THE UNIVERSITY OF LEEDSFaculty of Mathematics and Physical Sciences

Strategy for Digital, Blended, and Technology-Enhanced Learning 2017-2022

ContentsStrategy Summary......................................................................................................2

Vision and purpose.....................................................................................................3

Definitions and context................................................................................................3

Rationale –why do we need to change?.....................................................................3

Principles and outcomes.............................................................................................5

A. Stakeholders...........................................................................................................6

B. Structures supporting TEL in the Faculty................................................................7

C. Communications.....................................................................................................8

D. Current and foreseeable areas of TEL activity in the Faculty.................................9

E. Influencing and leading change..............................................................................9

Implementation and timescales...................................................................................9

Appendix: Current and foreseeable areas of TEL-related activity.............................11

References................................................................................................................14

Abbreviations: ACBDL – Faculty Academic Champion for Blended and Digital Learning; BL – Blended Learning; BLC – Faculty Blended Learning Committee; DSE – Director of Student Education; HE – Higher Education; HEA – Higher Education Academy; HoS – Head of School; MaPS – Faculty of Maths and Physical Sciences; MOOC – Massive open online course; NSS – National Student Survey; OER – open educational resource; STEM – Science, technology, engineering and mathematics; TEF – Teaching Excellence Framework; TEL – technology-enhanced learning; UoL – University of Leeds; VLE – virtual learning environment.

Strategy Summary

Vision: By 2022, our use of technology-enhanced, blended and digital learning will enhance our students’ experience, increase our profile in the wider higher education marketplace, and improve the efficiency of our teaching.Stakeholders A1) Students’ views and experience as

learners will be respected A2) The potential role of students as co-creators of teaching materials will be recognized

A3) Individual staff with particular interests in TEL will be encouraged to pilot (adopt, adapt and share) new tools

A4) Staff in senior academic leadership roles will display an awareness of the value of TEL

A5) All teaching staff will be provided with support to develop new skills in using TEL tools and approaches

A6) The Faculty SES will be involved as a partner in the rollout of technology with implications for the administration of teaching or assessment

Structures supporting TEL in the Faculty

B1) The ACBDL will disseminate information about new TEL tools and new University initiatives, encourage and mentor staff around the Faculty, and represent the interests of the Faculty in University level discussions on TEL.

B2) The Faculty will provide support for TEL activities across the Faculty via a support officer/team of officers

B3) The School BL representatives will help to disseminate information about developments in TEL to staff in their School, and inform the ACBDL and BLC on developments, needs and issues to do with TEL in their School.

B4) The BLC will be responsible for delivering and reviewing the Faculty BL Strategy, fostering communities of practise and ‘horizon scanning’ new technologies.

Communications C1) All members of Faculty staff will have simple access to news about the latest TEL developments relevant to their subject.

Current and foreseeable areas of TEL activity in the Faculty

D1) Where the benefits of a TEL tool are generally accepted (e.g. use of the VLE, lecture capture) all staff teaching on modules will be expected to make use of these tools.

D2) The use of approaches such as the flipped classroom, tools such as collaborative online working, desktop capture, and in-class technology such as e-voting will be encouraged wherever pedagogically appropriate.

D3. The faculty will engage in developing MOOCs, online videos and other OERs as a method of programme / module delivery, for outreach and advertising.

D4) The faculty will strongly support the adoption of e-submission of coursework, e-marking and e-feedback, and the use of e-assessment tools based on automated response systems where pedagogically appropriate.

D5) MaPS will be pro-actively involved in developments in learning analytics, including for monitoring student progress, and for improving teaching.

Influencing and leading change

E1) MaPS, through the ACBDL, will be pro-actively involved in developments in all areas of TEL at UoL, and changes to supported tools and technologies will be communicated clearly to relevant staff.

H2) Other stakeholders, particularly the members of the Faculty BLC, will keep informed about developments in TEL in their spheres of activity and will communicate these to the BLC and to other affected staff.

Vision and purpose

Vision: By 2022, our use of technology-enhanced, blended and digital learning will enhance our students’ experience, increase our profile in the wider higher education marketplace, and improve the efficiency of our teaching.

