Author: G. Skelly, gordon.skelly@ncl.ac.uk

Author: P.R. Kyle, p.r.kyle@newcastle.ac.uk

JISC e-Learning Activity Area: Technology-enhanced Learning Environments

Higher Education Academy Subject Centre: Medicine, Dentistry and Veterinary Medicine

This case study illustrates...use of specialist software, an effect on learning, an effect on exam results, an effect on student personal development, student satisfaction with e-learning, innovation in learning and teaching, an influence on educational research, staff satisfaction with e-learning, staff personal development, a positive effect on recruitment, a positive effect on retention, an influence on policy, use of resources, modifications to learning spaces, management of learning assets, an effect on social equality

Background & Context

Why did you use this e-learning approach?

The original concept behind the Newcastle LSE (Learning Support Environment) was to collate learning resources and organise them in a format based around the medical programme structure. This would allow both students and staff to identify what learning outcomes were being met. The students could identify what they should be learning and the staff could take an overview of what was being taught: providing complete transparency. A virtual learning environment (VLE) was chosen as the user group was spread over a geographically diverse area. In order to achieve the above the LSE had to provide communication tools for staff and/or students.

What was the context in which you used this e-learning approach?

The medical degree programme has, at any one time, over 1700 students and 1600 contributing staff. The first two years (Phase I) are based at the medical school. There is a joint programme with Durham University, where a smaller group of students complete Phase I at Queen's Campus, Stockton; joining Newcastle University for the final three years (Phase II). During Phase II, students are dispersed over a wide area in the North East of England where their training and administration are provided by four regional clinical centres called 'base units'. This means that throughout almost all of Phase II, students are not physically located on campus.

Before the LSE, resources were completely unstructured and in some cases non-existent. Everything was paper-based. Information was often disseminated via paper notices or sometimes email. During Phase II students had to return to the medical school for a day a week to collect resources.

The introduction of the LSE was a complete change from previous methods of working/organisation. As with any large change in the workplace, we expected initial staff resistance and a slow take up. There were concerns regarding adequate access to computers to log on to the LSE, especially on NHS sites, it was expected that on occasion NHS staff would be given priority over students. Dial-up connections were still widely used, even on NHS sites, implying restrictions on the type of material that could be presented (e.g. minimal video).

What was the design?

The design of the LSE was based on the formal course structure, as defined in the programme's 'study guides'. Using this approach the learning activities were already defined. The 'study guides' are written by curriculum officers and module leaders. The LSE provides detailed curriculum information customised for year-group and calendar year.

The fundamental philosophies in the design and integration of the LSE are: 1) that data is only entered once, ideally by the people responsible for it, and re-used as far as possible throughout the LSE and associated systems. 2) The focus is on developing online, user-friendly, content management systems that are accessible to non-technical administrators. 3) That as far as possible, non-technical users are empowered to independently manage their content online. 4) That internet technologies based on open-source software be used to the widest extent possible. 5) Presentation and content is customised for the individual, depending on their role.

A development group was formed, containing up to a maximum of eight people (including administration staff, teaching staff and developers). Limiting the size of the team maintained cohesion and the design process. The team was diverse in their experience, but there were three core members contributing the majority of the code, with others called upon as necessary. The majority of the team were software developers.

How did you implement and embed this e-learning approach?

The original version of the LSE was rolled out as an additional tool to the working habits, allowing users to acclimatise to the system at their own pace. Increasingly, administration tools were added to the LSE, making it a valuable information source and thus quickly increasing the user group size.

The aim was to provide a system that was intuitive to use and self-supporting in practice. The LSE has grown to be such an integral and embedded component to the degree programme that it is assessed within the structured course feedback evaluation system (which is now delivered via the LSE).

Students have a timetabled 'hands-on' session on how to use the LSE, at the start of the first term. It is noted that with every subsequent year group, the students have been increasingly technologically aware. Staff are also given formal training in the form of open training sessions and/or one-to-one meetings/demonstrations. The library staff were not formally trained but they contributed to the LSE content via the reading lists, printed in the study guides.

As expected, staff uptake was an issue. The initial phase was dominated by 'champions' who were vital in the system's success. Students were grateful for the LSE and applied pressure to other staff members to contribute. An unexpected problem was that of a conceptual barrier - non-technical staff members, at first, could not understand the service the LSE could provide. Some 'real life' scenarios were vital in conveying the facilities on offer. The NHS networks did provide many problems. Slow connections, inequity of access and security restrictions meant the roll out was slow. As the Trusts benefited from new networks and more computers, so did the LSE.