R. Clegg

(Ed.), Management and organization paradoxes (pp. 11-40). Philadelphia, P.A.: John Benjamins

Publishing Co.

Eden, C., Ackermann, F., (2004) Cognitive mapping expert views for policy analysis in the

public sector, European Journal of Operational Research , Vol.152, pp. 615– 630

Eden, C., (1992). On the nature of cognitive maps, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 29, pp.

261–265

ESF (2008) Higher Education in Europe Beyond 2010: Resolving Conflicting Social and

Economic Expectations. Available at: http://www.esf.org/activities/forward-looks/social-

12. References

List any references to the work of others you have cited (e.g. articles, reports, studies,

standards), and any explanatory notes. Provide URLs for any materials available on the

web.

http://www.bruegel.org/

http://www.sawtoothsoftware.com/download/techpap/maxdiff.pdf

http://www.esf.org/activities/forward-looks/social-sciences-scss/current-forward-looks-in-social-sciences/higher-education-in-europe-beyond-2010.html


sciences-scss/current-forward-looks-in-social-sciences/higher-education-in-europe-beyond-

2010.html Accessed on 10 June 2011

Finn, A., and Louviere, J. J. (1992) Determining the appropriate response to evidence of public

concern: The case of food safety, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol.11 No.1, pp.12–

25

Godet, M. and Roubelat, F. (1996) Creating the future: The Use and Misuse of Scenarios, Long

Range Planning, Vol. 29, No. 2. pp. 164–171

Havas, A. (2008) Devising Futures for Universities in a Multi-level Structure: A Methodological

Experiment, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, Vol. 75, pp.558–582.

Hawkins, D. T. and Wagers, R. (1982) Online bibliographic search strategy development,

Online, Month: May, pp. 12–19.

Hodginson, G., Maule, J., Bown, N., (2004) Causal cognitive mapping in the organizational

strategy field: a comparison of alternative elicitation procedures, Organizational Research

Methods, Vol. 7, No.1, pp. 3 –26

Kaivo-oja J.Y., Katko T.S. and Seppälä O.T. (2004) Seeking convergence between history and

futures research, Futures, Vol. 36, pp. 527–547

Kelly, G.A., (1955) The Psychology of Personal Constructs. Norton, New York.

Kerr, C. (1982) The Uses of the University , Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press

Kyvik, S. (2004) Structural changes in higher education systems in Western Europe, Higher

Education in Europe, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 393–409

Lancrin, S. (2004) Building Futures Scenarios for Universities and Higher Education: an

International Approach, Policy Futures in Education, Vol. 2, No.2, pp 203

Leedy, P. (1993) Practical research: Planning and design, 5th ed., New York: Macmillan

LERU (2006) Universities and Innovation: The Challenge for Europe, League of European

Research Universities.

Liem, D. G., Mars, M., and de Graaf, C. (2004) Consistency of sensory testing with 4- and 5-

year-old children, Food Quality and Preference, Vol.15 No.6, pp. 541–548.

Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A. and Swait, J.D. (2000) Stated Choice Methods: Analysis

and Application, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

MacNulty C.A. (1977) Scenario development for corporate planning, Futures, Vol. 9, pp. 128–

38

Nakicenovic et al, (2000) Special Report on Emissions Scenarios: A Special report of Working

Group III on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press


Neustadt, E., & May, R. (1986) Thinking in time: The uses of history for decision-makers, New

York: The Free Press

Noblit G.W. and Hare R.D. (1988) Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies,

London: Sage

Notten, P. (2006) Scenario Development: a Typology of Approaches, OECD Think Scenario :

Rethink Education

O‟Brien, F.A. (2004) Scenario planning – lessons for practice from teaching and learning,

European Journal of Operational Research, Vol.152, pp. 709–72

Salmon, G. (2008) Future Learning: Desire or Fate?, JISC Innovating E-Learning online

conferenceAvailable at www.online-conference.net/jisc/content2008/salmon/salmon.pdf

[accessed on May 19th 2009]

Schlosser, R.W., Wendt, O., Bhavnani, S. and Nail-Chiwetalu, B. (2006) Use of information-

seeking strategies for developing systematic reviews and engaging in evidence-based practice:

the application of traditional and comprehensive pearl growing, International Journal of

Language & Communication Disorders, Vol. 41 No.5, pp. 567–582

Schoemaker P.J.H., (1993) Multiple scenario development: its conceptual and behavioral

foundation, Strategic Management Journal, Vol.14, pp. 193–213

Strike K. and Posner G. (1983) Types of synthesis and their criteria, Knowledge Structure and

Use, Eds. Ward S and Reed L. Philadelphia: Temple University Press

Wildman, P. and lnayatullah, S. (1996) Ways of Knowing, Culture, Communication and the

Pedagogies of the Future, Futures, Vol. 28, No. 8, pp. 723–740

Wright G., Cairns G. and Cairns P. (2009) Teaching scenario planning: lessons from practice in

academic and business, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 194, pp. 323–335

Technical terms

Future Scenario

“A quantitative or qualitative picture of a given organization or group, developed within the

framework of a set of specified assumptions” (MacNulty, 1977) which are then “presented in

coherent script-like or narrative fashion” (Schoemaker, 1993).

Learning Futures

Learning futures is a methodology which helps make sense of an uncertain future. Its focus is on

making informed and democratic decisions. It assumes there are possible possible futures - what

“might” happen (future knowledge); plausible – “could” happen (current knowledge); probable

- “likely to” happen (current trends); preferable - “want to” happen (value judgements).