The purpose of the Strategy and accompanying action plans is to help the Schools of Chemistry, Mathematics, Physics and Astronomy, and Food Science and Nutrition to enhance their teaching and assessment, and, hence, the student experience, and to increase their profile in the wider higher education sector, through the use of technology. If the strategy is successful then by 2022 all four schools will make widespread use of tools such as video, e-assessment, e-feedback, collaborative online learning and classroom polling. Modules (especially “content") and even whole programmes may be increasingly delivered online. Teaching staff will be comfortable with the use of these tools. Through the increased use of technology students will be more active and autonomous learners, and student satisfaction will increase. Champions of technology-enhanced learning within the faculty will be recognised within and beyond the University as leaders in teaching excellence.

The strategy is designed to align with the University of Leeds Blended Learning Strategy (‘Learning and Teaching in a Digital Age’, 2013)1 and with the University of Leeds (UoL) Digital Strategy for Student Education (2014)2. The strategy is to be reviewed each year and may be revised in response to new University strategies.

Definitions and context

Digital learning refers to the process of learning with the aid of digital content, an online platform or online facilitators. The term is often used interchangeably with e-learning and online learning, and implies a distinction with face-to-face learning.

Technology enhanced learning (TEL) is often used as a synonym for e-learning but can also be used to refer to technology enhanced classrooms and learning with technology, rather than just through technology.TEL is therefore compatible with face-to-face learning.

Blended Learning (BL) is the considered, complementary use of face-to-face teaching, technology, online tools and online resources to enhance student education1.

Technology is a component of all of our students’ learning experience: these definitions only suggest different levels of emphasis on the use of digital tools in the learning and teaching process.

Rationale –why do we need to change?

A recent report by the Higher Education Policy Institute emphasises that technology for learning and teaching can provide ‘win-win methods, which offer both improved

outcomes and lower costs’3. It cites a 2015 survey of vice-chancellors carried out by PA Consulting, which found that 70 percent ‘believed technology-enhanced learning is essential for survival and/or the key to competitiveness’4. Whilst face-to-face teaching is and will remain the essential core of our taught programmes, and constitutes the irreplaceable ‘added value’ of a campus-based degree, particularly in STEM and laboratory-based subjects, there are many drivers for increased ‘blending’ of face-to-face with technology-enhanced learning, and even for digital delivery of some modules/programmes:

1. The competitive marketplace: innovative teaching methods can give one institution an edge in student recruitment e.g. a survey of US HE educators in 2009 suggested 79% of respondents believed lecture capture to be a somewhat, very, or highly competitive offering for their institutions – and one that differentiated them from those institutions of higher learning that lacked lecture capture capabilities5. Some digital tools may have an even more direct and obvious potential impact on recruitment e.g. the UoL has been among the vanguard in developing MOOCs, with our partner FutureLearn, targeted at 6th form students who are considering which Universities to apply to6. MOOCs and online programmes can increase an institutions presence internationally, and may serve as potential income streams. Developing online modules and programmes may enable us to recruit onto new programmes e.g. new articulated degrees with overseas institutions, where we might deliver some modules online before students come to Leeds for part of their degree.

2. Student expectations: Not only when choosing at which institution to study, but also once students have embarked on university studies, they expect a digital experience. A recent survey of 10,000 HE students across 24 institutions found that 72.2% agreed that when technology was used by teaching staff, it helped their learning experience7. Students wanted to see more use of recorded lectures, better use of VLEs, more online activities and assessment submissions. Technology can help to streamline and improve the assessment and feedback process which is a persistent issue for student satisfaction in most institutions e.g. systematic wide-scale technology-enhanced curriculum design and improvement of the online learning environment had a substantial favourable impact on National Student Survey (NSS) scores at Manchester Metropolitan University8. Enhancing teaching and student satisfaction through TEL may increase retention, particularly if accompanied by use of learning analytics9.

3. Cost-effective teaching: Studies by the National Center for Academic Transformation (NCAT) in the USA over a 15-year period show that technology-based development projects can lead to better outcomes and retention while also yielding savings: a meta-analysis of 156 NCAT projects found that all but three had reduced the costs of delivery, with an average saving of 31 percent. In MaPS, a particular example where the use of technology can improve efficiency is in the use of electronic resources to prepare students for laboratory classes: this has enabled the laboratories in the School of Chemistry to increase the throughput of students in

4

the teaching laboratories, which is necessary in order to accommodate increased student numbers.

