Memorandum submitted by the London Knowledge
Lab of the Institute of Education, University of London
INTRODUCTION
1. This response has been prepared by the
staff of the London Knowledge Lab at the Institute of Education,
University of London.
2. The London Knowledge Lab is a unique
collaboration between two of the UK's most prominent centres of
world-class research—the Institute of Education and Birkbeck
College. The Lab brings together computer and social scientists
from a very broad range of fields—education, sociology,
culture and media, semiotics, data mining, information management,
personalisation and ubiquitous technologies.
3. The ways in which we learn, and what
we need to know, are changing. This affects all sectors of education,
and especially HE. Our research aims to explore and invent the
roles of technology in education, and to understand how technology
relates to broader social, economic and cultural factors. This
informs our responses to selected questions from the Committee,
as outlined here. We would be happy to follow up with further
argument and evidence if requested.
THE SELECT
COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
What do students want from universities?
4. In short, they need greater flexibility
of provision, and responsiveness to their needs and capabilities.
Students need to be able to develop the skills and knowledge that
will help them to navigate through a world in which they may have
multiple careers, and need to retrain, as the UK economic priorities
and job market change.
5. If the future size and shape of HE has
to cope with 50% participation, as well as lifelong learners,
then it will need to offer a more responsive curriculum, flexible
teaching methods, and a range of patterns of delivery. Making
the curriculum responsive to students' needs, need not make it
wholly market-driven, which would undermine the contribution of
HE, and decrease its value to students. Flexible teaching methods
would add a broader range for the academic and course designer
to choose from. Flexible delivery would meet the needs of the
wider range of student audiences for HIM.
6. The responsive curriculum means:
— acknowledging the increasing diversity
and interdisciplinarity of subject areas
— practitioner/workplace knowledge
built into academic study
— greater focus on high-level skills
as a learning outcome from HE
— recognition and use of the high-level
IT skills students have acquired
— foundational knowledge taught in
part through its workplace applications
— negotiating subject areas with student
and workplace audiences.
7. Flexible teaching means:
— a shift from the transmission model
of teaching towards more resource-based learning, interactive
methods and independent, and collaborative study
— use of learning technologies, with
a lower proportion of traditional methods
— less focus on degree/class, more
on profile, portfolio, potential and skills
— greater focus on individual guidance
and support.
8. Different patterns of delivery means:
— part-time and online opportunities
— interrupted study (to return to the
same point at a later stage)
— work-based learning, mixing part-time
work with campus-based part-time, and online learning.
9. If every individual is to achieve their
learning potential, then the HE system has to be more personalised:
it should be possible for every individual to study in the time,
place and method that suits their needs. Personalisation is difficult
in a "mass" education system, but would be feasible
and affordable with proper integration of digital technologies
(Laurillard, 2005b).
10. A responsive curriculum is impossible
in a mass system that organises learning according to the providers'
needs. Digital resources and online conferencing make it possible
to differentiate between students in a cohort with respect to
their learning needs and preferences. Learning is essentially
a social process, and students need to be part of a group, learning
collaboratively as well as individually, but they do not have
to learn the same thing in the same way, as they do in a lecture,
or with a book. We need greater emphasis on student managed learning
and personalisation, with academics offering support and guidance
through the process of learning, and inspiration and leadership
with respect to understanding complex subject-matter. Learning
technologies offer many different ways of making personalisation
affordable in the form of a more responsive curriculum and more
flexible teaching [see Annex].
11. Students need a much wider range of
learning opportunities from HE. Many 18-year-olds are uncertain
about what to study, or what kind of career to aim for, making
university course choice essentially a lottery. Universities have
become much more flexible in their offerings in recent years,
but for an even more diverse student population this still needs
further development. In comparison with what is currently on offer,
students who want a university education, but are uncertain about
what to study, need:
— a wider range of shorter courses
to try until they discover a focus
— a longer period over which to develop
a focus for HE study—much more than three years
— a mix of part-time, full-time, and
interrupted study over that period
— a mix of campus-based, home-based
and work-based study
— personal guidance on the opportunities
available.
12. Greater flexibility need not lead to
increasing student transfer between institutions, and if universities
take care to serve their alumni well, through flexible online
provision of post-graduate study, they will generate expansion
in student numbers through this means, as well as through initial
participation. Online communication and collaboration environments
bridge the boundaries between university study, home, and the
workplace.
13. The UK has the technology. Through the
JISC, universities have a world-class central support service
for digital infrastructure, learning environments and experimental
development. There has been sufficient investment in research,
pilot studies, and teaching innovation for the sector to know
what technology can do, and what it takes to do it. The UK is
widely seen as being in advance of other countries with respect
to its use of learning technologies.
14. The UK has the means. The Open University
provides UK HE with a world-class partner for universities wanting
to offer open learning alongside their campus-based offerings.
Its maturity and stability place it in a good position to form
alliances with campus universities to complement their offerings
with a much wider range of study options for learners.