Appendix 1

List of Documents Analysed for the Horizon Scanning

Armstrong, J. Franklin, T. A review of current and developing international practice in the use

of social netoworking (Web 2.0) in higher education (Franklin Consulting, 2008)

Bone, Drummond, The Internationalisation of Higher Educatio,n Report Submitted to John

Denham MP, Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills (Department of

Innovation, Universities and Skills, 2009)

Bradwell, Peter, The Edgeless University: Why Higher Education Must Embrace Technology

(Demos, 2009)

Lord Browne, Securing a Sustainable Future for Higher Education (Independent Review of

Higher Education & Student Finance in England, 2010)

Browne, Tom; Hewitt, Roger; Jenkins, Martin; and Walker, Richard, 2008 Survey of Technology

Enhanced Learning for higher education in the UK (UCIA, 2008)

Callender, Claire; Jamieson, Anne; and Mason, Geoff, The supply of part-time higher education

in the UK (Universities UK, 2010)

Carpenter, Julie (co-ordination), Researchers of Tomorrow: Annual Report 2009-2010

(Education for Change, 2010)

Cooke, Ron, Online Innovation in Higher Education Report Submitted to John Denham MP,

Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills (Department of Innovation,

Universities and Skills, 2009)

European Commission, GREEN PAPER: Promoting the learning mobility of young people

(European Commission, 2009)

Franklin, Tom; and van Harmelen, Mark, Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in

Higher Education (Franklin Consulting, 2007)

HIGH LEVEL EXPERT FORUM ON MOBILITY, Making learning mobility an opportunity

for all (European Commission, 2008)

Humfrey, Christine, Transnational Education and the Student Experience: a PMI Student

Experience project report (UKCISA, 2009)

Johnson, L; Levine, A; Smith, R; and Stone, S, The Horizon Report 2010 (The New Media

Consoritum, 2010)

Learnovation Consortium, The Foresight Report (European Commission, 2008)

Mandelson, Peter, Higher Ambitions: The future of universities in a knowledge economy (Dept.

for Business, Innovation and Skills, 2009)

Melville, David (Chair), Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World (CLEX, 2009)

National Student Forum, Annual Report 2009 (National Student Forum, 2009)

National Student Forum, Annual Report 2010 (National Student Forum, 2010)


Pollard, Emma; Bates, Peter; Hunt, Will; and Bellis, Anne, University is Not Just for Young

People Working Adults‟ Perceptions of and Orientation to Higher Education (Department of

Innovation, Universities and Skills, 2008)

Ramsden, Paul, „The Future of Higher EducationTeaching and the Student Experience‟ Report

Submitted to John Denham MP, Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills

(Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills, 2009)

Redecker, Christine; Alla-Mutka, Kirsti; Bacigalupo, Margherita; Ferrari, Anusca; and Punie,

Yves, Learning 2.0: The Impact of Web 2.0 Innovations of Education and Training in Europe

(European Communities, 2009)

Sutch, Dan, Education futures, teachers and technology (futurelab, 2010)

UK Council for International Student Affairs, Prime Minister‟s Initiative for International

Education: Reports from Pilot Projects and Overseas Study (UKCISA, 2010)

University and College Union, Education for the Future: UCU‟s Manifesto for Post-School

Education (UCU, 2010)


Appendix 2

Main themes of the documents analysed for the CALF Horizon Scanning

Prepared by Robert Cane

Reference Summary of Content Quotations

Higher

Ambitions -

Mandelson

This report seeks to establish how the UK can maintain the success of its

Higher Education sector and, in doing so, foster excellence in teaching and

research and encourage participation across a broad spectrum of society.

The recommendations of the report focus on:

Expanding access;

Maximising the contribution of Higher Education to the UK‟s

economic growth;

Strengthening the research capacity of higher education institutions in

the UK and ensuring that they contribute, economically or socially, to

the wider society;

Promoting excellence in teaching and allowing students to make

informed choices on the basis of such excellence;

Ensuring that UK universities remain both at the centre of

communities and key players within the wider world;

Enabling them to do all of this within the constraints of fiscal

tightening in the public sector.

With regard to the benefits e-learning, the report makes a number of points:

Firstly, the use of e-learning techniques improves the quality of

teaching and availability of content and information;

Secondly, it allows for a greater level of flexibility in and

personalisation of the learning experience, particularly by increasing

the opportunities for two-way feedback between teaching staff and

students;

Thirdly, the use of online techniques in teaching expands the reach of

a higher education institution to both those within the UK who may

“The continuing development of

e-learning is a vital element in

supporting improvement of

teaching and the student experience

and in enabling the personalisation

and flexibility that students and

employers expect. We will empower

our universities to be world

leaders in the growing market in

transnational education based on

e-learning.” P. 92

“Chapter one stressed the

Government‟s commitment to

greater flexibility in access to higher

education. That includes making the

best use of digital technology and

elearning.

This can also play a role in

improving quality and the overall

learning experience.” P. 78

“The potential of

communications technologies to

extend the reach of our universities

is one of the most exciting aspects

of our higher education today.


struggle to access higher education through traditional routes (for

example, through scheduling constraints imposed by a job) and those

outside of the UK who ought to be targeted in the drive to increase

the international presence of the UK higher education sector.

Given such benefits, and the impressive potential of the UK with relation to

e-learning, the report suggests that UK higher education policy ought to:

Take advantage of the opening provided by a rapidly expanding

global market and encourage the expansion of UK higher education

(in partnership with other public and private bodies) into more

diverse forms of education across the world;

Encourage university leadership to put in place policies to drive

forward innovation and to ensure that existing pockets of „leading

edge‟ practice do not remain isolated;

Provide seed funding, and enable existing structures (such as the

HEFCE taskforce) to foster and co-ordinate innovation across the

sector;

Ensure that universities accurately inform students about the forms of

technology used in teaching particular courses before they sign up for

them, in order to encourage informed choice making on the part of

students.

Students should leave university

with a competent mastery of these

modes of communication and

information transfer.” P. 78

Ron Cooke,

Online

Innovation in HE

The report, part of a government debate on the future (next 10 to 15 years) of

HE in the UK, argues that the UK has a world-class reputation with regard to

innovation, infrastructure and the use of many aspects of ICT in HE. These

areas of the HE sector can:

drive economic growth, wider learning, and competitiveness in the

global market;

dramatically improve the student experience by, for example,

facilitating access to learning materials and allowing students to

“The UK is seen as world class, and

often world leading, in networking, content

and digital libraries, access

management, and many areas of e-

learning. Until recently the UK was world

class

in providing e-infrastructure for research

and in e-science.” P. 3


interact with peers and teachers in a less temporally and

geographically dependent manner.

However, the UK‟s leading international position are threatened by several

factors, including:

a lack of training for teachers and students, who may be comfortable

with computers and the internet without actually knowing how to use

them well;

a failure to generate and make available high quality, modern

learning and teaching resources, and a failure to adequately exploit

existing online resources;

a lack of strategic management of ICT by HEIs;

the fact that the UK is gradually falling behind in attempts to meet the

ICT needs of research.