4. Teaching quality: The Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) provides an additional motivation for demonstrating teaching excellence. Digital technology can contribute to all three components of the TEF as currently constructed: teaching quality, learning environment and student outcomes (the long version of the definition of ‘learning environment’ explicitly includes ‘use of technology’). A recent Higher Education Policy Institute report recommends ‘Providers should be expected to include information on how they are improving teaching through the use of digital technology in their submissions to the TEF’3. While TEF submissions in 2017 were general to the whole institution, and the UoL is relatively well-placed in blended learning provision as an institution, future TEFs may require submissions at a more subject-specific level so MaPS must be prepared to demonstrate teaching excellence, including in its digital provision.

Principles and outcomes

The remainder of this document will contain a series of strategic aims, numbered A1-E2, which will help to support this overarching vision.

The enhanced student experience may be demonstrated by e.g. improvements in retention rates and student survey scores e.g. NSS/YES. The increased profile of our digital activities may be shown by student numbers taking MOOCs we have developed and by recognition of our use of TEL through e.g. grants, fellowships and conference invitations. Improvements in the efficiency of our teaching may be through teaching larger numbers, using space more efficiently, reducing contact hours or reducing the administrative burden of e.g. assessment.

Our progress in the use of learning technology will always be guided by the principles of the University’s Blended Learning Strategy1, viz:

Programme-focused: all BL approaches which support learning and enhance the student experience at the UoL should be considered by programme teams to ensure consistency in the student experience.

Educationally appropriate: technology intervention should be curriculum focussed and aligned to the learning strategy. Approaches should be consistent with current educational literature and described in appropriate documentation such as specifications and reviews.

Research-based: use of technologies and digital material should support students’ understanding and experience of the research underpinning their discipline and their learning.

Optimising contact time: use of technology and digital materials within, and outside the classroom should enhance learning during contact time.

High quality content: all digital learning materials, whether produced internally or sourced from external open educational resources (OERs), should be relevant and fit for purpose.

Available and Accessible: all tools and digital materials should be designed with mobile technologies in mind, normally made available ahead of time and be accessible to all students.

5

Use of learning spaces: Innovative and effective use should be made of existing physical spaces to enhance learning.

Skills development: graduate-level digital literacy skills should be developed to enhance employability.

A. Stakeholders

Students (undergraduate and taught postgraduate): new and innovative uses of technology in teaching must be educationally appropriate and enhance the student experience.

A1) Students’ views and experience as learners will be respected. Feedback will be used during innovation and adoption of new methods. This may be facilitated by e.g. School blended learning representatives meeting with staff-student fora, student representation on the Faculty BL committee (BLC), and using student volunteers/interns to test new tools.

A2) The potential role of students as co-creators of teaching materials will be recognized. The Faculty should support internships, and encourage staff/students to apply for funding to develop teaching technology projects e.g. JISC Summer of Student Innovation.

Digital learning early adopters / champions: Adoption of digital teaching tools by champions usually precedes wider adoption.

A3) Individual staff with particular interests in TEL will be encouraged to pilot (adopt, adapt and share) new tools. Such individuals should be exposed to current developments e.g. through networks within the Faculty, within the University and beyond the University. This can be facilitated by improving communications about TEL via MaPS BLC and the MaPS BL webpages, but Schools must also value these activities e.g. via workload models. Individuals must be encouraged to share their experiences – again MaPS BLC and the MaPS BL webpages have a role but Schools must also support and reward individuals who wish to disseminate their findings e.g. beyond the University by conference presentations or publications.

Wider teaching staff in the Faculty: wider adoption of technology in teaching requires buy-in of all teaching staff.

A4) Staff in senior academic leadership roles will display an awareness of the value of TEL. A culture supporting the adoption and integration of TEL should be promoted in each School: this requires the support of HoSs, DSEs and other senior staff.

A5) All teaching staff will be provided with support to develop new skills in using TEL tools and approaches, e.g. through Organisational Development and Professional Learning, Teaching Enhancement Scheme (TES) groups, and the assistance of the Faculty BL team. New developments likely to impact all staff should be clearly communicated. Routine administrative tasks associated with TEL should be divested

6

where possible to the Faculty BL team or SES, and not add to the workload of academic staff.

