Category Archives: stuff

e-Learning Stuff: Top Ten Blog Posts 2024

laptop with coffee
Image by Firmbee from Pixabay

Having posted that I was unable to post a top ten from 2024 looking at the dashboard I realised I could see the stats for the blog posts from 2024.

In 2024 I posted 70 posts on the blog. In 2023 I wrote 89 posts on the blog. There were 92 posts in 2022, 113 blog posts in 2021. In 2020 I had written 94 blog posts. In 2019 I had written 52 blog posts which was up from 2018 when I only wrote 17 blog posts.

Microphone
Image by rafabendo from Pixabay

The tenth most popular post was Lost in translation: the radio programme. This was a blog post from a series of posts I did during the covid pandemic, but still has relevance today.

The post at number nine was The idea of capturing a lecture… was a thought piece from April 2024. It discussed that capturing a lecture isn’t a new idea, however capturing a lecture may not be the optimum way of delivering a recorded version of the in-person session.

A really old post from 2008 was the eighth most popular post. Full Resolution Video on the PSP. Do people still use the PSP?

PSP
Image by WikimediaImages from Pixabay

Seventh place was Ten ways to use QR Codes which was not a post about ten ways to use QR codes. At the time QR codes appeared to be more of a fad with people using QR codes because they were QR codes. Since then the proper use cases for QR codes has grown, most people find them useful now for doing other things, they are a means to and end.

The post at number six was from 2015, I can do that… What does “embrace technology” mean? was from the FE Area Reviews.

The post at number five was a week note from 2019, Student Journey – Weeknote #08 – 26th April 2019.

walking home
Image by 춘성 강 from Pixabay

The fourth most popular post was written in February 2024 and asked the question: What makes an intelligent campus?

At number three was a post on freakish occurrences, “million-to-one chances happen nine times out of ten”. One of my favourite quotes from Terry Pratchett is that “million-to-one chances happen nine times out of ten”. When something awful happens, or freakish, we hear news reporters say “it was a million-to-one chance that this would happen”.

snowy road

The second most popular post was from 2009 and asked To Retweet or not to Retweet which was a post about retweeting on the Twitter.

The most popular post in 2024 is one of the all time popular posts, The iPad Pedagogy Wheel. Published in 2013, this was number one for many years.. I re-posted the iPad Pedagogy Wheel as I was getting asked a fair bit, “how can I use this nice shiny iPad that you have given me to support teaching and learning?”. It’s a really simple nice graphic that explores the different apps available and where they fit within Bloom’s Taxonomy. What I like about it is that you can start where you like, if you have an iPad app you like you can see how it fits into the pedagogy. Or you can work out which iPads apps fit into a pedagogical problem.

Is it a Snow Day?

Lots of snow this week, however, I didn’t see much mention of university closures compared to say fifteen years ago when we had some really bad snow.

Back in February 2009 we had the worst snow for twenty years. Many universities  and colleges closed, most publishing notices about the closure to their websites.

At the time myself and few others recorded a podcast about the role that learning technologies and communication tools can have in supporting colleges and schools that get closed because of the snow.

I remember discussing the issue with colleagues at the time once the snow had melted that we as a college did not make much more use of our VLE and other online platforms during the time we were closed. The result of the discussion was that closing for three days every twenty years was not something we really needed to spend resources and time planning for. There is a point, when there is an “out of the ordinary” event, contingency planning probably isn’t required in any great depth. Much easier just to deal with the problems resulting from the closure than try and plan just in case (which at the time) for a remote chance of closing.

However then in January 2010… the snow came back, this time the worse snow for forty years! Once more lots of universities, colleges, and schools closed. I discussed this at the time in my blog post on snow. My main point was:

Yes, snow makes it dangerous to travel, but with the internet and mobile technologies, does it mean that learners need to stop learning just because the decision is taken to close the physical location? So what if this snow is unprecedented? What if we are now not going to have bad snow for another twenty years?

My next point in the post was this.

Closures happen a lot, time to start thinking about how an educational institution can make best use of the fantastic tools that are available to it for learning. Though the first thing to do will be to change the culture. It’s not just about contingency planning; it’s about changing the way people work when there isn’t snow and changing the way people think when there is.

It was never about the snow; it was about the disruption.

In 2010 I spoke at the Plymouth e-learning conference, I chaired a debate about closing the physical campus in times of crisis and disruption. I wrote about this at the time in this blog post.