To facilitate recommendations to address these core concerns, the report

attempts, in a suitably circumspect manner, to predict the course of

development for both ICT and the UK higher education sector over the next

15 years:

Although it is impossible to predict specifics about the future of the

rapidly advancing field of ICT, several things are clear from our

experience of innovations that have already come to pass, and the

present integration of the internet and interactive Web 2.0

technologies in the lives of the younger generation. ICT will be more

powerful and interactive in 15 years time and there is likely to be a

generation gap as younger generations continue to adapt to new

technology more readily than their elders.

The future of HE in the UK is more easily determinable. Its

expansion will continue based on an diversity of tailored models of

education ranging from traditional models from research-led

institutions to skills-based courses provided by, amongst others, FE

“A step change is required. To exploit ICT

it follows that UK HEIs must be flexible,

innovative and imaginative. A good ICT

infrastructure is essential but not sufficient

and similarly funding for innovation is

essential but not sufficient. The UK enjoys

the former but the latter is only just

adequate and is under threat: just at the

time

when HE must provide leadership and

exploit its expertise.” P. 9

“In particular the UK is not doing enough

to provide a more or less complete online

educational experience to students who,

for a variety of reasons (economic,

lack of time, geography) cannot enjoy a

conventional campus based learning

experience. This is especially true of

students where demand for higher

education

outstrips supply such as the emerging

economies of South East Asia and South

America and those developing countries

that are likely to become increasingly

more important over the next 15 years.” P.

10

“In the UK most online material should be

openly available to all, free of charge at


colleges, big businesses and private providers. This growth will also

see a particular focus on expansion into global markets as

demographic factors prevent any significant expansion of the

domestic student base. Alongside this, the HE sector will move

further away from public funding models and become more „private

sector‟ in their operation.

The report argues that, for the UK HE sector to adapt these innovations in

ICT to the needs of an increasingly diverse HE framework, certain

recommendations ought to be followed:

A corpus of open learning resources ought to be established.

Institutions must develop their own integrated strategies towards the

use of ICT in teaching and research.

E-infrastructure must receive suitable investment. Most of this ought

to come from individual institutions through sound management

strategies that take suitable account of ICT needs. Central funding,

however, must also be maintained, to support, in particular,

collaborative and national projects.

A small number of national centres of excellence ought to be

established to spear-head innovation in the UK.

the point of use. This will encourage re-use

of materials by other teachers, make

available high quality resources to

students that they can have confidence in,

and

provide a valuable marketing tool to

potential overseas students (whether they

learn in the UK or in an overseas

campus).”

P. 14

Horizon Report

2010

The annual Horizon Report seeks to identify emergent technologies, trends

and challenges that will effect higher education over the following 5 years.

The 2010 report identified the following „Key Trends‟:

The internet provides an abundance of resources and opportunities for

forming relationships, which challenges educators to rethink their

roles in favour of an increased emphasis on helping students to make

sense of and assess the credibility of the information that is out there,

and on mentoring them to prepare them for the world that they will

enter upon graduation. This is particularly important as traditional

role of universities (providing credentials) is being impinged upon by

„Over the past few years, the emergence of

a raft of new (and often free) tools has

made collaboration easier than at any

other point in history.‟ P. 4

„People expect to be able to work, learn

and study whenever and wherever they

want to.‟ P. 4

„The portability of mobile devices and their


other organisations.

People expect to be able to study whenever and wherever they want

to. In a busy world, faster approaches are often perceived as better.

This places an emphasis on „just-in-time‟ and „found‟ learning, as

well as informal sources of education.

Technology is increasingly cloud based. This is changing not only the

way that we use technology, but also how we conceptualise it, with

physical location taking a back seat to functionality. Although there

remain some concerns about privacy and control over data, drives

towards cost cutting will push us further towards cloud computing.

Students‟ work is becoming increasingly collaborative, and across

campuses multi-disciplinary initiatives are being undertaken.

Although this trend is not as pronounced as the others, new tools are

making such collaboration easier.

It also identified the following „Critical Challenges‟ facing educational

organisations:

The role of tertiary education is changing, and institutions must adapt

to meet the needs of students. They must focus on encouraging

critical inquiry and mental flexibility, and encourage problem-solving

approaches.

With new forms of scholarly publishing (particularly through social

media) old forms of assessment no longer apply. Citation-based

metrics, for example, cannot take account of reader comments,

tagging, being referenced in blogs etc. The academy must adapt to

these new media.

Digital literacy skills are increasingly important in every discipline,

but the teaching of such skills does not meet this need. The challenge

is only increased by the rapid pace of technological development.

Cost-cutting means that institutions are increasingly focusing their

finances into narrow areas. The importance of research into emerging

technologies must be emphasised in such considerations.

ability to connect to the Internet almost

anywhere makes them ideal as a store of

reference materials and learning

experiences, as well as general-use tools

for fieldwork, where they can be used to

record observations via voice, text, or

multimedia, and access reference sources

in real time.‟ P. 10

„Open content shifts the learning equation

in a number of interesting ways; the most

important is that its use promotes a set of

skills that are critical in maintaining

currency in any discipline – the ability to

find, evaluate, and put new information to

use.‟ P. 14

„An obvious draw for students is the

advantage of having a single handheld

reading device that can easily

accommodate the entirety of the readings

involved in one‟s study, as well as all the

essential reference texts.‟ P. 18

„Augmented reality has strong potential to

provide both powerful contextual, in situ

learning experiences and serendipitous

exploration and discovery of the connected

nature of information in the real world.‟ P.

22


Finally, it identifies six key technologies „to watch‟:

It suggests that within the next 12 months the following technologies

will be increasingly important:

o Mobile computing (e.g. through smart phones or netbooks) is

already taking off, and provides significant opportunities for

new teaching activities on and off campus, particularly those

focused on communication and collaboration.

o Open content is also expected to reach mainstream

importance. This allows students the choice of how and when

to learn, and allows access to educational resources in areas

when such access was previously too expensive.

The report suggest that within 2 to 3 years the following technologies


o E-books are already popular commercially and a number of

pilot studies suggest that they may come to dominate campus-

life as well. They are easy to annotate, store and transport, and

will reduce the costs of education, as well as the amount of

paper used.

o Simple augmented reality is increasingly accessible without

specialist equipment as applications for laptops and smart

phones can overlay digital information onto the physical

world.