The Faculty Student Education Service: The SES are stakeholders because they provide administrative support for TEL activities e.g. for activities in the VLE, and share responsibility with academic staff for activities monitoring student progress e.g. the administration of student assessment and attendance. Such elements are encompassed within the area of learning analytics and form part of the course design-delivery-evaluation-modification loop.

A6) The Faculty Student Education Service will be involved as a partner in the rollout of technology with implications for the administration of teaching or assessment – particularly if large numbers of students are affected.

The Faculty Pro-Dean for Student Education and Taught Student Education Committee (FTSEC): The Pro-Dean and FTSEC share responsibility for teaching activities across the Faculty and the BLC reports to FTSEC.

B. Structures supporting TEL in the Faculty

Faculty Academic Champion for Blended and Digital Learning (ACBDL): the ACBDL should be an experienced academic who has credibility for his/her use of TEL. The ACBDL interacts with a large number of groups including the Blended Learning and Learning Technologies Information Group (BLLTIG), the VLE team, and the Digital Learning Team, and shares with other Faculty Champions the task of representing academic interests in University projects such as the Lecture Capture project, Attendance Monitoring project etc.

B1) The ACBDL will disseminate information about new TEL tools and new University initiatives, encourage and mentor staff around the faculty, and represent the interests of the Faculty in University level discussions on TEL. The ACBDL will raise awareness of TEL initiatives at University level among relevant individuals in the Faculty. Activities within the Faculty will be shared among other Faculty staff, at University level, and beyond. The ACBDL must be appropriately supported by the Faculty and the role recognised in his/her workload model.

Faculty Blended Learning Team: Faculty-level support for BL currently comprises the ACBDL for Blended and Digital Learning, and the Faculty BL Support Officer.

B2) The Faculty will provide support for TEL activities across the Faculty via a support officer/team of officers who will work with the ACBDL, supporting TEL activities e.g. use of the VLE, working with individuals on pilot projects, helping staff adapt, use and integrate proven TEL approaches, and assisting in the dissemination of information across the Faculty. Where appropriate, the support officer/officers may work together with support teams in other Faculties, sharing knowledge and expertise.

7

School Blended Learning Representatives: Each School nominates a BL representative who should normally be a member of the School Taught Student Education Committee with particular interest in BL, and knowledge of the use of BL within their School.

B3) The School BL representatives will help to disseminate information about developments in TEL to staff in their School, and inform the ACBDL and BLC on developments, needs and issues to do with TEL in their School.

Blended Learning Committee (BLC): The BLC comprises the ACBDL, School BL representatives and Faculty BL Support Officer together with a Student BL Champion (supported by the UoL Digital Learning Team) and representatives from Faculty SES and Faculty IT. The committee meets at least twice a year and reports to FTSEC.

B4) The BLC will be responsible for delivering and reviewing the Faculty BL Strategy, fostering communities of practise and ‘horizon scanning’ new technologies.

Quality assurance: Discussion of Blended Learning activities currently forms part of the annual quality assurance exercise in each School. The School BL representatives and ACBDL should be involved in Annual School Reviews and Students Academic Experience Reviews.

Wider networks: A number of teaching enhancement and pedagogic research groups exist within the University, whose goals partly overlap with our aims of encouraging staff to adopt new approaches, and supporting early adopters/champions in disseminating their activities, e.g. Leeds Institute for Teaching Excellence (LITE), Pedagogic Research in Science and Mathematics (PRiSM). The BLC will encourage engagement with these other networks.

C. Communications

Communicating and disseminating information underpins most of the activities within the strategy. The main responsibility for sharing information is with the ACBDL but is also shared by the Faculty BL Support Officer, the School BL representatives, and the BLC. The ACBDL may share information via communications with DSEs, FTSEC and the BLC, emails to all staff, talks and demonstrations, newsletters and the Faculty BL webpages. All members of the BLC should contribute to communications. Communications may include raising awareness of new developments and activities within and beyond the University, including new tools, meetings or announcements. The communications activities should also include publicising activities within MaPS.