15. The UK does not have the strategy. In
order to capitalise on these advantages, to build a system capable
of meeting the wide range of students' needs, the effective integration
of learning technologies has to become a clear and costed strategic
direction across the sector as a whole.
What should the Government, and society more broadly
want from HE?
16. This was determined carefully by the
Dearing Committee consultation in 1997, and does not obviously
need to be altered:
17. "The role of universities is to
enable society to make progress through an understanding of itself
and its world: in short to sustain a learning society"
18. To achieve this the report set out the
four main purposes of higher education as being "personal",
"intellectual", "economic" and "social":
— to inspire and enable individuals
to develop their capabilities to the highest potential levels
throughout life
— to increase knowledge and understanding
for their own sake and to foster their application to the benefit
of the economy and society
— to serve the needs of an adaptable,
sustainable, knowledge-based economy at local, regional and national
levels
— to play a major role in shaping a
democratic, civilised and inclusive society" (NCIHE, 1997).
19. In particular, there are new skills
and patterns of knowledge that employees increasingly need in
the workplace, where technology is ubiquitous (Kent, Bakker et
al., 2005). Because of this, technology can also be used to support
online learning and professional updating by simulating artefacts
commonly found (such as charts or graphs), and rebuilding them
so that the underlying models become visible, manipulable, and
therefore learnable (Noss, Bakker et al., submitted).
Should central funding be used as a lever to achieve
government policy aims?
20. To determine "what", yes,
but not "how" as that should be devolved to the sector.
Government should be responsible for determining the broad principles
and ambitious aims for HE. HEFCE and universities should be responsible
for planning how to achieve these aims. Government should provide
responsive funding for strategic central investment in the sector
proposed, with supporting evidence, by the sector for developments
that are more cost-effective when carried out on behalf of all
institutions, rather than separately. It provides regular updating
of physical and digital environments for research, but only the
former for teaching. Innovation in teaching has benefited from
the existence of the digital infrastructure for research, but
specific teaching and student-oriented provision and updating
is also needed. Examples are: a unified open source learning technology
infrastructure (for all education sectors to enable easier cross-sector
collaboration and learner transitions); digital information systems,
tools and environments offering personalised support for learners'
journeys through HE; a national reconfiguration of broadcast audiovisual
media integrated with online learning, building on the lessons
from the historic OU-BBC collaboration.
Is the current structure and funding affecting
growth of HE in FE and part-time study? How important are HE in
FE and flexible learning to the future of HE?
21. A flourishing HE-in-FE provision is
crucial for a truly flexible and responsive system, because it
is capable of being adaptive to student needs.
22. Flexible learning and innovation in
teaching, with a greater focus on personalisation, will help to
address the needs of the very diverse students now entering HE.
If students are not learning in the optimal way for them, their
time is wasted, and we waste millions of years of working time
in our undergraduates every year. The sector has done a lot to
make itself accountable for quality of provision, but this does
not equate to quality of learning achievement. Flexible learning,
with a greater focus on personalisation, is the key to this (for
examples see Annex).
23. The structure of funding for teaching
and research necessarily affects the ability of the HE sector
to innovate in teaching—all discretionary time is devoted
to research because it carries financial reward. It is as important
to innovate in teaching as in research. New technology can build
stronger links between teaching and research, with research outputs
available online and accessible for student use. It would be valuable
to have stronger incentives for teaching innovation, eg new criteria
in research awards relating to how they might feed into teaching
programmes, forms of online dissemination of research addressed
to student communities, etc.
Can, and should, the Government be attempting
to shape the structure of the sector?
24. No, it should model the size, and establish
the funding principle to achieve its realisable ambitions for
affordable expansion.
Is the Government's role one of planning and steering,
or allowing the market to operate?
25. Neither—it is to provide the vision,
strategic aims, and principles of funding.
Should there be areas of government planning within
HE—eg for strategic subjects?
26. Yes, because, for example, we have a
serious shortage of mathematicians, engineers and scientists coming
through the system. But intervention has to be strategic and systemic.
It would not be sufficient to reduce fees for these courses in
order to attract students. No doubt it would, to a degree, but
this would not address the fundamental reasons why there is a
loss of interest in these subjects. In general, they are badly
taught at school-level, and also in much university provision,
and the problem is cumulative, as fewer well-qualified teachers
come through. In general, to foster strategic subjects, the Government
should take a systemic approach, examining all the drivers of
student choice and achievement (interest, enjoyment, teaching
quality, quality of learning experience, cost, career prospects,
etc), and focus intervention on all of them.