Finally, it suggests that within 4 to 5 years the following technologies


o Gesture based computing already has a strong consumer base

and a growing number of prototypes for educational and

research purposes suggest that its importance to the academy

will increase. Such technology is changing our understanding

of what it means to interact with computers.

o Visual data analysis is currently used to discover patterns in

large data sets (particularly in the sciences) through

„The kinaesthetic nature of gesture-based

computing will very likely lead to new

kinds of teaching or training simulations

that look, feel, and operate almost exactly

like their real-world counterparts.‟ P. 26

„The promise for teaching and learning is

further afield, but because of the intuitive

ways in which it can expose intricate

relationships to even the uninitiated there

is tremendous opportunity to integrate

visual data analysis in undergraduate

research, even in survey courses.‟ P. 30


visualisation and it is likely to grow in importance as new

tools make it easier to adapt models in real-time and become

more accessible, allowing anyone to examine data and display

complex relationships within it.

EU Report –

Higher Level

Expert Forum on

Learner Mobility

In the light of a declining population of young people across the EU, the

need to ensure the continued success of Europe as a knowledge intensive

society, and the need to deepen the sense of European identity and

citizenship amongst Europeans, the report suggests that it is important to

ensure that learner mobility (in higher education, vocational education, adult

education, volunteering and civil society programmes, and secondary

schools) is promoted across the EU and across its borders. This would

require making such mobility the rule rather than the exception through

changes in regulations, the standardisation of educational systems, increased

funding to relevant programmes, and an increased focus on language

learning.

Although the deepest and most complete form of mobility is physical, the

report also mentions the benefits of „virtual mobility‟. That is, of using ICT

to access educational resources and opportunities physically located

elsewhere. This can be both mobility in its own right, and a means by which

to prepare for, enrich and follow up on physical mobility.

Indeed, in a scenario constructed to demonstrate a positive vision of the

future, the ongoing ICT revolution has meant that such technologies are

widely available and cheap and easy to use. Europeans are, therefore,

connected to networks that allow for significant virtual mobility. This sits

alongside a vision of significant physical mobility, with portable benefits and

loans, Europe-wide initiatives, extensive language tuition and common

qualifications frameworks allowing for easy movement across Europe.

The report also constructs a second scenario in which learner mobility is

limited. In this scenario, ICT has left Europe‟s youth isolated and cut off

from the rest of the world, impeding, in particular, physical mobility.

„Mobility is both physical and virtual. Due

to the ongoing revolution in ICTs,

most citizens are connected, networked,

equipped with several wireless and

intelligent

devices to get and process information.

Virtual mobility is widely available, quick

and cheap.

Nevertheless, physical mobility provides a

more intensive and deeper experience and

is, therefore, irreplaceable. Developing the

synergies between virtual and physical

mobility is a

central art of a new way of life.‟ P. 11 (Part

of the first scenario)

„The technologies which can facilitate

virtual mobility and greatly enhanced

networking,

which forms an integral part of the positive

vision outlined here, also have the

potential to fuel an increasing isolation

and atomisation among young people.‟ P.

12 (Part of the second scenario)


EU Green Paper

Re: Learner

Mobility

Following the report detailed above, this green paper, calls for policies to be

implemented to increase learner mobility amongst young Europeans.

Although this mainly focuses on physical mobility, it does recognise the

value of virtual mobility in two ways:

As a supporting structure, before, during and after, periods of

physical mobility.

As a form of mobility that can connect together Europeans that are

either unable or unwilling to physically mover across the EU.

The green paper gives two specific examples of virtual mobility practice that

can be used to great effect:

The Comenius e-twinning programme promotes the use of ICT to

connect schools together, and facilitate networking, the sharing of

resources and pedagogy, and collaborative learning. The programmes

does not fund individual projects, but rather provides the background

expertise, support and advice to facilitate e-twinning between the

50,000 schools (approx.) that had signed up when the green paper

was written. http://www.etwinning.net/en/pub/index.htm

The Virtual Campus for Digital Students initiative involves a network

of providers of distance and online education who are creating a

virtual campus through which open resources and tools can be shared,

and the compatibility of e-learning environments can be ensured.

www.vicadis.net

„Virtual mobility, i.e. the use of the internet

and other electronic forms of information

and

communication, is often a catalyst for

embarking on a period of physical

mobility…

it does enable young people to prepare a

stay abroad

and can create conditions for future

physical mobility by facilitating

friendships, contacts and

social networking etc…

It can also provide an international

dimension to those learners

who, for different reasons, are not able or

willing to go abroad.‟

P. 18

„Within the Comenius programme,

eTwinning is being developed to

mainstream the use of

Information and Communication

technologies to promote collaborative

learning, the

European dimension, the sharing of

resources and practice and the

pedagogical use of ICT in schools Europe-

wide.‟

P. 18

DIUS, Working This report covers the attitudes and intentions of working adults towards „… only 13 per cent said they would prefer

http://www.etwinning.net/en/pub/index.htm

http://www.vicadis.net/


Adults and HE higher education, and the potential that they may pursue it themselves.

The research conducted for the report revealed that, for the majority of

working adults, higher education is perceived as something that is open to

all, and only a small proportion (15%) of them would not consider applying.

They believe it that it will improve career prospects, although many of them

did not feel that they has the knowledge to access or find financing for it. In

terms of the method of delivery, they preferred non-traditional forms of

delivery. In particular, the flexibility of part-time study at an institution close

to home (which allows them to keep working) was judged to be very

important.

In terms of distance learning and digital delivery of tuition, the respondents

were considerably less positive. They favoured face-to-face teaching

methods, with only 13% saying that they favoured distance or online

learning. Crucially, though, only 2% said that they would like to study with

the Open University, suggesting either a lack of understanding regarding

what the OU does, or that many respondents would prefer to study online,

but with a local university. The report also suggests that more flexible

delivery methods (such as online learning) may simply need further

promotion, as many potential adult learners do not know enough about them.

