Newsletter of the European eCompetence Initiative

NETWORK NEWS

Second Edition
January - March 2005

EDITORIAL

by Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Johannes Wildt

Dear eCompetence and eLearning actors,

More and more the term eLearning threatens to vanish into the archives of history. Even the pioneering eLearning guru Elliot Masie recently stated that he will no longer use the term eLearning. That reminds me of quite regular discussions that have taken place in our consortium on the "e" in eLearning and in eCompetence. Common redefinitions of the e tends towards education, excellence in learning or even enhancing learning as these notions fit the wide innovative process much better than focusing on the narrow electronic definition. Recently however, a new term is becoming popular. The term eBologna will assure that we won't lose our connection to the "e" in the near future. This approach will be partially examined in our second newsletter.

In this edition, our new Irish colleague Andrew will give you some hints on new contents and information update in our eCompetence website. Have a look inside!

Dirk Schneckenberg outlines the focus of the upcoming Dortmund coordinator meeting. In addition to the preparation of the Galway Symposium we will also have to take care of the interim report to the Commission.

Elisa Mancinelli from SCIENTER and Noelia Cantero from the COIMBRA Group give a brief summary on the main outcomes of the project HECTIC or Higher Education Consultation in Technologies of Information and Communication. The reflections on creating links between eLearning and the Bologna Process in the HECTIC recommendations are probably a pioneer activity that the HECTIC project members achieved.

Jef Van Den Branden from AV-net K.U.Leuven presents an article on the basis of two EU funded eLearning projects, in his piece on the importance of enhancing European training activities with specific ICT applications. The Netcampus and cEVU projects were both led by euroPACE, which has now successfully applied for funding for an eBologna-related project called REVE (Real Virtual Erasmus), that aims at enhancing the impact and efficiency of the Erasmus programme through the set-up of and support for a virtual Erasmus action.

We also include two reviews on eLearning publications that our Swiss partners SCIL have published in the elearning-reviews.org platform. In this edition the reviews focus on change management models for ICT integration.

Finally Helle Baeklund from Aalborg University gives a short perspective on the upcoming eCompetence case studies that we plan to undertake as the next major survey activity.

Best regards,

Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Johannes Wildt

SUBSCRIPTION

recommend
subscribe
unsubscribe
feedback

IMPRINT

Publisher:
European eCompetence Initiative

Editors:
Dirk Schneckenberg
Andrew Hamilton
Jenny Booth

MODELS OF TECHNOLOGY AND CHANGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION - An International Comparative Study on the Current and Future Use of ICT in Education

by Sabine Seufert, University of St. Gallen

The research study ‘Models of Technology and Change in Higher Education’ was conducted by CHEPS (the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies) and the Faculty of Educational Science and Technology of the University of Twente in the Netherlands in 2001. The research project was funded by SURF (the support agency for technology in higher education in the Netherlands), the Bertelsmann Foundation in Germany and the Norwegian Ministry of Education.

The aim of the study was to investigate strategic and policy-based initiatives with respect to the use of eLearning in higher education. Therefore, the main questions for this study were: Which ‘eLearning scenarios’ are emerging, how can future developments be predicted, and strategic choices be based on these scenarios?

The research design consists of an international comparative survey including data from the Netherlands, Germany, Norway, the United Kingdom, Australia, Finland, and a few universities from the USA. Data were collected via web-based questionnaires addressing different target groups: decision makers, support staff and instructors. Overall all, about 20 to 50% of the universities in the mentioned countries responded, not including the USA where the response was much lower.

The research study is based on four scenarios for educational delivery:

Scenario A: Back to Basics is the current dominant scenario for “traditional” universities in which the institution offers a program and ensures its quality and where local and face-to-face interactions are usual.
Scenario B: The Global Campus delivers as well a quality controlled cohesive local curriculum but available globally since global and network-mediated interactions are the norm (Globalization).
Scenario C: Stretching the Mould brings flexibility in terms of individualization in which the learner chooses what he / she wants and takes more responsibility for quality assurance. The main communication mode is still face-to-face (Individualization)
Scenario D: The New Economy offers individualization and globalization as the most radical form.

The main conclusions of the study can be summarized as follow:

Change is slow, and not radical: Institutions in higher education are gradually changing with respect to the use of eLearning as a process of change from within. Innovations of ICT don’t have a strong impact on their main strategy (in terms of their mission, profile, or market position).
ICT in teaching and learning: Widespread but part of a blend: Nothing new, the study confirms that a kind of “blended” approach is the main model. Common information and communication technologies, e. g., email, PowerPoint, word processing, web resources, have become a commodity, but in a way that only gradually changes traditional teaching practices. The traditional “lecture” is still the main teaching method. eLearning plays a complementary role as a further instructional tool (additional to already existing ones).
Instructors: Gradually doing more, but with no reward: The instructors are gradually using more technology but incentives are missing. The use of technology doesn’t influence their practice of teaching much (“stretching the mould”-approach).

An interesting outcome of the study is that the differences between the countries are not extremely significant. Since the data from USA are too small, the comparison between Europe and America is not feasible. However, the study gives an interesting portfolio of different eLearning strategies relevant for higher education leaders, policy makers, and support units. The focus of the study is sufficiently broad and shows the way to the integration of further innovation processes, such as the bologna reform process. The concrete recommendations (1. Set the target, 2. Become more systematic about the Stretching the Mould, 3. Stimulate new tools that relate to Stretching the Mould, 4. Develop policy for instructor incentives) at the end of the study are too brief and could be discussed in more detail.

RELATED LINKS
http://www.elearning-reviews.org

FOR MORE INFO CONTACT
Jasmina Hasanbegovic
eMail: sabine.seufert@unisg.ch

back