C1) All members of Faculty staff will have simple access to news about the latest TEL activities relevant to their subject.

8

D. Current and foreseeable areas of TEL activity in the Faculty

The appendix discusses various technology enhanced teaching tools and approaches, in the context of current activity in MaPS. It is attempted to flag areas where significant changes are expected. It is difficult, however, to foresee what new technologies may emerge over the next five years: other, new, tools / teaching approaches, which we have not predicted, may become even more important than those listed.

D1) Where the benefits of a TEL tool are generally accepted (e.g. use of the VLE, lecture capture) all staff teaching on modules will be expected to make use of these tools.

D2) The use of approaches such as the flipped classroom, tools such as collaborative online working, desktop capture, and in-class technology such as e-voting will be encouraged wherever pedagogically appropriate.

D3. The faculty will engage in developing MOOCs, online videos and other OERs as a method of programme / module delivery, for outreach and advertising.

D4) The Faculty will strongly support the adoption of e-submission of coursework, e-marking and e-feedback, and the use of e-assessment tools based on automated response systems where pedagogically appropriate.

D5) MaPS will be pro-actively involved in developments in learning analytics, including for monitoring student progress, and for improving teaching.

E. Influencing and leading change

The ACBDL, through his/her links with BLLTIG, the other faculty champions, and groups such as the VLE service and Digital Learning Team, is in a position to influence which tools for learning and teaching are made available and supported by UoL, and how these are implemented.

E1) MaPS, through the ACBDL, will be pro-actively involved in developments in all areas of TEL at UoL, and changes to supported tools and technologies will be communicated clearly to relevant staff.

E2) Other stakeholders, particularly the members of the Faculty BLC, will keep informed about developments in TEL in their spheres of activity and will communicate these to the BLC and to other affected staff.

Implementation and timescales

A MaPS Action Plan for digital, blended and technology-enhanced learning should be considered, agreed and monitored annually by the BLC, with support from the ACBDL, and by FTSEC.

9

The BLC and the ACBDL will also contribute as requested to the production of, and monitoring of progress against, action plans for individual Schools and/or programme teams.

May 2017

10

Appendix: Current and foreseeable areas of TEL-related activity.

Virtual learning environments: VLEs are now ubiquitous in all HE institutions. The staff teaching on the great majority of modules in MaPS now use the UoL VLE, BlackBoard, to make resources such as lecture slides (as a minimum) available to students. It is also used on many modules as a portal for e-submission of assignments, for e-assessment, the collation of marks, and distribution of feedback. It is anticipated that such use will increase. The potential of the VLE as a portal for sharing information and resources in other groups (via VLE organizations) is becoming more accepted e.g. the Food Science and Nutrition safety organization, which includes all staff and students in the School. The VLE is integrated with a number of University systems e.g. Banner but has some limitations e.g. in integrating with certain e-assessment tools. It is expected that VLEs including BlackBoard will evolve and become more compatible with mobile devices and more personalised. Increased use of the VLE is expected, for pre-class learning, after-class learning and assessment, and non-module groups.

Online video/audio: the University has developed tools for lecture capture, desktop capture, media management and streaming to defined audiences (VideoLeeds) which are increasingly adopted in the Faculty. Despite concerns from some staff, there is no persuasive evidence that lecture capture, which enables students to view face-to-face lectures after the event, leads to decreased attendance10. Evidence does suggest that students mostly use lecture recordings for revision, and that they value the availability of these recordings highly, therefore all staff should be encouraged to provide them. Video/audio recordings made by desktop capture can be used in a ‘flipped’ model for students to view before a face-to-face class, to complement face-to-face teaching e.g. to emphasise points that were missed in a lecture, or to provide feedback e.g. worked solutions to problems. These recordings are easy to make and valued by students: their use should be encouraged in all Schools. We anticipate developments to improve lecture and desktop capture e.g. to increase the range of compatible devices. Use of lecture capture, desktop capture and media streaming, to aid learning and inclusiveness, will be strongly encouraged.