Additionally, the report argues that the internet ought to be used to provide

accessible information that specifically addresses the concerns of working

adults considering entry into higher education. This would solve existing

problems caused by the fact that most available information concerning

university entry is currently aimed at traditional, non-mature students.

distance learning or study online…Yet this

is still considerably higher than the

proportion who said they would prefer to

study with the Open University when

looking at preferences for study location

(only two per cent). This suggests that

there are some individuals who would like

to study virtually but perhaps through a

local university or it could suggest that

there is a lack of awareness about the type

of opportunities afforded through the Open

University.‟ P. 88

„Face to face delivery in an institution is

considerably more popular than distance

learning…but this may reflect a limited

understanding of the range of ways HE

can be delivered.‟ P. 93

UK Council for

International

Student Affairs

„Prime Minister‟s

Initiative for

International

This is a series of reports on pilot studies and overseas visits funded by the

PMI. These projects were conducted as part of a scheme designed to help

those who seek to provide greater support for international students in the

UK.

Most of the projects included ICT in some way (e.g. through a Facebook

„This resource will encourage

international students not only to develop

the knowledge and skills to succeed

academically in another country, but also

to take advantage of

the extra-curricular activities provided in


Education:

Reports of Pilot

Projects and

Overseas Study

Visits‟

(September,2010)

group), but many of the projects used ICT as the primary medium through

which to support the educational (and personal and social) experiences of

international students:

Lancaster University sought to create web-based resources to

promote awareness of mental health issues. The project led to the

design of an online quiz („Mind Map‟

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/sbs/counselling/mindmap.php ) allowing for a

degree of self-assessment regarding mental health (about which many

felt uncomfortable talking), and providing details of support services

for those that might feel that they need them.

Leicester University sought to construct a multimedia resource to

inform them about the range and benefits of extra-curricular activities

available for higher education students in the UK. This could be used

by international students prior to arrival in the UK. The project

demonstrated the need to be aware of other context in which

information produced may be used and the need to provide broad

content that can be used flexibly across many formats.

The University of Manchester piloted a scheme in which a number of

online functions were used to help international students in their

attempts to find employment in their home country. The project

generally proved successful, although some employers preferred

traditional face-to-face recruiting trips and time zones were a

challenge to work around. The activities included:

o Online webchats were held between students and experienced

international recruiters.

o Video conferences were held between students, alumni and

intermediary agencies.

o Private one-to-one chats were held between students and

advisors.

o International alumni were encouraged to network with

students through, for example, forums.

o An e-mentoring scheme was piloted between Chinese students

order to enjoy a fuller and more

rounded experience.‟ P. 8 (the University

of Leicester project)

„Time zone

differences can significantly impact when

dealing with international

recruiters and students. Student

attendance did suffer during early

morning sessions.‟ P. 12

(the University of Manchester project)

„The main learning point from our

experience has been the quality of

international students and graduates

as an exceptional resource as role

models for others.‟

P. 16

(the Newcastle University project)

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/sbs/counselling/mindmap.php


and Chinese alumni.

Newcastle University produced a number of videos (that are on their

careers service website) with international students discussing issues

surrounding the search for employment (or further study).

Universities UK,

The Supply of

Part-Time Higher

Education in the

UK (July 2010)

This report investigates the supply and growth of part-time study in higher

education and the various factors that inhibit it. It identifies three models of

part-time study:

Fully integrated with full-time education.

Mixed, with some integrated and some provided separately.

Separate part-time provision, often provided by a separate school or

department.

This separate provision also takes place in a variety of ways:

In partnership with other institutions (e.g. FE colleges)

Work-based provision.

Electronically, through distance learning.

The development of part-time education in general is inhibited by many

factors:

The size of existing provision, and the cost of expanding

infrastructure.

Additional teaching demands placed on staff by expansion.

The local demand for part-time education.

The willingness of employers to participate in or fund such education.

The geographical accessibility of the institution.

Inadequate government funding.

„There was a general consensus that a

greater

and better use of ICT would facilitate the

expansion of flexible and distance

learning. The barriers to such greater

utilisation were

resource constraints and an unwillingness

by staff to engage with such

developments.‟

P. 44


With regard to the use of ICT, although the majority of provision of part-

time higher education in the UK is face-to-face (with the obvious exception

of the Open University) many courses contain e-learning elements and

modules, and the use of VLEs is widespread. There is a general consensus

within the higher education system that ICT can facilitate the development of

flexible and distance learning, and many universities said that they would

expand such provision were funding levels greater and staff could be

encouraged to engage with such developments.

This along with several other changes, such as providing greater support to

students and staff involved, would help to increase the level of part-time

study in the UK HE sector. In particular, the report suggests that a credit-

based, modular funding system would be useful in allowing the more

efficient use of resources and blurring the distinction between part-time and

full-time education.

National Student

Forum Annual

Report 2010

This is the final report of the NSF, and it argues that universities ought to

focus on certain core policy areas:

Widening participation.

Flexibility and innovation in the delivery of education, including in

the method of that delivery (e.g. through distance learning)

Improving pre-entry information.

Ensuring environmental sustainability, through national and

institutional policy, and through the promotion courses and modules

related to such issues.

A significant focus on the student, including through well designed

student support, responsive financial and administrative services,

high-quality and well supported teaching, and a customer focused

accommodation service.

Benchmarking of institutional performance against the concerns of

the NSF, and the promotion of future student listening exercises.

„technology is used to enable innovative

methods of assessment, where this adds

value: e.g.

• I can respond to questions orally using

audio-recording software in supervised

rooms

• group work is tracked using

technology which enables the assessor to

see what individual students have

contributed‟ P. 40

We recognise the change in demand for

higher education amongst mature and

part-time students in particular …We see

this as a need for increased flexibility

across the sector as a whole, rather than


Alongside a recognition of the need for good IT services and facilities, the

report makes several explicit suggestions of how ICT may be used to

improve the student experience, particularly to create a more innovative,

dynamic, diverse and student-centred learning experience:

Having a significant amount of administrative information online

allows for 24 hour access.

The use of technology, such as podcasts, can enhance and

complement traditional teaching methods.

Technology can enable innovative methods of assessment and

feedback (including, for example, recording oral answers to questions

and audio feedback). Specifically, it can help to track individual

contributions to group work.

Technologies, such as e-books, can also help disabled students.

necessarily expecting all universities to

immediately offer all kinds of provision.

However, we do urge all universities to

commit to a systematic review of provision

to identify which courses could

appropriately and effectively be adapted

for other modes of learning (e.g. for

distance learning and part-time learning).‟

P. 15

Browne Report This reports aims to provide a model for the sustainable financing of HE in

England that would allow English universities to increase their funding,

provide excellent teaching, and maintain as broad a participation base as

possible. This will allow the maintenance of a world class, and diverse

higher education sector that can contribute significantly to the UK economy,

which cannot happen without significant extra investment.