Even if it doesn’t snow really badly next year, other things may happen that result in the physical closure of the educational institution. It could be floods, high winds (remember 1987), flu or similar viral infections, transport strikes, fuel crisis, anything…

Of course in 2020 we had the global covid pandemic, and disruption was taken to an unprecedented level, which meant as a sector, we had to respond quickly and effectively. There was a massive emergency response and the sector moved everthing online and people stayed at home.

So this week we’ve had some snow, but I suspect the disruption is still there, but the response from the sector will be influenced by that covid experience, to the point where the disruption can be minimised.

Is today a snow day? No it’s just a day when it snowed.

Review of 2024

coffee

Usually at this time I would publish a blog post of the top ten posts of the previous twelve months. However WordPress have stopped doing free stats for blogs that show adverts. So I don’t have detailed stats about the top posts.

I posted 70 posts on the blog.

In 2023 I wrote 89 posts on the blog. There were 92 posts in 2022, 113 blog posts in 2021. In 2020 I had written 94 blog posts. In 2019 I had written 52 blog posts which was up from 2018 when I only wrote 17 blog posts.

So does your institution have a silo mentality?

Silos
Image by marcson from Pixabay

This was an interesting read on the WonkHE about higher education silos, Institutional silos are making it harder to build learning environments for student success.

Ask any higher education institution leader about the organisational challenges they’re grappling with, and they’ll start talking about silos.

Though talking about silos, the article is more about integrating digital into learning and teaching. The article concludes

As the digital learning and teaching landscape continues to evolve, institutional strategic agendas to make the most of technology to enhance student engagement and support won’t be driven by small teams of experts, or even by digital leadership. It will require all student-facing staff to have the confidence and skills not just to follow processes and use systems but to actively work to deploy technology creatively and interpret data to take forward improvements to learning and teaching (and that don’t depend on staff simply working harder and longer). To get to that point, institutional leaders will need to continue to find creative ways to break down those silos and build whole-organisation digital capability.

Though as anyone knows breaking down silos is hard. We often think of grain silos, metal cylinders that are close together, they should be easy to break, shouldn’t they? I always now think of higher education silos as missile silos, embedded into reinforced concrete and dispersed across a wide area.

One question that I have been thinking about after reading his article was, what typifies a silo mentality, and what enables cross-silo working? I think a key aspect is strategic thinking within the silo. If you have a unique strategy for your department, this is symptomatic of silo thinking. If you have a strategy based on, say the student journey, the staff experience, research impact, then you probably have already broken down your silos.

Last year I wrote this;

I wondered if silo working is another word for non-strategic working? People often complain about silo working and the resulting challenges that can arise. I think part of the reason why there are problems with duplication, conflict, and lack of communication, across silo working, is teams are working to their own objectives and aren’t necessarily working towards common objectives.

The WonkHE article talks about digital learning and teaching, if the owner of the digital learning strategy is the head of the digital learning team, then how will that strategy, not only communicate across the university, but how will it compete with all the other departmental strategies out there.

Breaking down silo working, isn’t just about saying, we need to break down the silos but is so much more about thinking strategically about what your organisation is trying to achieve. Recognising that even if your department is successful in achieving your strategic goals, doesn’t mean that the university is being successful.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Old Camera

I read the other day that UCAS applications for university were down for a second year running. This maybe something that universities should not only care about, they should be worrying about this and thinking about their planning for the next few years, even the next ten years.

I also read that Intel, the computer chip manufacturer were laying off 15% of their staff having failed to respond in an effective way to the use of ARM chips, first by Apple and then by many other PC manufacturers.

Throw in a podcast I listened to in the car the other day when stuck in traffic on the M5, which covered companies that failed to change. This included Kodak who did not adapt to the introduction of digital cameras, magazine publishers who didn’t understand the web, and even record stores that couldn’t adapt to the introduction of CDs or downloads.

Before I discuss the impact of the drops in applications for universities, it will provide some insights into looking at what is happening to Intel and looking back at other major companies that failed to respond to (usually digital) disruption. It should be said that hindsight is a wonderful thing.

When I started working at City of Bristol College in the early 1990s (it was Brunel College then), I worked in the Faculty of Business, Food, and Hairdressing. A large diverse faculty, and across the many staff we shared a single 286 personal computer. The 286 was the name of the chip that powered the computer. Intel at the time was the biggest chip manufacturer in the world. I read in the book, Good Strategy, Bad Strategy, that it had successfully transitioned from a manufacturer of computer memory to one that made computer core chips.

