Frank Snels

University Information Manager

University Of Twente

June 2016

Frank.Snels@utwente.nl

DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENTTOWARDS A FUTURE PROOF DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIROMENT

Introduction

Digital Learning Environment (DLE)

Phase 1: current usage (2014)

Phase 2: vision and ambition (2015)

Education of the future

Functional requirements

Support of the DLE

Phase 3: Tender and implementation (2016 - )

16-6-2016 2

AGENDA

University of Twente

20 juni 2013Onderwijsarchitectuur in de praktijk 3

6 faculties, 4 institutes

10.000 students, 3300 employees

1600 publications, 200 PHD’s,

20 bachelor- , 33 master schools

800 startups

Technical Research University

Green campus University

High tech, human touch

most entrepreneurial university (Meest

ondernemende Universiteit)

Shortcut european tender proces surf contract 5 years ago

Blackboard Surf contract ends for several universities

Goal twente university: better understanding current situation

Activities:

67 Interviews (20 students, 35 scientific, 12 support staff)

UT-workshop (SURF SIG DLWO): 40 participants

Studentenworkshops: 20 participants

Blackboard database insights (1369 courses 2013/2014)

4

PHASE 1: CURRENT USAGE OF THE

DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT (DLE)

DLE an integrated collection of

digital services and applications that

supports students and teachers in

their work

LMS: Learning

Management Systems

like Blackboard, Canvas

of Moodle

SURF survey 2013 (40 participants):

18 NL-HE institutes use Blackboard,

17 use sharepoint

Nationale Studenten Enquete (2014) : score 3,8 (scale 1-5)

UT-evaluation (2013/2014): score 3.5 (scale 1-5)

Courses not using Blackboard: max 8%

5

GENERAL FINDINGS

Adaptive release 54%, mashups:2%

grouptools 25%, student signup 14%,

Discussionboard: 4%, blog: 0%, journal: 0%, wiki: -%

Grade center: not to adopt (down/upload: 4%)

, ephorus* assignments: 22%, group assignments:

15%

Tests: 3%, surveys: 2% (faculty of ITC 61%)

6

FINDINGS: BLACKBOARD DATABASE ANALYSIS

* via Blackboard

Uniform design and stability are the key aspects for students

1 Learning management system (LMS)

Teachers: Blackboard is user unfriendly and has a steep learning curve

Our teachers are researchers with an education task

Collaboration outside the learning management system

Whatsapp, Dropbox en Google apps are most used for collaboration

Internal support to teachers needs attention

Differences within faculties

7

FINDINGS

Introduction

Digital Learning Environment (DLE)

Phase 1: current usage (2014)

Phase 2: vision and ambition (2015)

Education of the future

Functional requirements

Support of the DLE

Phase 3: Tender and implementation (2016 - )

16-6-2016 8

AGENDA

9

PHASE 2: TOWARDS A FUTURE PROOF DLE

Learning

goals

Learning

approaches

Digital

learning

environment

Blended learning, with at least four different uses

- Classroom technology

- ‘Flipped’ didactics

- Time and place independent teaching

- Open Educational Resources

Diversity participant;

Student driven learning / demand pull

Course goals: from knowledge to skills (Research skills, Design

skills, Entrepeneurship)

10

EDUCATION CONTEXT

Twente Academy

Bachelors

Masters

PDEntr/

DBAPDEng

PhD

UC

Atlas TEM P

rofe

ssio

na

l

de

ve

lop

me

nt p

rog

ram

sBREADTH

DE

PT

H

Functional

requirements

Non-functional

requirements

Overview, insights and

Composition of:

participants, teachers, groups,

coursematerial, facilities, learning goals,

competenties and properties

from learningactivity, course or module

Dataintegration en interoperability

Personalisation

Visual integration and identitity

management

FUTURE PROOF DLE: CORE FUNCTIONS

SOURCE: SURF SIG DLWO, “een flexibele

en persoonlijke leeromgeving” sept 2015

https://www.surf.nl/binaries/content/assets/surf/en/knowledgebase/2016/memorandum-learning-environment_uk_web.pdf

INTEGRATION

12

13

DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT SUPPORT (1)

Didactic

Technology

Education specialist

System engineer

Business information management

Blackboard key-user

Instructional designer

Core “LMS als

organizer,

integrationplatfor

m”

Reccomended“b.v. peer feedback,

digital assesment,

voting,

video(Camtasia) ”

Optional“Virtual classroom, forum,

socrative, online courses”

Pilot“USB assesments, MOOC”

Expected usage form all teachers

and staff. central finance and

support.

Reccomended, central finance

and support. Fully integration with

core

Is optional, Facyulty or school

finance and support. Integration

with core is optional.

New features. Project based

Finance and support

Public features without support or

finance. Openbare integratiePublic

“Whatsapp, dropbox, hangouts,

facebook,”

DIGITAL LEARNING ENVIRONMENT SUPPORT (2)

14

15

PHASE 3: TENDER AND IMPLEMENTATION (1)

Tender 2016, implementation 2017 –

Proces: best value and traditional

support improvement is seperate project

Faculty involvement

Roadshows

Usability tests

Core functionality Tender <-> LMS Tender ?

Frontrunners shows traditional LMS players

LMS tender (2016)

16

PHASE 3: TENDER AND IMPLEMENTATION (2)

Questions

17