E-Learning Research Observatory
Call 2: E-learning 2007
Full proposal form
Contact detailsName: / Kyriaki Anagnostopoulou
Job title: / Head of e-Learning
Institution: / MiddlesexUniversity
Address: / NorthLondonBusinessPark
Oakleigh Road South
London, N11 1QS
Email address: /
Telephone number: / 020 8411 5148
Partner details (if applicable)
Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary
Name: / Will be working with Middlesex partners which deliver franchised programmes. Precise partnerswill depend on modules chosen for further study (see detailed work plan).
Institution:
Name:
Institution:
Project information
Title: / Making Connections: using e-learning data to improve retention rates in higher education
Theme(s): /
- Student diversity within an HE institutional context and its impact on the demand for learning solutions. Recognising the changing characteristics of students entering HE.
Grant requested: / £34,200
Project description
Please provide a brief description of the work to be conducted, following the sub-headings listed.
Please note:-
- It is important that applicants refer wherever possible to the “Types of activities to be funded” section of the Call for Proposals.
- The key assessment criterion to be used by the analysts of the proposal will be the extent to which the application promotes a project that will have a significant impact on the HE sector in the UK
- Embedding e-Learning into current teaching and learning practices, developing new forms of e-Learning, disseminating good practice and placing the research into the broader e-Learning debate will also be important elements for the assessors to consider.
- Full proposals that exceed the word maximums may have marks reduced.
Student retention was highlighted as a significant issue in a number of government papers including the Dearing Report (NCIHE, 1997), Higher Education in the Learning Society, and the White Paper titled The Future or Higher Education (DFES, 2003),however, ‘education, not retention, should be the goal of institutional programmes’ (Tinto, 1993). The need to ‘bear down on student retention’ (DFES, 2003) is coupled with the widening participation agenda to encourage greater access particularly to under represented groups, aspiring to have reached 50% of 18-30 year olds in HE by the end of the decade (HEFCE, 2001); this adds to the equation of delivering a quality learning experiences to an increasingly diverse student body. The need to address retention issues within the UK HE sector, and at an institutional level, will clearly have benefits for both institutions (reputation, fee income, government grant income, etc) and students (student-centred support, qualifications, future prospects, etc) but the primary factors leading this proposal is the need to enhance the student learning experience.
Institutional research at Middlesex (ISLER Project), has shown that students withdraw for a complex combination of reasons, which are often masked by the HESA data under the categories of ‘other’ and ‘unknown’. The ISLER research discovered that these categories are masking factors related to the student learning experience(student/staff interaction, cohort identity, use of formative assessments, timely feedback, etc) Literature also suggests that learning and teaching methods have considerable impact on the retention of learners (Mortiboys, 2002; Yorke, 2003; Parmar and Trotter, 2004) and it is precisely on these which this proposal wishes to focus.
Literature contains many examples of work investigating the use of ICT to improve retention and progression rates in distance education, however, very little has been done in leveraging learning technologies to identify and support campus-based, blended-learning students who are considered at risk of leaving HE before completion.
Aims
The purpose of this research is to assist HE institutions in improving the learning experience of first year students, particularly focussing on those at risk of withdrawing from their courses. This proposal attempts to add value to recent investments into e-learning by exploiting the tracking data captured by VLEs in order to identify and describe how ‘at-risk’ students manifest themselves online, and to pinpoint appropriate timescales for interventions which may help improve retention.Simpson (2003) claims that both distance education and traditional institutions have started using customised ‘predicted probability of success’ indicators based on student profiles and life history data. However, we have identified an absence of research referring to behavioural patterns and identities.Research Questions
- How does the identity of students at risk of withdrawing from higher education manifest itself online?
- Is there an associated behaviour of ‘at risk’ students specific to the online learning environment?
- What are the characteristics of ‘at risk’ students and how do they differ from students who are not at risk?
- Does the online behaviourdiffer depending on students’ access route to HE (direct, UCAS, partner institutions)?
This proposal wishes to take forward Simpson’s (2003) idea of ‘proactive critical markers’ based on behavioural patterns of students interacting online in order to identify whether students at risk from withdrawing from HE manifest themselves online in a unique manner.
Equally, this project proposes to build on earlier research studies (Woodman, 1999 cited in Simpson, 2003, p. 16) which have established a profile of ‘at risk’ students based on factors such as demographics, previous qualifications, employment, etc.