In the 1990s I remember upgrading computers to a 386 and then a 486. I remember the marketing hype that arrived in 1993 when Intel named the 586, the Pentium, in order to differentiate it from other chip manufacturers.

In 2002 I moved over to the Apple platform, buying a G4 PowerBook and later a G5 Power Mac. I was, like many Mac users, a little concerned when Apple announced the move to Intel back in 2005. However all wasn’t’ well for Intel, when they failed to deliver on the needs of Apple. Apple moved to fabricating their own chips, first for their iOS devices and then their Mac lineup. Apple announced in 2020 that they would be moving all their Mac models away from Intel chips to ARM processors. The M1, M2 and now the M3 chips power all their current models.

The problem for Intel, and probably is why they are now having problems, was that they didn’t just lose a customer when Apple moved to ARM, other computer manufacturers in an attempt to maintain market share and compete with Apple also started building ARM powered computers. Intel had not only lost Apple, they were also now losing considerable market share.

This month we saw Intel decided they needed to cut costs and have cut 15% of their staff. Will this be enough, maybe, but probably not.

The podcast I listened to discussed how Kodak did not adapt well to the digital revolution in photography.

It was interesting as it wasn’t as though Kodak ignored digital, they actually produced a handheld digital camera back in 1975.

However, company executives were reluctant to make a strong pivot towards digital technology, since it would require heavy investment, make the core business of film unprofitable, and put the company into direct competition with established firms in the computer hardware industry.

One of their own employees had written in 1979 that photography would completely shift to digital by 2010.

Kodak knew that digital was going to disrupt the market for photography. However they were unwilling to pivot and shift from their core business. They couldn’t see what they needed to change, as they were concerned with protecting their existing business.

Their customers and consumers made the move to digital and there were plenty of other companies out there who were being innovative and designing, developing and making the (digital) photography products that were being demanded.

It also probably didn’t help that Fujifilm started competing directly with Kodak in the US (and worldwide) in the 1980s.

You could say that Kodak didn’t adapt to the changes happening to their sector.  Kodak weren’t blind to the threats posed to their business, they knew what digital meant for photography, they designed and built digital photography products. However they failed to change enough to make a difference.

In 2012 Kodak filed for bankruptcy.

There are lots of other examples of how organisations and companies did not respond to changes and trends. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, as you can ask, why didn’t they change, they could see the challenge, they could have changed, they could have adapted.

The problem often is that though internally the organisation may know it needs to change, the current situation means they are unable to change.

That radical step is make radical change knowing that this will have a potentially negative impact on the business and your customers.

So is the drop in applications a bump or a trend? That we don’t know, but maybe we will this time next year.

So universities may know and realise that they need to change, but they can’t afford to make those changes now. As a result they may never change.

Should I stay or should I go….

It would appear that the remote teaching during covid is continuing to have an impact on attendance at in-person teaching. Alongside the cost of living crisis, rising costs, the need to work, and interestingly a perception by students that attendance at in-person sessions was unlikely to benefit their learning and their grades.

Scores of current UK students shared with the Guardian how they feel about attending university lectures and tutorials.

‘I see little point’: UK university students on why attendance has plummeted

About half of the students who got in touch said they were regularly skipping classes, with many saying they were hardly attending at all. A lot of students pointed to financial difficulties forcing them to prioritise paid work over studying, a lack of enthusiasm for the format of lectures, low motivation to get up and go in, and the perception that attending classes was unlikely to improve their grades.

We have to remember that many of these students would not have been at university during the lockdowns in 2020 and 2021. They would have been at school or college. Going forward there will be a continuing stream of new students who experienced remote teaching at school who will be attending university.

Polly Toynbee in the Guardian questioned in an opinion piece on university finances,

…why sixth-formers get so much more teaching time than university students at far lower cost.

The amount of in-person contact time that students have, is so much less than they experienced at college and school, that you have to ask, with less hours to attend than their previous educational experiences, they might value it more. It would appear that they value it less.

The financial imperative for work by students was also illustrated at the Wonkhe event, The Secret Life of Students.

The latest and most powerful insights on the student condition from Wonkhe and Cibyl’s Belong student survey platform and from across the HE sector.

I did a sketch note on that session.

There was a lot of things in there, about sleep, travel time, working, and time travelling to work.

A student also presented at that event and talked about how the need for work, would often trump attendance at lectures and classes. The student also questioned the value of attendance of in-person sessions which could be accessed through recordings later, or what needed to be learnt was learnt more effectively through resources and books.