Given the assumption (held by employers, HEIs and the NUS) that students

ought to contribute financially for the benefits that they receive from HE (i.e.

dramatically increased earning potential), the heart of the report is a new

funding scheme in which the cap on fees is lifted and students essentially pay

for the cost of their education (using student loans the repayment of which

beings when the graduate starts earning over £21,000) with some central

subsidies being provided for the more expensive STEM subjects, which are a

government priority. This would exist alongside a system of grants to avoid

discouraging students from poorer backgrounds. The report claims that this

would:


Allow student choice (which must be aided by greater information

being provided by HEIs prior to application) to dictate the financing

of higher education, forcing universities to respond to what students

want, and, thus, increasing the quality of teaching and, potentially,

diversity of HE provision.

Provide more funding for higher education, whilst allowing for

reduced expenditure from public taxation. This, in turn, should allow

more students to access HE as numbers are no longer constrained by

what the government can afford.

Through merging the funding of part-time study into this system

(rather than forcing such students to pay upfront as is currently the

case), encourage greater numbers of students to pursue HE by

increasingly diverse delivery methods.

Such a system will be overseen by a new HE Council, which will take over

functions from OFFA, the OIA, the QAA, and HEFCE. This body will

protect the public interest in HE by monitoring the quality of teaching and

course provision, ensuring that competition between institutions remains

beneficial to students, adjudicating in disputes between students and

institutions, and targeting centralised funding to promote the priority STEM

subjects, which are crucial to UK economic growth and the knowledge

economy.

This will be accompanied by efforts to increase the diversity of higher

education providers, with private institutions and further education colleges,

in particular, being encouraged to provide higher education.

UK Council for

Transnational

Student Affairs,

Transnational

Education

In seeking to raise awareness of and support for transnational education in an

internationalised higher education sector, this report provides an overview of

existing transnational education programmes run by universities in the UK,

and provides some reflections upon how the success of such programmes can

be maximised.

„Transnational education (TNE) covers, in

the words of the Organisation of

Economic Cooperation and Development

(OECD):

“All types of higher education study


Transnational education is, literally, education that occurs across national

borders. That is, education undertaken in one country, but provided by an

awarding institution in another. The report identifies six forms of

transnational education:

E-learning, with the entirety of the course offered online (e.g. the

Universitas 21 Global Network MBA).

„Brick and Click‟ provision, whereby part of the course is taken

online and some is provided at a physical location, potentially one in

the home country of the student rather than the awarding institution

(e.g. the MBA at Singapore‟s PBS Academy).

Overseas campuses where all, or part, of a degree is taken.

Partnerships with foreign institutions that will deliver a programme

for an awarding institution.

Partnerships where foreign institutions will deliver part (usually at the

beginning) of a course, and the rest will be delivered by the awarding

institution.

Partnerships where ad hoc students can progress from overseas

institutions to the home institution for part of the course.

The report explicitly states that it does not directly consider e-learning,

however, from its consideration of the latter forms of transnational

education, it draws some conclusions about how an institution might best go

about educating students in a country other than its own. According to the

report, the most successful institutions are those that:

Have a clear and long-term vision for their transnational educational

activities, with support from those in leadership positions within the

institution;

Have a champion for the scheme, who is prepared to work on both

the wider vision and the minutiae of the project, and is capable of

engaging with others within the institution, and ensuring that

ownership of the scheme is taken by the entire institutional

programmes, or sets of courses of study,

or educational services (including those of

distance education) in which the

learners are located in a country different

from the one where the awarding

institution is based. Such programmes may

belong to the educational system

of a State different from the State in which

it operates, or may operate

independently of any national system.”

(Council of Europe 2002 and quoted

by the British Council in the paper

“Education UK Partnerships:

Transnational

Education”, February 2008).

The British Council defines it more simply

as “education provision from one

country offered in another”.‟ P. 4


community;

Ensured adequate resourcing (both funding and staffing), and ensured

that such courses remain of the same quality as the rest of the

qualifications offered by the institution;

Designed partnerships to suit the specific natures of the institutions

involved.

UCU, Manifesto

for Post-School

Education (2010)

Responding to the Higher Ambitions report (and anticipating an election),

this UCU report argues that any post-school education system ought to be

based on the intrinsic value of education to enhance lives, liberate talent and

help to realise a truly civilised society. Given this, it argues that education

must be given significant investment, even in hard economic times.

The manifesto rejects the tone of the Higher Ambitions report and the ending

of public investment in higher education that is implicit within it. The UCU

believes that high levels of fees are regressive and hinder equal access, which

is very important.

Crucially, the manifesto also laments the lack of investment in teaching in

the sector, despite the fact that it is universally acknowledged that it is

underfunded. They argue that extra funding is needed (even just up to the

OECD average) in order to reduce class sizes, properly reward high quality

and innovative teaching, and move teaching staff onto proper contracts.

Finally, with regard to research, the manifesto rejects the stifling of academic

freedom that is associated with selective and targeted government funding

and assessment of research. Instead, the UCU argues that research quality

should be assessed by means of peer review, selectivity of funding

(especially in the arts, humanities and social sciences) should be reduced, the

importance of the dissemination of research through teaching ought to be

recognised, and a longer-term vision of intellectual development should be

adopted rather than the current short-term focus on immediate economic

gain.

„That vision is founded on a fundamental

belief in the intrinsic value of education as

a

force for the enhancement of the lives of

individuals, the liberation of their talents

and

the realisation of a truly civilised, socially

responsible, fair and

prosperous society.‟ P. 1

Franklin and van This report, funded by JISC, seeks to examine the ways in which Web 2.0


Harmelen, Web

2.0 for Content

(May, 2007)

technologies might be used in the creation and distribution of content for

higher education. It argues that Web 2.0 will have a significant impact upon

the future of higher education (including formal, informal, work-based and

life-long learning), including learning and teaching activities, widening

participation, staying in contact with alumni, potential students and the wider

community, and interfacing with industry.

The report recognises that other factors (such as the need for greater

economic efficiency, demographic trends and an ongoing push for higher

standards of learning and teaching) will work alongside technological

changes to drive forward higher education. However, it argues that Web 2.0

technologies can benefit higher education by:

Allowing greater student autonomy;

Allowing increased levels of collaboration;

Increasing pedagogic efficiency.

