Gudrun Geirs Rognvaldur Olafs

Gudrun Geirs Rognvaldur Olafs

• 1.
  What have welearnt and where are we heading ? Guðrún Geirsdóttir and Rögnvaldur Ólafsson University of Iceland
• 2.
  DE Initiatives atthe University of Iceland 1997 – rector’s interest in developing DE building on earlier ideas at the University ROL appointed part time to enhance DE at the University Síminn (Icelandic Telephone Company) interested to try out new technology in videoconferencing (terminal and connection) Ministry of Education interested and supported implementation of IT at all educational levels Ministry IT grant used to establish a Centre for Teaching and Learning at HÍ (Kennslumiðstöð)
• 3.
  First attempts Voluntaryparticipation of teachers with different interests Technically interested Ideologically interested – to reach more students – part of equality of access Interested in pedagogy Strengthening the discipline No coherent strategy in providing DE All attempts received with great enthusiasm and thankfulness by students
• 4.
  The Local EducationCentres The Local Education Centres (Símenntunarmiðstöðvar) established around Iceland effort of local people to ensure access to different levels of education Important (yet sometimes difficult) partners Provide access to courses Socially supportive of learners The ‘voice’ and lobbyists of the students Partnership with the University, i.e. hold exams and suggest DE courses
• 5.
  Local Education Centres
• 6.
  Technology – whattools to use? Videoconferencing Available technology Most aligned to teachers way of teaching Learning management systems Web CT Itslearning Uglan - The HÍ localnet Large number of teachers find Ugla self-sufficient but still a number of interested teachers trying out different methods Developing different approaches (Blackboard and Moodle).
• 7.
  Very limited numberof DE courses Number of courses offered 2007-2008
• 8.
  But some accomplishments Built strong national network with The Local Education Centres Símenntunarmiðstöðvar Participated in technological development DE network of national universities Participation in different DE networks
• 9.
  A ‘typical’ distanceeducation course Recording of lectures/session available for students on Ugla Emisson Videoconferences Access to course material through Ugla Discussion groups and students co-operation on Ugla Face to face meetings 2 – 3 x a semester Informal student support and social environment at Símenntunarmiðstöðvar
• 10.
  Barriers – institutionallevel Broad lines of study and many small departments make the organisation of DE difficult Strong culture of academic freedom and strong resistance to top down management Curriculum management is seen the responsibility of disciplines and department Lack of financial resources Teaching not a high status priority within the University – strongly focusing on research Little understanding and even less belief in the credibility of distance education I teach like I was taught (teacher previous experience) Isolation or independence from outside stakeholders
• 11.
  Barriers – departmentallevel Lack of dialogue and consensus on the responsibility of departments and the future development of disciplines The responsibility of teaching is in the hands of individual teachers rather than departments Lack of teaching policy within departments i.e. the provision of individual courses does not work for DE students No institutional pressure nor policy Isolation from possible stakeholders
• 12.
  Barriers - teacherlevel Teachers’ unwillingness to participate Teacher believe (rightly) that DE demands more work in curriculum design and new ways of working Lack of IT skills and lack of pedagogical ideas Pedagogical culture – creating a learning environment is not the responsibility of teachers Lack of support and recognition of those who have been trying, i.e. pioneers burn-out
• 13.
  The biggest barriers?No ideological consensus or policy on the role of the University in DE No institutional wide discussion on the rational of DE Previous man to man method of implementation does not work institutional wide Distance education has never been implemented into a whole system-wide policy
• 14.
  What is needed?DE has to be implemented as a university policy requires discussion between activity systems Different activity systems have to find a way to communicate and coordinate their efforts such as governance (policy making and finance), different schools (departments), The Computing Centre, and support systems Leadership and forum?