Literature points to examples of work carried out in the area of supporting students in online distance education courses which suffer from high attrition rates. These include empirical studies attempting to identify a correlation between student satisfaction, performance and retention in relation to demographic characteristics (Wang and Newlin, 2000), traits such as learning style, sensory preference, etc (Ehrman, 1990), educational backgrounds and previous experience of online distance education courses (Osborn, 2001), self-efficacy and motivation (Wang and Newlin, 2002) and social presence which is defined as the degree to which someone is perceived as ‘real’ in an online environment (Gunawardena and Zittle, 1997). Some of these studies were unable to produce reliable predictors (Wang and Newlin, 2000), some where able to make correlations but only in context-specific situations but had not cross-situational consistency (Ehrman, 1990) whilst others concluded strong links between their areas of research (Gunawardena and Zittle, 1997; Osborn, 2001; Wang and Newlin, 2002). However, very little has been done to identify and support campus-based, blended-learning students who are considered at risk of leaving HE before completion.
Carrying out this research proposal will rely on the built in tracking tools of Virtual Learning Environments. Beaudoin (2002), however, cautions against solely relying on this type tracking facility by noting that many students who fail to actively participate in a face-to-face or online class still achieve the intended learning outcomes and do academically well despite their apparent lack of interaction. ‘Lurking’, defined as logging in, observing but not contributing to discussions, although not a highly visible form of learning, is a legitimate method of learning. Pappas, Lederman and Broadbent (2001) state that tutors need to rethink the way they monitor student performance due to the lack of visual and aural feedback in an online environment. However, in their study ‘lurking’ is not recognised as a preferred method of learning in any of the three cases they report on. The limitation of tracking tools is also highlighted by Hewling (2004) who examined their effectiveness these tools with regards to students who lurk as well as those with limited access to the internet, who prefer to log in once, download materials and engage with them offline, even though they are formally enrolled on an online course. Consideration of this point is important for the validity and reliability of the study. As no position or method will provide and undisputable clear view of the empirical field (Brown and Dowling, 1998) methodological triangulation has been sought and is described in the appropriate section of the original Expression of Interest.
Detailed work plan. Please use any work phases identified in this work-plan in your response to the section on detailed budget (maximum 500 words).
Recruit P/T researcher / August 2007
Establish Project Team
Co-ordinated by the Head of e-Learning, as Project Manager, this will include appropriate representationfrom the partner institution. Project Sponsor will be Prof. Barry Jackson, PVC and Director for Learning and Teaching. / Sept 2007
Create detailed project plan (to include regular meetings of the Project Team)
Website
Set up project website for ongoing dissemination and detailed documentation of the project, processes and procedures. Frequency of updating to be agreed. / Sept 2007
Extensive literature review
This project is set in the context of existing work, and is informed by literature in 3 research domains:
- retention and progression
- e-learning
- social behaviour and identity
Sampling of modules to be studied
The data pool for the project will be identified from an analysis of retention data from Middlesex from 2006/7 in order to select a sample of the modules for further analysis. The research will identify the target modules in relation to varying levels of e-learning use and will span across the disciplines and consider students that enter HE directly, through UCAS and via partner institutions. / Sept-Oct 2007
Observations - online interactions
Particular attention will be paid to students who have withdrawn from the University. This will involve observation of the life of online communities through the artefacts it created and contributed within a set period of time; both quantitative (ie, number of discussion postings) and qualitative data (ie, nature of posting and language used) will be collected and analysed. / Oct-Dec 2007
Analysis of tracking data
Particular attention will be paid to the online identities and behaviour exhibited by students who withdrew from their studies prior to completion; these will then be contrasted with identities and behaviours exhibited by students which have progressed successfully. The analysis will look both at identifying patterns between the above groupings of students and also the level and nature of differentiation in their online activity. / January 2008
Interviews
This research proposes to build upon Sharpe et al (2005) work by illuminating the students’ voice in the evaluation and experience of blended learning and therefore proposes that additional data is collected through interviews of students who have withdrawn from the target modules as well as a sample of those who have successfully completed the year. / February 2008
Analysis of interview data / March 2008
Authoring of toolkit
This is to include the authoring of appropriate guidance notes on how it can be used, implemented, etc / April – May 2008
Pilot phase
Use and testing of toolkit within Middlesex / June –July 2008
Revision of toolkit
Design and print toolkit
One copy to be sent to each HEI, CETL and Subject Centre / August 2008
Conference and launch
Organise and host a one-day conference at which the toolkit will be launched. The conference date will be in Sept 2008, however the planning phase will extend over a period of many months / April-Sept 2008
Publications, conference presentations
To take place at appropriate times throughout the life of the project. / Dependant on external factors
Deliverables and outcomes (maximum 500 words)
It is useful to consider outcomes and deliverables in terms of their impact over time (GlenaffricLtd, 2006).
The eight identified deliverable and outcomes are categorised based on their potential impact. The immediate outcomes of this project focus on learning, the intermediate/medium term outcomes focus on action and the longer term/final outcomes will focus on operationalising the outcomes.