Such technologies are increasingly used in higher education institutions, both

in module specific senses and more broadly, but they do present some

difficulties, which institutional policies and strategies will have to face,

including:

The choice of systems used, their hosting location, and how

accessible they are;

Issues surrounding privacy, data ownership and intellectual property;

Control over content and its longevity;

Ensuring that staff and students have appropriate skills and strategies

(including assessment methods) for the new learning environments.

As such, the report makes several recommendations regarding direction in

which JISC ought to focus its funding in the future (all 21 recommendations

are summarised on pp. 2-3). These include:


Ensuring that guidelines are not so strict as to stifle the

experimentation that is necessary to fully exploit Web 2.0

technologies;

Funding studies to examine issues related to the accessibility of

content created and distributed using Web 2.0 technologies (including

copyright issues, accessibility of the technology, and extending

student access beyond graduation);

Funding research into and building a bank of case studies relating to

teaching methods using Web 2.0 technologies, particularly relating to

assessment methods;

Funding projects to consider legal and policy issues surrounding Web

2.0 technologies, including intellectual property, plagiarism,

university control over content, risk associated with the use of

externally hosted services, and the appropriate balance between

openness and safety;

Funding projects to develop methods for the integration of Web 2.0

technologies into institutional ICT infrastructures and for the

assessment of group work.

Learnovation,

Foresight Report

(2008)

This report and the associated foresight activity are designed to build a vision

of the future for technology enhanced learning (particularly life-long

learning) through use of the DELPHI methodology, whereby emerging

paradigms are examined through means of the iterated surveying of the

opinions of experts, whose input can examine and validate existing analyses,

whilst introducing new areas for consideration. The ultimate goal is to

construct a vision of the future based upon a consensus constructed between

experts.

The priorities for change identified suggest ways of steering existing ongoing

changes towards a situation in which learning has a greater impact upon

societal development, and knowledge, learning and human capital are treated

as important elements of a desirable future. Such a process focuses primarily

on two objectives:


Making the individual learner to focus of the learning experience to

improve the strategic management of human capital in the knowledge

economy;

Engendering a shared vision of education that promotes openness and

includes significant elements of informal education, in order to

encourage a grass-roots „blooming‟ of education supported by a top-

down focus from governmental levels.

The constructed vision of the future suggests that these two elements can

come about through the focusing of education policy on several key areas:

Building a learner-centred, cradle-to-grave learning ecosystem to

encourage every individual to take ownership of their unique

education within a community (learning ecosystem) of diverse

educational identities, where diversity and innovation are actively

encouraged. Notably, this will involve the universalisation of distance

learning;

Recognising the value of the full range of learning spaces (work-

place and informal, as well as traditional formal learning spaces),

which will both promote a wider and more diverse learning culture

and open up previously underexploited sources of innovation;

Redirecting traditional processes to promote innovation through

learning, and embedding innovative mechanisms into the everyday

lives of individuals, institutions and policy-making bodies.

Particularly important examples of this are:

o The redirection of ICT strategy away from the old hardware

approach, towards one that recognises the potential for

technologies to support specific processes in a learning

environment, through increased flexibility, cooperative

knowledge construction, the creation of communities, virtual

mobility, blended learning, and innovative distance learning,

which can increase access and exploit all opportunities for

learning and innovation;


o The refocusing of assessment and benchmarking procedures

away from repetitive procedures towards processes that

directly recognise creativity and innovation and the

environment necessary to promote them;

Reorganising learning solutions in order to support decentralisation,

localisation and bottom-up learning environments, which can

promote individualised learning and encourage the individual to take

more responsibility for the contribution to society that can be made

through their learning and innovation. However, owing to the

significant, global economic divide, and vested interests that may

oppose the democratisation of learning, this may well be difficult in

many parts of the world. The use of ICT to decentralise learning may

not be sufficient to solve these entrenched problems, but it can help

by favouring growth (through the promotion of technological

innovation), and providing a location for discussion of the existing

order.

Futurelab,

Education

Futures,

Teachers and

Technology

(April, 2010)

This discussion document arose from an expert seminar on the changing role

of teachers in the future of education and the challenges faced whilst moving

into the future (towards 2025 and beyond).

The document begins by identifying social and technological trends that will

continue into the future. These trends include:

The exponential rise in computing power (and the ability to process

large amounts of information quickly) will continue.

A new personal information landscape will emerge, particularly given

the trend towards cloud computing and increasingly mobile access to

information and resources. In this landscape, the boundaries of

various (geographical, temporal and institutional) sites of learning

will be blurred as the cloud offers new choices, opportunities, and

responsibilities with regard to how and where learning takes place.

This technology will still prove unable to provide a quick fix to

„There is one large issue which a meeting

like this was not going to tackle, but could

still highlight: the need for this discussion

to be underpinned by a vision of

education: What is education about, from

birth to 18? What do we

actually want pupils to learn, and to be

able to do? Can we have a common view

of that? How will that change? This vision

needs to be co-created by those who have a

stake in education: education

professionals, parents, employers

and learners.‟ P. 8

„One


complex educational problems, and a strategy will need to be

developed to make the most out of the new mix of provision. That

being said, this shift towards mobile and cloud computing still

represents one of the once a decade shifts in technology that have

such a great impact upon our lives. Education must be remade in the

light of this, and teachers prepared for their part in the new

educational world.

The document suggests that these trends will lead to a number of challenges,

including:

The development of new roles for teachers and the abandoning of

other traditional ones. As the classroom changes from a fortress

providing scarce knowledge to a location within a society with

abundant knowledge and new technologies that can be used outside

of the classroom, teachers will have to develop (or enter the

profession) with the skills necessary to make use of and provide

pupils with access to new information networks, rather than simply

imparting subject-specific knowledge.

Teachers will need to be supported in developing the skills and

practice necessary to teach in such a society. Older teachers, in

particular, may lack the technical skills necessary, and new methods

will need to be developed to deal with technological have-nots and to

embrace the idea that, in a networked educational environment,

individuals planning their own lessons and teaching practice no

longer makes sense.

