jisc

Why does no one care about my digital strategy?

May 9, 2018 James Clay 10 Comments

So have you ever been tasked with writing a digital strategy? Do you know where to start? Do you know what is going to ensure it will work and be successful.

So if you are tasked with writing a digital strategy, you could write it in isolation, but prepare for it to be a low priority for people higher up. Also expect people in other directorates or departments to ignore it as they focus on their own strategies.

Jisc have recently published a leadership briefing written by myself and Lawrie Phipps. A key aspect is aimed at those tasked with writing strategies, where we argue that in order to get stronger “buy-in” there is a need to apply digital lens to all strategies.

The paper proposes the concept of using a digital lens when approaching strategy, practice and process. The lens is made up of different aspects that need to be considered when applying digital to existing and intended structures.

It is necessary to identify which element will be looked at in digital contexts – for example, a particular teaching practice. Different digital options should then be explored to gain a thorough understanding of the range of possibilities. The benefits and risks of each possibility should be carefully weighed before deciding to deploy. As with all change, it is important to reflect and evaluate the nature and impact of the changes caused by the incorporation of digital.

There is a history of people talking about applying a lens to stuff, to look at things differently. To give a different perspective on what has been written or talked about. These are sometimes called strategic lenses and can cover different area such as design, customer focus, resources, cultural amongst others.

In this blog post I want to reflect on my own experiences in designing, developing and writing my own digital strategies. My initial frustrating experiences with a strategy that took a lot of my time which was then ignored, well certainly felt like it was ignored. It was almost a tick box exercise and the end result was the strategy was put into a lever arch file, put on a shelf until the following year when it would be reviewed, revised and published again.

As a TEL Manager in a college I was asked and I delivered a digital learning strategy, well back then it was called the Information and Learning Technology or ILT strategy. Historically it had come about because of funding from Becta to colleges was given on the basis of colleges writing an ILT strategy. This was often distinct from the IT strategy. The IT strategy was usually focused on the technical infrastructure to support the college business, whereas the ILT strategy was focused on the embedding of technology into teaching and learning. What often happened though was that both strategies weren’t linked together and weren’t always linked to the corporate strategy, of if they were those linkages weren’t always clear.

The end result was that sometimes these strategies were at odds with each other.You had an ILT strategy was advocating a student BYOD policy and the IT strategy was clear that non-organisation devices could not be connected to the wireless network.

It wasn’t just the IT strategy, I am aware of heated discussions between managers, where the ILT strategy was advocating a student BYOD policy and the Estates strategy was clear that non-organisation devices could not be plugged into the power sockets.

On top of all this was the core corporate strategy that was focused on something completely different.

I remember my ILT strategy talking about the use of the VLE by students and that all courses would have a presence on the VLE. Sounds fine, but academic staff didn’t see that as a priority, because the corporate strategy was talking about, widening participation, improving teaching and learning, and better student outcomes. Staff saw the improvement of teaching and learning as a priority, they saw using the VLE as something extra, more work so a) didn’t use it b) would often say they didn’t have the time (which we know now means they didn’t consider it a priority). So a lot of my time was taken up “selling” the use of edtech. What I didn’t realise at the time was that what I often was doing was applying a digital lens to the existing strategy in order to “sell” the VLE or other edtech to academics. I would talk about how the VLE would enable them to “improve” teaching and learning, could be used to “widen participation”. I started to realise that having a strategy focused on tools was never going to be successful, one which focused on outcomes would be easily understood by managers and staff, and more easily achieved.

In a later role I had to write a combined IT, Libraries and Learning Technology strategy. We were being supported by an external consultant and I do remember one of the key things she said was that anything in our departmental strategies had to stem from the core corporate strategy.

A typical IT strategy will often say something like this:

Enable a secure, robust and stable network.

What this does is focus the minds of the IT and network teams to ensure that the network has high resilience, low downtime and is secure. As a result when academics and learning technologists want to try something new, they are “refused” because it could impact on the security and reliability of the network. Over the years I remember many times being told we couldn’t use this tool, access this service, because of the “importance” of enabling a secure, robust and stable network.

The problem was that the corporate strategy said

We will develop and deliver high quality teaching and learning, across a wide range of subjects and qualifications.

This meant developing new ways of teaching and improving learning. Academics wanted to try new and innovative practices, but the IT strategy was acting as a barrier.