Also see the original article that inspired the Guardian survey: Lectures in question as paid work pushes attendance even lower

Lecture attendance is now so low that some academics have started to openly question the future of the teaching method.

So what should universities do in light of this insight? What is the future of university teaching and how does it need to change? Also how does the university manage student expectations so that they stop seeing in-person teaching as a choice, and isn’t the optional extra of a university education.

Finally, and something I have been reflecting on this, what is the role of digital and technology in all this?

Keeping you awake?

Across the country there are a real variety of university campuses. No two campuses are alike, but all have similar challenges that the Estates team have to work with. There was an interesting article from Wonkhe a few weeks back on what keeps your estates manager awake at night? from the incoming AUDE chair.

Estates Directors, by and large, are significant net spenders of university income. While we may also run aspects of our institution’s income-generating commercial services – conferencing and retail for instance – and we know our university built environment can be key in attracting research income, staff and students too, on the whole we sit on the expenditure side of the balance sheet, with buildings second only to people in terms of operating costs.

It noted the challenge that costs are rising, and budgets are being cut, and the challenges that this budgetary nightmare brings to the Estates team. There are things they can cut, things they can spend less on, and then there are the statutory requirements that have to be met and paid for. In addition the way in which campuses are been used are changing.

The issue of both students and staff using the campus differently now, post covid, and their hybrid use of space for studying and working. We know that space designed for the way we would use those spaces pre-covid, aren’t necessarily now the kinds of spaces that we need post-covid. Easy to say, actually quite challenging to think about and design spaces that meet these new needs. What are those new kinds of spaces and how would we know?

Most universities I have discussed this with reinforce the importance of the university space, a place for people to come together for education and research. There is an expectation that staff and students will be physically travelling to and using the university buildings and spaces.

Even so with hybrid working and studying the norm these days, spaces have to be flexible to allow for in-person working and studying, as well as allowing for online interactions to take place on campus as well. Just because a meeting or a lecture is online this doesn’t automatically mean that the person participating is going to be off campus. Are there spaces on the campus that can be used for these online activities.

Another challenge isn’t just space, but also time. You can already see that more people are coming into the office for two or three days a week, and those days are usually in the middle of the week. The challenge that anyone has in managing space is how do you provide the capacity needed for two or three days, knowing that for the rest of the week it will be underutilised. How do you incentivise people to spread their in-person working (and studying) patterns across the week, to ensure space is being used efficiently.

With people working at home for part of the week, what I am seeing in our own spaces, and hearing about on university campuses, and also seeing in the office work environment; is that without some kind of intervention, people are creating their own working patterns based on the patterns that benefits them individually and aren’t necessarily the most efficient mechanism for space utilisation across a working space. There is a default to mid-week in-person working, resulting in less utilisation on the extremities of the week. Should spaces be closed one day a week to allow for this?

Might it be more efficient to spread utilisation across the week, and then reduce the size of the space required? How then do you encourage and incentivise people to work on the less popular days of the week?

Whatever decisions are made by estates teams in relation to the campus, it is understandable why it might be keeping them awake at night.

Personalisation, just some thoughts

man on windowsill looking over a city
Image by Pexels from Pixabay

I have been looking at what we mean by personalisation in higher education. What I have discovered is that there isn’t really any clear idea or definition of what we mean by personalisation and across the sector there are varied views and opinions about what is personalisation, what can be personalised, and importantly why we would do this.

In this blog post I am not trying to come up with a definition of personalisation, nor am I proposing what it definitively means for higher education. No, this post is much more some of my recent thinking on the issue and what personalisation could mean for higher education.

In many ways the sector already has personalisation, the student journey for each student, though common in many areas, is pretty much unique to each individual student.

There are reasons why universities might want to be more explicit in how they personalise the student journey. These may include equity, inclusion, adaptation, enhancement, efficiency, and other reasons. Obviously though you might want to allow all of the student journey to be personalised, the reality is that a fully personalised student journey isn’t practical or affordable.

Reviewing the student journey, there will be touchpoints, where the student interacts and engages with the university. Across those touchpoints the university will need to decide which touchpoints:

  • Don’t need to be personalised.
  • Must be personalised
  • Should be personalised
  • Could be personalised

This will then allow those touchpoints to be prioritised.

In addition the level of personalisation would need to be considered, what changes would have to be made and the subsequent impact of those changes. What are the variables across the touchpoints and what does personalisation look and feel like for students for all the touchpoints.