MOOCs, open education, online modules and online programmes: Unlike simple video material available via the web (published e.g. via VideoLeeds, iTunesU, YouTube or private websites), and Open Educational Resources (OERs) which might be video, powerpoints or other online resources produced in different HEIs, MOOCs and online modules are more substantial offerings which also include a structure, some sort of formative and possibly summative assessment, interaction with other learners and, usually, an educator. While MOOCs may not yet have proven to be the disruptive technology once envisaged, they have certainly been successful in raising the international profile of institutions and are likely to be an important component in a future mixed-provider model of HE11. The UoL has invested heavily in online delivery and MOOCs, through the Digital Learning Team, the Online Distance Learning Centre, and its involvement with the FutureLearn

consortium. UoL is thus, currently, an important player in MOOC provision: MaPS has been less involved than other faculties but some MOOCs have been developed (e.g. the ‘Discovering Science’ series produced by Prof Taylor and colleagues in Chemistry), we have one of the first credit-bearing MOOCs for which the UoL will award credits subject to performance at the required level and payment, and have integrated a MOOC into a taught module (we have also realized the possibility of re-using digital learning materials on more than one course!). Other institutions and organizations offer STEM-based MOOCs and online modules (e.g. MIT OpenCourseware), but there is a large market of potential online students.

The Faculty should develop more MOOCs as a way to increase our international exposure, focussing on topics related to research interests or where MaPS has competitive advantage due to particular expertise, and where learning resources can be re-purposed for different courses and modules. Short MOOCs may be explicit advertising platforms for particular programmes. The UoL sees particular opportunities for wholly- or part-online Masters programmes: MaPS should investigate the possibilities for part-MOOC MScs, articulated degrees and CPD courses.

The faculty should encourage staff participation in MOOCs as learners, and encourage the use of externally-produced MOOCs and OERs within modules: this simply acknowledges the trend towards flexible provision, but can also reduce the need for delivery of material through traditional but cost-intensive methods such as lectures.

Collaborative online working and student-teacher interaction: Collaborative online working may include the use of tools such as chatrooms, wikis (both available in the VLE) and online peer marking (e.g. WebPA), all of which have been used to some extent within MaPS. Also included is the use of online collaborative whiteboard tools such as BlackBoard Collaborate. Such tools are particularly useful for creating a community of learners, and are the ‘next best thing’ to face-to-face interaction for developing student-student and student-teacher relationships, hence they are particularly valuable for online distance learners but can be useful for campus-based students on ‘traditional’ modules too. Use of collaborative online working tools should be encouraged, particularly for online distance learning.

Using technology in class (including e-voting systems): Classroom polling technologies such as ‘clickers’ have been used for a number of years, by enthusiastic staff in MaPS as elsewhere, as a method for increasing classroom interactivity. Recently there has been a move towards mobile device-based polling tools e.g. Socrative. The UoL plans to introduce a classroom polling functionality as part of the UniLeeds mobile app from September 2017. MaPS should encourage appropriate use of such technology. The UoL has also invested heavily in technology-enabled ‘interactive’ lecture theatres: these enable (e.g.) groups of students to work together on a document and share it with the class, or the teacher to share a document which the students can then edit. Such ‘active learning’

12

approaches have been shown to improve student performance when compared to ‘traditional’ lecturing12.

Online materials for the laboratory (to prepare for the lab, or instead of the lab): STEM departments at a variety of institutions have developed extensive online materials for students to engage with prior to embarking on experiments in teaching laboratories. Such materials can include the script for the experiment, pre-lab questions, videos showing how to use specific equipment, safety information, and even simulation software. The benefits of this approach are that students are better prepared so use their time in the lab more efficiently, and experiments can be more open-ended and investigative rather than formulaic13. The School of Chemistry has actively pursued this approach and seen significant efficiencies. The model can be extended further to the point where the student controls an experiment on-line from a distance, without entering the laboratory at all14.

E-assessment: E-assessment may include the use of automated response assessment engines (e.g. BlackBoard quiz tool, Numbas, MapleTA), the e-submission of assignments (typically word-processed documents but might be e.g. spreadsheets or videos), plagiarism checking, marking using a computer, and the provision of online marks and feedback. These diverse approaches bring various potential benefits (different assessment formats suit different students, all forms of online feedback are enduring and visible from anywhere, e-submission enables students to work remotely, automated response systems allow different students to be given unique questions, marking is efficient and transparent, and feedback can be instantaneous) but also pose challenges when used in STEM subjects e.g. automated response systems cannot assess students’ working, marking with the aid of a computer requires a tablet and stylus if the feedback is to include equations or chemical structures. Nevertheless most of the approaches listed have been utilized somewhere within the faculty. The faculty should encourage the use of e-assessment where pedagogically appropriate. E-assessment should not add to the assessment burden, and should always be accompanied by sufficient feedback.