Centralised standard setting must be avoided in order to promote

localised innovation. This must recognise that this new flexibility

requires teachers that can develop curricula (a skill that the National

Curriculum has eroded) and develop truly collaborative learning

within the classroom (and in the lives that they have outside of formal

education).

strong message overall is that one set of

things to expect

is changes in how, what and when people

learn, and who they turn to for help. In

that case, teachers‟ professional

development would do well to mirror the

changes

expected in other kinds of learning. They

will both benefit from this immediately,

and discover how to approach the shifting

demands and roles of their work in

different

contexts in future.‟ P. 8

„Teachers, it

was suggested, will need to be not just

digitally literate,

but fluent in a variety of modes and media.

They, as mentors, and their own mentors

as developing teachers,

need to be confident users of Web 2.0

technologies.

They also need to be aware of, and

knowledgeable about local contexts. There

must be a professional approach

to lifelong learning, perhaps using a

portfolio approach.

E-portfolios would fit with the general

increase in

knowledge sharing as well as support the

continuing

professional development from ITT


In response to these challenges, the document suggests that:

Initial teacher training (ITT) and continuing professional

development (CPD) must train teachers to both use and create digital

resources effectively. It cannot simply be assumed that new teachers

are „digital natives‟ as technology is a moving front and they are

likely to have significant experience only as consumers of the digital

world.

ITT and CPD must change to include the use of these technologies in

the support of teachers. For example, teachers musts make better use

of the online environment for mentoring purposes, and the example

of the „virtual schools‟ (to which student teachers are assigned, and in

which they can explore teaching roles in a realistic environment) set

up by UEL for their students could be followed.

Personal learning networks involving both digital and non-digital

elements and linking teachers to other teachers, classrooms, experts

and members of other fields should be encouraged as CPD activities.

Links to other fields, in particular, may help to generate innovation.

through to retirement.‟ P. 8


Appendix 3

Questionnaire for CALF in association with

BA ENGLISH WITH MEDIA STUDIES AND ENGLISH WITH CREATIVE WRITING

University College Falmouth

Creating Academic Learning Futures (CALF) is a joint research project between University

College Falmouth and the Beyond Distance Research Alliance at the University of Leicester.

CALF aims to engage student voices and understand student ideas about the future of learning in

higher education. More information about the project can be found at

www.le.ac.uk/beyonddistance/calf/.

Would you take a few moments to read and answer the questions below based on your ideas and

experiences as a student? Your thoughts and ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Imagine that it is the Year 2025. Imagine that you have just finished secondary school and you

are considering studying further. Which of the features described in the questions below would

MOST make you want to choose a university or a college for your further studies and which

would LEAST make you want to enrol?

Question 1

How important will be different features in 2025 when you are choosing where to study for higher education

in 2025?

Of the options below, which one will be the MOST important and which will be the LEAST important in

2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)




quality learning resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and

constantly updated in real-time archives quality educational

content for all subjects studied from leading teachers and

researchers.

Courses and institutions recommended by other students from

your social network and friends, with possibilities to give


Possibility to accumulate course credits from studying abroad or

to gain a joint degree with an overseas institution.

http://www.le.ac.uk/beyonddistance/calf/


Question 2


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)

Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less

living costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree.


practitioners and researchers in online tutorials and computer-






researchers.

Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record

for meeting diversity and special needs.

Question 3


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature

will matter

LEAST to you in

2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you in

2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)



physical books.



Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning and

teaching.





Question 4


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature

will matter

LEAST to you

in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE

box)

Which feature

will matter

MOST to you in

2025? (tick

ONLY ONE

box)

Strong links with leading edge local and international employers for

learning on the job and work experience while studying.

Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local teachers.

Personal online access to internationally renowned teachers, practitioners

and researchers in online tutorials and computer-based virtual reality

environments at low cost.



technologies, preferred by the individual student, support provided for the

students personal technology.

Question 5


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to

you in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to

you in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less living

costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree.


social network and friends, with possibilities to give constant

feedback for your satisfaction and recommendations.


teaching.



technologies, preferred by the individual student, support provided

for the students personal technology.


Question 6


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to you in

2025? (tick ONLY ONE

box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you in

2025? (tick ONLY ONE

box)

Quality student accommodation, on-campus student

facilities for learning and leisure, library buildings and

library collections of physical books.

Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own

local teachers.

Courses and institutions recommended by other students

from your social network and friends, with possibilities to

give constant feedback for your satisfaction and

recommendations.

Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven

record for meeting diversity and special needs.

Question 7


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to

you in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)



physical books.



Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local

teachers.





researchers.


individual student, delivered using learning styles, new or

traditional technologies, preferred by the individual student,

support provided for the students personal technology.

Strong pastoral student support, institutions with proven record for

meeting diversity and special needs.


Question 8

How important will be different features in 2025 when you are choosing where to study for higher

education in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to

you in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)



physical books.






teaching.





researchers.


individual student, delivered using learning styles, new or



Question 9


in 2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to

you in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Which feature

will matter

MOST to you in

2025? (tick

ONLY ONE

box)








teaching.





Question 10


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)



physical books.



Courses delivered over shorter period than in 2010 with less

living costs, earlier entry into job market and quality degree.






Learning process personalized and supported for the needs of

each individual student, delivered using learning styles, new or









Question 11


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)

Which feature will

matter MOST to you

in 2025? (tick ONLY

ONE box)



Environmentally-friendly practices in every aspect of learning

and teaching.

Personal face-to-face tutorials with the institution‟s own local

teachers.








researchers.

Learning process personalized and supported for the needs of

each individual student, delivered using learning styles, new or









Question 12


in 2025?


2025?

Which feature will

matter LEAST to

you in 2025? (tick

ONLY ONE box)

Which feature

will matter

MOST to you in

2025? (tick

ONLY ONE

box)



physical books.






teaching.






learning resources (e-journals, e-books, e-textbooks) and constantly

updated in real-time archives quality educational content for all

subjects studied from leading teachers and researchers.


social network and friends, with possibilities to give constant feedback

for your satisfaction and recommendations.

Thank you for your participation!

If you have any questions or would like to be informed about the outcomes of the survey, please

contact Sandra Romenska at:

[email protected]


Appendix 4

Screenshots from Googleopoly Game


Appendix 5

Examples of a cognitive map


Appendix 6

CALF Project Research Model

Hindsight, Insight, Foresight, Oversight

NTFS Projects Final Report Template · 2011. 10. 23. · NTFS Projects Final Report Template Page 4...

Documents

Transcript of NTFS Projects Final Report Template · 2011. 10. 23. · NTFS Projects Final Report Template Page 4...