If the IT strategy was linked to the corporate strategy and said:

Enable a secure, robust and stable network to allow high quality teaching and learning through the use of technology.

What this does is focus the minds of the IT and network teams to ensure that the primary focus and use of the network is on allowing innovative use of technology for teaching and learning. Yes they still need to ensure that the network is secure, resilient and stable, but their primary focus will be on ensuring that teaching and learning can make effective use of technology.

Any departmental or methodology strategy should always link back to the organisational strategy and how the objectives and actions will support the organisational strategic aims.

So how do you do that then?

Well that’s where the lens comes in.

So if you are tasked with writing a digital strategy, you could write it in isolation, but prepare for it to be a low priority for people.

If you apply a digital lens to the corporate strategy, you can demonstrate how digital technologies can enable that strategy. So rather than talk about how you are going to increase the use of digital technologies, the strategy talks about how the use of digital technologies will enable the strategic aims.

The leadership briefing we published provides a mechanism on how to do just that. The next stage will be to distill the strategy into an operational plan, again applying a digital lens will demonstrate and show how digital technologies can be an enabler and not a barrier.

jisc, podcast

Podcast on Leadership #jiscdiglead

March 22, 2018 James Clay Leave a comment

Over the last three years I have been developing and delivering the Jisc Digital Leaders Programme, part of a wider team including Lawrie Phipps and Donna Lanclos.

Those two were recently interviewed by Chris Rowell, though the focus of the podcast was supposed to be about a chapter of a book that Lawrie and Donna had written, in the end the podcast was mainly about the leaders programme.

DELcast #4 Interview with Lawrie Phipps & Donna Lanclos about Digital Leadership and Social Media

DELcast #4 Interview with Lawrie Phipps & Donna Lanclos about Digital Leadership and Social Media – @Lawrie @DonnaLanclos @JISC

I really enjoyed listening to these two talk about the Jisc Digital Leaders Programme. The conversation reminded me how much the programme has changed since the initial pilots back in 2015, and what improvements and changes we have made to the programme.

Well worth a listen.

vle

VLE Modelling

February 26, 2018 James Clay Leave a comment

Despite many people talking about the death of the VLE over the years, the institutional VLE is still an important component of most colleges and universities offer in the online space, whether this be supporting existing programmes of study, those offering a blended approach, or even fully online programmes.

For the purposes of this blog post I see the VLE as a concept, more of a combination of tools, that includes the institutional LMS/VLE alongside other tools such as Padlet, WordPress, Twitter, Adobe Connect, etc..

The challenge for many academics and staff is the assumption often made by managers and learning technologists that they are able to create curriculum models that incorporate the VLE in a way which flows and is integrated for the learner. This is exacerbated if the VLE is more than just a Learning Management System (LMS) and incorporates other web tools and services.

Why would they?

Unless they have a core understanding of the potential of the different functions and tools within the VLE, how are they able to ensure they are fully integrated into the curriculum flow.

The result is more often the VLE is bolted onto or duct taped onto an existing curriculum model. This process creates extra work for academics, who they find the whole process of adding (not embedding) the VLE a chore, an extra, so no wonder we occasionally see resistance.

Now I am not saying that academics are not capable of building curriculum models where the use of the VLE is embedded and integrated. What I am trying to say is that when it comes to embedding the VLE, it’s more than just training and development in the use of the functions and tools. This will certainly enable academics to start along the process of developing curriculum models. However by creating some exemplar and example curriculum models where the VLE is embedded will enable academics to reflect and think about how to embed the VLE at a faster pace. Once academics are creating their own models or adapting those provided these can then be shared back.

I’ve always thought when it comes to change, how can you make it easier. If something you’re doing isn’t working, then do something differently.

Finally always reflect on why you are doing this, as I posted recently though we talk about embedding digital technologies into practice, the reality is what we want to do is to undertake practices differently, and one way of doing this is through the use of digital. This isn’t about trying to increase the use of the VLE, it’s about using the VLE to solve a range of other issues such as how to ensure learners can have access to a range of materials, resources, activities and conversations at a pace, time and place that suits them on a device of their choosing.

vle

Looking at things differently…

February 15, 2018 James Clay Leave a comment

Though we talk about embedding digital technologies into practice, the reality is what we want to do is to undertake practices differently, and one way of doing this is through the use of digital.