Learning analytics: Learning analytics is the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data about the progress of learners and their contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimising learning and the environment in which it occurs9. UoL like any other institution acquires vast amounts of data on student activity and performance e.g. attendance data, the digital footprints left when students interact with the library or the VLE, exam results etc: but we do not yet use these data systematically, bringing together data from the Student Information System (SIS), VLE and other sources, and using these, in many of the ways that other HE institutions do. Others are exploiting these data systematically e.g. for identifying at-risk students and increasing retention, for assessing the performance of specific sub-cohorts of students (e.g. those with particular needs) against others, and for improving teaching either retrospectively (where class performance is below expectation on a module or groups of modules) or during a module (e.g. in response to poor engagement / performance in formative assessment). Some Universities

13

provide analytics based systems to help students to select future modules, building on data about their career choices, aptitudes and grades for previous modules to provide optimum pathways through their studies. Engagement and performance data may be made available to individual students via a ‘dashboard’, comparing their performance to their own individual goals or to the cohort average. With a recent HE Commission report recommending specifically that all HEIs consider introducing a learning analytics system, and that institutions consider using this information in their submissions to TEF15, it is likely to become a priority for UoL. With the introduction of an app for attendance monitoring, and the (dormant) e-assessment project which envisaged all assessment data being aggregated in one dataset, the blocks are in place.

References

1. Leeds, U. o. University of Leeds Blended Learning Strategy: Learning and Teaching in a Digital Age; University of Leeds: 2013.2. Leeds, U. o. University of Leeds Digital Strategy for Student Education; University of Leeds: 2014.3. Davies, S.; Mullan, J.; Feldman, P. Rebooting learning for the digital age: What next for technology-enhanced higher education?; Higher Education Policy Institute: Oxford, UK, 2017.4. Boxall, M.; Woodgates, P. The innovation race; PA Consulting Group: London, UK, 2015.5. Greenberg, A. D.; Nilsson, A. H. The New Imperative for Lecture Capture Systems in Higher Education: How Competition, Affordability, and Business Benefits are Driving Adoption; Wainhouse Research: Duxbury, MA, USA, 2009.6. Parr, C. Moocs could be ‘major recruitment tool’, says FutureLearn’s Simon Nelson Times Higher Education [Online], 2015. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/moocs-could-be-major-recruitment-tool-says-futurelearns-simon-nelson/2018969.article.7. Newman, T.; Beetham, H.; Knight, S. Student digital experience tracker 2016: results from the pilot project; JISC: Bristol, UK, 2016.8. Stubbs, M. 5 top tips to enhance your students' experience 2013. https://www.jisc.ac.uk/blog/5-top-tips-to-enhance-your-students-experience-11-mar-2013.9. Sclater, N.; Peasgood, A.; Mullan, J. Learning analytics in higher education; JISC: Bristol, UK, 2016.10. Karnad, A. Student use of recorded lectures; London School of Economics: London, UK, 2013.11. Yuan, L.; Powell, S. MOOCs and Open Education: Implications for Higher Education; JISC: Bolton, UK, 2013.12. Freeman, S.; Eddy, S. L.; McDonough, M.; Smith, M. K.; Okoroafor, N.; Jordt, H.; Wenderoth, M. P., Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America 2014, 111 (23), 8410-8415.13. Teo, T. W.; Tan, K. C. D.; Yan, Y. K.; Teo, Y. C.; Yeo, L. W., How flip teaching supports undergraduate chemistry laboratory learning. Chemical Education Research and Practice 2014, 15, 550-567.14. University, O. The Open Science laboratory. http://www.open.ac.uk/researchprojects/open-science/.15. Commission, H. E. From bricks to clicks: The potential of data and analytics in higher education; Higher Education Commission: London, UK, 2016.

14