I am interested in how data, digital, and technology can help and support this process. Certainly from a data and analytics perspective, the ability to record those touchpoints and the changes that arise from personalisation.

From my perspective, the next stage will be is, what is the role of an organisation like Jisc in the process of personalisation.

Transformation and all that

graphic
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

As we discuss and talk about digital transformation, it becomes apparent very quickly that digital transformation is not about digital causing transformation. It’s not as though if you invest in digital and online technologies that therefore you will be (magically) transformed.

When discussed digital transformation, it is probably best explored as transformation which is enabled by digital technologies.

I have written before about this, two years ago I published a blog post, called Thinking about digital transformation which I used to discuss and reflect on my then thinking about digital transformation.

Well, I have been thinking about what we understand mean by digital transformation and in some discussions, I have been using different kinds of explanations to explore what I see and understand digital transformation is.

In the post I draw out that merely making something digital, doesn’t mean you have transformation. The example I used was about the authorisation of leave.

calendar
Image by tigerlily713 from Pixabay

When you start to think about this digitalised process, using a bespoke system, over spreadsheets or pieces of paper, you may think of this as transformative. However, when you did deeper, there is still that same old authorisation process there.

I concluded…

The digitalisation of the HR system only becomes transformative when you actually look at and transform the processes and the thinking behind those processes. You need to transform the process; the digital HR system enables that transformation. Simply digitalising your HR system results in less benefits than if you transform the organisation and use digital technologies to support that process of transformation.

Here we are two years later and re-reading the blog post, much of what I wrote still stands up. In some cases the technology has moved forward already.

I wrote…

Now looking further forward, could you use artificial intelligence (AI) to learn from leave request, rejections and authorisations to have a better idea of when there are potential pinch points…

There was this Gartner article on AI in HR which was published last year.

AI will have an effect on the work conducted by the HR function, across the employee life cycle. This impact includes HR operations and service delivery, recruiting, learning and development, and talent management.  In a first step, AI will lead to new sets of employee expectations about how employees interact with HR and HR technologies. Over time, this shift will lead to rethinking the purpose and structure of individual HR roles and teams.

meeting
Image by StartupStockPhotos from Pixabay

I also mentioned the cultural challenges that existed.

When I first started asking this question a few years back, I was quite surprised by the resistance to the idea of a system or an individual self-authorising leave, and it got to the point where often the discussion would just fall down. Culturally people (okay managers) were struggling with the concept that they no longer had the power to authorise leave or not.

These are still very much here. I recently attended UUK’s Survive or thrive? Grasping the financial sustainability challenge event and the cultural challenges were echoed there as well.

We need to apply all the innovation, creativity and business acumen across the sector and beyond and grasp the nettle to find solutions to the big questions.

In one session it was clear that the technological or digital solutions were there already, what was holding back the transformation was the cultural and people issues.

In the past we may have wanted to transform, but we didn’t have the necessary tools to make that happen. Today we have the tools, the question is, do we have the will?

In the city there’s a thousand faces, all shining bright

Image by Pexels from Pixabay
Image by Pexels from Pixabay

The Intelligent University in the Smart City

The smart campus is already here. Universities across the UK are already using technology, sensors and data analysis capability to prompt simple, automated actions such as adjusting heating, for example. The smart campus goes further than such simple actions and allows us to gather data about the spaces and, importantly, act on that data. We can turn down heating in rooms which aren’t being used, and the system will take into account the actual external temperature and not just the time of year. We can use electronic entry systems, such as swipe cards, to ensure the security of the rooms, but also to measure room occupancy. Similar occupancy data can be gleaned from campus wide wireless neteworks. We can also ensure that the lighting, heating and CO2 levels are within defined parameters. We often have insights into specific aspects of the smart campus, environmental conditions or room utilisation but these insights can be limited in what they can tell us. Most of the time, it isn’t all joined up and so has limited scope in terms of what we can learn and how we can use the knowledge to enhance and improve the student experience.

London
Image by Free-Photos from Pixabay

It’s a similar story with the smart city. Cities across the world are looking at how they can use technology to make transport and transit systems work for the people in that city. The Wikipedia definition of a smart city is “an urban development vision to integrate information and communication technology (ICT) and internet of things (IoT) technology in a secure fashion to manage a city’s assets”. Data from systems and sensors across a city can tell us some stories, about the use of transport, congestion, parking, pollution, health care, crime and a range of other functions and aspects of the modern city. Like the smart campus these insights and stories can be limited in scope, and often only give us part of the story.