So if you want to increase use of the VLE, we approach the problem by thinking how we can get people to use the VLE, use it more and use it in different ways.

By looking at things differently, using the VLE stops being the problem you are trying to solve, but the solution to a different problem.

The challenge can be that learners want to have access to a range of materials, resources, activities and conversations at a pace, time and place that suits them on a device of their choosing.

How do you get those resources and activities to the learner?

Well you could post them the printed resources, however you may not know which specific ones they want, so you would need to send them all! They would also be all in printed format, no video, no audio just print!

You could create conversation opportunities in specific rooms (or off campus locations) at a time and place that suited you, some learners, but not all.

You could determine when and where learning activities should take place, but give no flexibility to the learners about their circumstances or choices.

If we go back to the problem

…learners want to have access to a range of materials, resources, activities and conversations at a pace, time and place that suits them…

Then the VLE starts to become part of the solution to the problem of access, inclusion and flexibility.

An online space like the VLE can be used to store all the resources, the learner can choose which ones they want to access when (and where).

An online space like the VLE means you can do more than just text, you can have video files, audio recordings, even interactive content.
The VLE or other online spaces allow asynchronous conversations to happen, allowing discussion at different times and places for different learners. There are also opportunities for synchronous live conversations too, which can be combined with other resources and activities.

The VLE isn’t the problem, it’s part of the solution.

ipad

Does your pilot scale?

February 9, 2018 James Clay Leave a comment

One issue I have found with TEL research that is written about in journals or presented about at conferences, is that most if not all is based around small cohorts of learners and rarely looks at the impact across a whole organisation.

Sometimes the TEL research appears to be about doing research and not necessarily thinking about the scaling up and mainstreaming of the research at a later date.

Often the research has minimal funding, which means that you are forced to use a smaller number of learners. Often the lack of funding means that though there is existing research out there, rather than scale up from that, the research is duplicated (again with a smaller cohort).

It needs to be noted that sometimes TEL research shouldn’t be scaled up straight away because that may have a detrimental impact on the learners.

One lesson I would pass on, is if you are undertaking a small scale pilot is to reflect on how it would scale in the future. It’s not just about how the technology, device or process enhances and enriches teaching and learning, but what about all the other stuff. Logistics, charging, storage, training, support, staff development, sustainability, and end of life.

When the iPad was released in 2010, there were lots of iPad pilots undertaken by universities and colleges.

Most of these didn’t seem to take into account the challenges that a large scale roll-out of iPads would require. Where would the iPads be stored, how would they be charged? When it was released there were no charging carts available. I once asked a charging case company to provide a case for Nintendo DS, they couldn’t as there wasn’t the demand for one, and it was too expensive to test just for a single order. The end result was multiple six way gangs to charge the class set; it was no wonder so few people used them.

Another challenge with iPads was how a device designed for an individual could be use by multiple people. If you had a few you could reset them individually, fine if you had ten, impossible if you had a hundred. Then there was the challenge of getting apps on to them. You could sync multiple iPads to a single iTunes account, fine again if you had ten, not feasible if you had a few hundred! Eventually Apple released the management software to manage multiple iPads and the licensing platform to licence apps across multiple iPads.

However those initial iPad pilots weren’t always thinking in terms of that bigger picture, so weren’t able to scale effectively until those multiple iPad issues were resolved.

So if you are looking at a pilot, consider the following:

If it involves a device to a technology, what about the storage, where will they live when not being used? How will they be charged? What will be the process for booking them? Even if you have a small number consider the perspective if you had enough for everyone!
If it is a new process (or web based tool) you may be able to train the ten staff in the pilot, what about training the staff across the whole organisation, how is that going to happen and who is going to do it. Thinking about that at the pilot stage means that if the pilot is successful, it will be easier to scale and mainstream later. Similar considerations about staff development and support when things don’t go as planned.
There is also considerations of sustainability, whose budget will those costs by placed in after the pilot? Are they onboard?
What about end of life, equipment replacement, where will the funding for all that come from?

Small scale pilots are useful, but thinking about scale and mainstreaming early on will avoid major headaches and challenges later.

conference

Making another game #disrupticon

February 5, 2018 James Clay 1 Comment

At the Rethinking Research: Disrupting and Challenging Research Practices conference where I was presenting a mapping session, one of the sessions I attended as a delegate was “Hacking the University Game” led by Luca Morin from Coventry University.

