As indicated in the case study in part a of this section, Staffordshire has introduced eLearning (via the use of VLEs) in 1997 and subsequently moved forward, gradually introducing elements of an MLE. In terms of supporting staff development, a central Learning Development Centre was set up in 1988, charged with driving developments. Development prior to September 1998 had been very much centred on supporting the efforts of "enthusiasts" ("Freds in Sheds") and the move to a more centralised and strategically driven approach was accompanied by a move to an approach of supporting centrally funded projects which had to be both part of their home School's own learning and teaching strategy and also approved centrally. Projects were expected to report centrally, in terms of both progress and outcomes.
Whilst this approach was largely successful and resulted in a good "overall" penetration of the use of eLearning across the institution, by summer 2002 it was clear that the rate of increase of uptake had slowed and there were still "unreached parts". In addition the impact of developments was too localised, and did not fit with the goal of become a "learning organisation" in terms of changing practice across the institution.
In summer 2002 a new Information Service was created as part of a University-wide restructure affected all academic and service components of the University. This new service includes Learning Development and Innovation, Learning Support, Corporate Systems, and IT. eLearning is one of its four core strategies and MLE developments are embedded into all strategies. For the support of the development of eLearning courses, it was decide to move to "Integrative Development".
In working towards Integrative Development, the approach adopted by Information Services has been to assign a member of Learning Development and Innovation as manager to the particular group of academics once each development has been identified. They work with the group (with other LD staff) to take the development through to validation (or approval if it is a change of a validated traditional course to "e" delivery). Together they produce a development plan and manage it from conception to delivery. The main focus of LD input, apart from managing the development, is to work with the teaching staff group to produce a coherent course structure for input into the chosen VLE. Where possible, LD work with the academic staff to pass on known good practice in terms of "sharp" pedagogy. At various points other staff are brought in. Learning Support staff (who include information specialists) work with the group on identifying resources, clearing IPRs and, with other staff with appropriate "clerical skills", populate the VLE with content produced by the teaching staff using the structure created by LD and the academic group. This is obviously the "full version" of the approach and varies according to the ability, desire and time available of a particular group of teaching staff to carry out various elements of the process themselves.
[The approach is now being widened to encompass development of Foundation Degree courses delivered across SURF (the Staffordshire University Regional Consortium - consisting of the University and 11 partner FEIs). Here a lead academic from a University School and a SURF College work together with an LD "Manager" to drive the development of each module.]
This approach has been very successful - for examples two University "full distance eLearning" modules were taken from conception, through validation and development, to delivery in just over eight weeks. However, as described in subsection 7.1 - it revealed exactly how un-embedded most of the University's eLearning and MLE actually was (and resulted in the "eL-P2R2 Project), and, in this specific context, revealed further work was needed on the support for actually delivery of eLearning via the emerging MLE.