27. Technology is changing both what we
need to know, and how we come to know it. As the workplace diversifies,
graduates working in the knowledge economy need to keep renewing
and developing their high-level skills, eg for information-handling,
independent learning, critical thinking, reflective innovation,
project management, resource modelling, knowledge management,
communication, networking, interpersonal negotiation, design,
creativity, time management, and enterprise, and they need the
ICT skills to support all these. Foundational knowledge is important,
but will need to be continually updated. The curriculum in HE
therefore has to differentiate between building foundational knowledge,
and using this knowledge-building process as the vehicle for the
acquisition of all these high-level skills. This refocus does
not require government intervention except to foster debate across
the sector. The mismatch between the predominant HE focus on discipline
knowledge, and the workplace requirement for high-level knowledge
skills, helps to fuel the absence of HE from workforce development
(Connor, 2005).
Is there a clear goal for the future shape of
the sector? Should there be one?
28. No, because the future environment is
too uncertain. Better to focus on building the capability of the
sector to learn, and to adapt to its environment. It does this
very well in the research field, but much less well in teaching.
This response is an attempt to offer an analysis of why, and what
might be done.
CRITICAL DEPENDENCIES
29. Academics need to develop a differentiated
range of pedagogies appropriate for different types of learning
outcome and academic level. A better understanding of the differential
benefits and costs of traditional and new technology teaching
methods would improve the effectiveness of investment in teaching
innovation (Laurillard, 2006a).
30. Academics also need far greater support
than they have ever been offered for making the shift towards
greater use of e-learning methods and personalised learner support,
using the best of traditional methods and digital technologies
to provide an optimal mix of learning activities and support (Laurillard,
2005a). This could be accelerated through the JISC programme of
e-learning research.
31. Academics need to exhibit in teaching
all the characteristics they do in research (training, collaborating,
sharing, with a robust R&D methodology), if innovation in
teaching is to make the progress needed. Given the effect of the
RAE on teaching innovation, we need more imaginative reward systems,
modelled on those that work well for research, to motivate the
professionalisation of teaching.
32. Alternative approaches to the use of
teaching resources, making better use of learning technologies,
would include both pedagogic and financial benefits that would
service the demands on HE outlined above. However, these would
only be realisable if certain conditions were in place: clear
strategic management, good project management, sufficient investment,
good change management practice, a supportive and engaged academic
community, inter-institutional collaboration, and the changes
supported by a robust R&D methodology for teaching. None of
these are very easy to achieve. They need a well thought-through
national strategy as a framework for institutions to address all
these issues. Senior managers need support from the Funding Councils
if they are to manage the scale of these reforms effectively,
and collaboratively. Universities' learning and teaching strategies
could be expanded to include a focus on managing the transition
to e-learning, resource management, and collaboration (Laurillard,
2002).
33. Any strategic framework developed must
emphasise the need for a participatory way forward that engages
all parties in the process of change, particularly those who teach
and those who learn. Change must come from within the sector,
directed by those who understand it, not by relying on external
consultants who do not understand the business of HE. (Laurillard,
2001). A strategic framework should recognise the skill base that
we have within our universities and use its strengths as well
as trying to develop its practices. Many institutional practices
are still very traditional, and although they are changing, progress
is not fast. Providing digital tools and environments that lower
the barriers for lecturers wishing to innovate will accelerate
change, led by academics themselves, and ensure that all staff
are able to make a valuable contribution as HE rethinks itself
for the future (Laurillard, 2006b).
RECOMMENDATIONS
34. The outline above suggests some possible
ways of reconfiguring HE to achieve improved quality and flexibility,
expansion at reasonable cost, and better management of resources.
|
| Issue | Recommendations
| Levers |
|
| Productivity | Invest to improve quality of output in terms of flexibility: HE should offer a wider range of study mix options to students: ft/pt, on/off campus, residential, interrupted study, work-based study, home-based study, etc. This would provide greater assurance that students make optimal choices of course and improve learning outcomes.Invest to increase numbers at lower unit cost : use e-learning to improve scale at reasonable cost by investing in collaboration across institutions—use LKL expertise to advise on creating an "innovation support unit", which can engage with selected university departments to develop their e-learning business, and build sector knowledge of new pedagogies, new design and production methods, new markets, new patterns of delivery and student support, IPR mechanisms, etc.
| HEFCE funding targeted on learners' needs rather than institutions' needs.Funding flows promote, rather than undermine institutional collaboration.
|
| Academic professionalism | Professionalise teaching: match the support and reward mechanisms in research to motivate staff to become as professional in teaching as they are in research (covering coaching, accreditation, and opportunity to innovate, collaborate, disseminate, and achieve recognition).
| HEFCE strategy |
| Responsiveness | Invite industry to form partnership contracts: with learners and courses, contributing funding for limited period contracts for work-based learning, using e-learning to offer negotiated curriculum—shifting industrial training expenditure towards HE, where appropriate.
| HEFCE-Industry project to identify appropriate mechanisms for industry contribution
|
| Inclusion | Promote online access to university study at school level, and in the workplace: online collaboration across HE, FE and schools would foster the pull-through to post-16 education by engaging learners from all areas, and offering "taster" courses using e-learning to excite their interest.
| Matched funding via funding councils and LAs
|
|
|