I hadn’t intended to attend this session, however as the presenter of the session I was in hadn’t turned up, I had to make another choice so came in late to this one.

In a previous blog post I talked about the design process for a vice-chancellors game we created as a group.

In another part of the session we were asked to reflect on a different kind of game, choosing a different subject to focus on. This time though we were asked not to think about the mechanics of the game, but focus on what the game was trying to enabler the players to learn. After chatting with the other person on my table we decided to do a game for students that demonstrated to them the difference between employability and education.

Many students sometimes focus on the skills they need for a job and think “education” isn’t as important as gaining employability skills.

What we wanted the game to demonstrate to students was that undertaking a degree wasn’t (just) about gaining the skills for a future job, but that by undertaking the degree you would learn stuff in the subject, but by doing so would also gain the skills that would be transferable and useful in a future job. In addition that focusing on employability would be a false economy and learning those skills discretely independently from the degree subject takes longer than gaining those skills by learning in the subject area.

We used a simple example to explain this, learning how to use Excel is an useful employability skills. It takes time to learn how to use Excel effectively and gain skills that are transferable to the workplace. Without context though, the transfer and application of these skills can be challenging, especially if you’ve not done it before.

However using Excel to understand a series of data from the subject area and learning how to manipulate it within Excel not only means using Excel, but also learning how to use Excel in context. This makes it easier to understand how to use Excel, but you can apply it to different situations. As a result, using Excel within a subject context can make it quicker and easier to gain Excel skills, than learning to use Excel outside the context.

The game was about engaging learners in the process that though employability skills are important for a future job or career, these skills will be more transferable and enhanced by gaining them through learning in the subject context, then trying to do the bare minimum.

There were less steps using the employability route, but each step would take longer. The education route had more steps, but they could be completed more quickly. There were also connections between both routes.

Of course spending ten minutes thinking and designing a game that covers this doesn’t mean that this is a finished game and there are major flaws with the concept and design. However the exercise of creating a game does make you think about the problem and the core issues, that in itself is an useful exercise.

conference

Making a game #disrupticon

January 24, 2018 James Clay 1 Comment

I hadn’t intended to attend this session, however as the presenter of the session I was in hadn’t turned up, I had to make another choice so came in late to this one.

When I arrived Luca was taking about the Landlord Game and Monopoly and on the table was a selection of dice, playing cards, blocks, pen, blank cards, pieces and other stuff.

A bit unsure of the aim of the session I listened carefully and tried to get up to speed.

The first activity (for me) in the workshop was for our table to design a “Vice-Chancellor’s Game”.

When it comes to game design you need to reflect on the aim of the game, what do the players need to do to “win”, is this a competitive or a collaborative game.

My thinking was that there were two approaches to this game, one was to focus on a single university or to go for a UK wide game where universities compete against each other.

In the UK wide game, players would be vice-chancellors competing against each other to make their university the best and win the game.

In a single university game you could have a competitive game where the players play characters who are senior managers competing with each others to become Vice-Chancellor. Another game could have the players collaborating together to make their university the most successful.

On our table we took the choice of a single university competitive game with the vice-chancellor “competing” with the academic staff, students and professional services.

Each player has a unique table with attributes that reflect their role’s objectives. We used blocks to RAG (red, amber green) rate each attribute. Then using some kind of process, players play cards against each other or themselves. These would then improve or deprecate their RAG ratings. These cards can be offset by dice rolls (and or money).The aim of the game is for the players to ensure all their attributes green.

It was an interesting exercise in thinking about the game idea and start to reflect on the mechanics about how this game would work. As with any game the mechanics and algorithms would reflect the bias of the game designer, so that would need to be taken into account.

For me the process of designing a game is probably more useful than playing the game itself for participants. I enjoyed this aspect of the session.

twitter, vle, youtube

“I don’t know how to use the VLE!”

January 21, 2018 James Clay Leave a comment

A model of VLE embedding and development

Despite many people talking about the death of the VLE over the years, the institutional VLE is still an important component of most colleges and universities offer in the online space. Whether this be supporting existing programmes of study, those offering a blended approach, or even for fully online programmes.

For most universities and colleges, growth in the use of the VLE is relatively organic, with little planning on either side. Training is often focused on the mechanistic and technical aspects of the VLE. Some training looks at the learning first, but without understanding the potential of the functionality or the affordances of the VLE, it can be challenging for practitioners to work out how to use the VLE to meet the needs of that learning activity.