Newcastle University worked with its local authority to develop a Cooperative Intelligent Transport System (CITS) leading to a “smart corridor”. This will mean that buses will be controlled by digital technology. This will allow buses to “talk to” traffic lights, maybe holding green lights for a short time or redirect drivers past congestion, improving journeys and reducing delays. Many of these smart city initiatives work in isolation, where real benefit comes is when the data from these systems is integrated and new possibilities emerge. It’s not always about systems talking to each other – if a system can utilise the data from another then maybe better informed decisions can be made.

Image by rawpixel from Pixabay
Image by rawpixel from Pixabay

There is a vision of universities moving from a smart campus, to a smarter campus, to the intelligent campus. An intelligent campus will take data from a range of sources, not just the physical aspects of the campus and how it is being used, but also the data from digital systems such as cohort information, attendance records, the virtual learning environment, the library, student records, even Electronic Point of Sales and online services. This joined up approach can provide insights into the student experience that we would otherwise miss. These insights can inform and support decision-making by individuals across the campus, including students, academic and professional service staff.

An intelligent campus using predictive analytics means that rather than responding to problems, universities and colleges are proactive and make appropriate interventions earlier to avoid those problems happening in the first place, based on a range of live data sources. It’s a similar story within the smart city, where using a range of data sources and analytics could enable informed decision making removing the need to react to problems by ensuring they don’t happen or are mitigated as much as possible.

So how does the intelligent campus slot into the smart city? The reality is in many cities the campus and the city are not distinct spaces, and for many people they will move between city and campus across the day. If a university with an intelligent campus does not integrate or work with the smart city then they won’t have the full picture and in some cases could be at odds with each other. Bringing in the full picture, all the data, a better understanding can be drawn from the experiences of the students and the city population at large.

CCTV
Image by Stafford GREEN from Pixabay

The collection and interpretation of data from a wide variety of sources understandably raises some concerns about the appropriateness of data collection and usage. One of the challenges that does need to be seriously considered are the ethical issues of using a range of sensors, tracking technologies, even CCTV that could be used to track not just people’s movements, but could actually be linked to individuals.

Some of the examples of data used in intelligent campus or smart city activities might not be thought of as personal. However, with the combination of different types of data from different sources, it becomes potentially easier to identify individuals, for example precise location and user behaviour. Anonymised data once aggregated can lead to better understanding of user behaviour and the management of facilities, but also potentially reduce privacy.

Even in an age where sharing of data on an app is commonplace, and sometimes scant attention is paid by users to the extent of this sharing, the fears and concerns of individuals should not be underestimated nor dismissed. This is something that we at Jisc have had to grapple with when developing our Learning Analytics service, which we recently launched, along with a code of practice to address ethical questions.

laptop
Image by fancycrave1 from Pixabay

Could this become a reality? Learning analytics services rely on a hub where academic and engagement data is collected, stored and processed. What if we, as a sector, could extend the learning data hub to enable data to be gathered in from physical places? Could we also bring in data from public systems, such as transit information, traffic, pollution levels, health care, entertainment information and provide a full enhanced student experience? Well that’s a dream that may well be possible in the near future.

References

Clay, J. (2018). Guide to the intelligent campus. 1st ed. [ebook] Bristol: Jisc. Available at: http://repository.jisc.ac.uk/6882/ [Accessed 13 Feb 2024].

Clay, J. (2017). In the city there’s a thousand faces, all shining bright | Intelligent campus. [online] Intelligentcampus.jiscinvolve.org. Available at: https://intelligentcampus.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2017/06/12/in-the-city-theres-a-thousand-faces-all-shining-bright/ [Accessed 13 Feb 2024].

Jisc. (2015). Code of practice for learning analytics. [online] Available at: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/code-of-practice-for-learning-analytics [Accessed 13 Feb 2024].

Clay, J. (2024). What makes an intelligent campus? [online} Available at: https://elearningstuff.net/2024/02/12/what-makes-an-intelligent-campus/  [Accessed 13 Feb 2024].

Education Technology. (2018). What makes an intelligent campus?. [offline] Available at: https://edtechnology.co.uk/Article/what-makes-an-intelligent-campus [Accessed 10 Sep. 2018].

En.wikipedia.org. (2018). Smart city. [online] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_city [Accessed 13 Feb 2024].