The end result is an inconsistent approach to how practitioners use the VLE which can be confusing for learners who have multiple modules or courses delivered by different people. The other end result is that sometimes an inappropriate function of the VLE is used resulting in a challenging experience in learning something, with the challenge being using the technology, not understanding the learning.

One of the attractive aspects of any VLE is the range of functionality that it offers allowing practitioners (academics, teachers, lecturers) many different ways to engage with learners and create learning activities.

Continue reading “I don’t know how to use the VLE!” →

stuff

e-Learning Stuff: Top Ten Blog Posts 2017

January 1, 2018 James Clay Leave a comment

This year I have written 21 blog posts, in 2016 it was 43 blog posts, in 2015 I wrote 24 blog posts. In 2014 I wrote 11 and in 2013 I wrote 64 blog posts and over a hundred in 2012. In 2011 I thought 150 was a quiet year!

The tenth most popular blog post in 2017 was written for the 2015 ALT Winter Conference, my blog post on time and priorities, I don’t have a dog #altc This was a discussion piece and looks at the over used excuse for not doing something, which is not having the time to do it. The real reason though, more often then not, is that the person concerned does not see it as a priority.

In ninth place is a post from 2016, which was Mapping the learning and teaching. Mapping is an useful exercise to think about practice and though any such map may not be accurate or complete, it does allow you to consider and think about actions and training required to change behaviours or how spaces and tools are used. I took the concepts used in mapping visitor and residents behaviour and looked at how it could be used for teaching and learning. This post has been used for workshops in some universities and colleges.

Dropping down to number eight was Comic Life – iPad App of the Week Though I have been using Comic Life on the Mac for a few years now I realised I hadn’t written much about the iPad app that I had bought back when the iPad was released. It’s a great app for creating comics and works really well with the touch interface and iPad camera.

Back in June I wrote up the presentation I was going to deliver in Manchester for the CILIP Conference in July, and this post, The Intelligent Library #CILIPConf17 was in at number seven. What is the future of the library? This session at the CILIP Conference will explore the potential technologies and the possibilities that can arise from the developments in artificial intelligence and the internet of things. Can we build an intelligent library? Do we want to?

Back in 2015 I asked I can do that… What does “embrace technology” mean? in relation to the Area Review process and this post was the sixth most popular post in 2017.

Clmbing back two places to fifth was 100 ways to use a VLE – #89 Embedding a Comic Strip. This was a post from July 2011, that looked at the different comic tools out there on the web, which can be used to create comic strips that can then be embedded into the VLE. It included information on the many free online services such as Strip Creator and Toonlet out there. It is quite a long post and goes into some detail about the tools you can use and how comics can be used within the VLE.

Dropping two places to fourth, is Can I legally download a movie trailer? One of the many copyright articles that I posted some years back, this one was in 2008, I am still a little behind in much of what is happening within copyright and education, one of things I do need to update myself on, as things have changed.

In third place is a post from 2017, Show me the evidence… This post was inspired by a discussion on the ALT Members mailing list, in which one line asked:

…in particular to share these with academics when they ask for the evidence to show technology can make a difference.

In the post I questioned the motivations about staff when asking the question and if this was the actual problem why staff weren’t engaging with learning technologies. I am sure it is for some, but from my personal experience, often it isn’t!

Climbing back two places back to second, from 2013, was Frame Magic – iPhone App of the Week, still don’t know why this one is so popular!

Once again, for the fifth year running, the number one post for 2016 was the The iPad Pedagogy Wheel. 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.

So there we have it, the top ten posts of2017, of which just two were from 2017!

alt, conference

ALT Online Winter Conference #altc

November 14, 2017 James Clay Leave a comment

ALT’s Online Winter Conference, now in its fourth year, is back to showcase some of the best Learning Technology from ALT Members from across sectors.

The conference will take place online from 12 to 13 December 2017, giving ALT Members an opportunity to highlight the work they and their community have been involved with and to gain feedback from peers. This is a fantastic platform for you to hear about innovative ideas as new initiatives are shared in this creative environment.

To see the variety of topics covered in 2016, see last year’s programme.

For more information and to submit a proposal go here.

Deadline: 19 November 2017 for consideration.

To register complete this short form.

eLearning Stuff