Immediate Outcomes / Intermediate Outcomes / Final Outcomes
Short term / Medium term / Longer term
Focus / Learning / Action / Conditions
Results /
- Raising awareness of how ‘at risk’ students manifest themselves online
- Building knowledge on the type of data that needs to be collected to further inform practice
- Reporting on lessons learnt and offering practical advice for the sector.
- Producing a toolkit (checklist + guidelines) focusing on online behaviours which can be used to flag up potential ‘at risk’ students as early as possible
- Reporting on the use of the toolkit within Middlesex, its applicability to other contexts, etc along with practical advice for the sector.
- Incorporating the toolkit appropriately into academic workloads within the researching institution; the toolkit produced will influence academic practice and also feed into institutional policy; it will complement MiddlesexUniversity’s ‘Week 4 Reality Check/Programme Review’ process which all academics are required to carry out
- Making toolkit available to other HEIs along with guidelines on its use and further customisation as required. The toolkit will be posted to named contacts in each HEI and copies will also be made available to each HEA Subject Centres and Centre of Excellence (CETL)
- The toolkit will be launched at a one day conference hosted by MiddlesexUniversity which will aim to bring together research from across the UK related to the topics of e-learning and retention.
Project impact and dissemination
Please detail the anticipated impact of the project (research, policy, practice), dissemination activities and potential for future funding. Please also include reference to the intended target group where appropriate.
(Maximum 500 words. Please continue on a separate sheet if necessary)
Research
The proposed research project aims to build capacity with regard to retention in relation to e-learning, where a gap in the research field has been identified and detailed above.
Policy
The government’s widening participation to higher education agenda may not be of benefit to everyone. Recent research (Bynner, 2003 cited in Simpson, 2006)illustrates how the physical, mental and financial well-being of individuals dropping out of HE is at jeopardy “yet the policy of access and widening participation often ignores and silences the deeper level of student subjectivity and positionality” (Burke, 2004). Irrespective of the nature of the cause and effect relationships oftheseresearch outcomes one needs to wonder if ‘at-risk’ students are identifiable then what is the moral responsibility of the University as a professional institution which serves society? Also, what is the responsibility of the individual academic staff memberwho is facilitating their learning?
Practice
This research project is intended to be of a practical nature and the evaluation will feed back into the institution, to the benefit of the student learning experience, whilst having applicability to the sector; guidelines and reports will aim to and assist the institutions in identifying ‘at-risk’ students from their online behaviours. The outcomes will be of interest to academic staff and managers, FE and other partners as well as to the wider HE community which is concerned with retention and progression rates and is currently engaged in blended learning.
This project will have:
- Immediate impact in terms of institutional learning and awareness raising internally and externally.
- medium term practical impact where the tool produce will influence academic practice leading to more ‘at-risk’ students succeeding in their studies and also feed into institutional policy
- longer term impact by operationalising the anticipated outcomes and making them available to the sector.
- Ongoing dissemination through a dedicated website
(information sharing, further conceptual understanding) - HEA and ALT conference presentations (information sharing),
- Publication of paper(s) (information sharing),
- The operationalisation of the outcomes aims to inform policy and practice within Middlesex
- toolkit sent to all HEIs, HEA Subject Centres and CETLs whose work relates to these issues will also receive copies of the toolkit (ie CETL in Blended Learning at Herfordshire, CETL in the Student Experience at Wolverhampton, etc) (dissemination for change, informing HE practice)
- A one-day conference bringing together expertise in e-learning and retention research and launching the toolkit. This will be led by the Director for Learning and Teaching. (dissemination for change, informing HE practice).
The future research potential of this project lies in investigating sector-wide, national retention trends in relation to e-learning behaviour. An individual may choose to withdraw from a programme offered at one HEI in order to study a more suitable programme at another HEI; although this individual may appear to have withdrawn from an institution, they have not withdrawn from academic studies in the HE sector. A longitudinal study would significantly further understanding of retention at a macro level.
Projected costs
Please list the main costs of the project and refer them if possible to phases in the work-plan
The total funding requested from the HEA is £34,200. An additional £9000 will be made available by MiddlesexUniversity as described below. Match funding also includes staff time of the Director of Learning and Teaching (PVC), Head of e-Learning, CLQE Researcher, one academic member of staff (to be identified for the pilot phase) and one VLE project officer (from the CLQE e-learning team). CVs of the 3 main team members are attached. The break down of what is to be funded and by whom is available below.
Tasks / Details / Funding Body / Funding required
Recruitment of P/T Project Researcher (0.5 P/T graded at RB1) /
- Recruitment, salary costs approx £29,700
- Lease of IT equipment for 1 year £500 – (internally funded)
Establish a Project Team / Head of e-Learning (internally funded) / MDX funded
Create detailed project plan / Head of e-Learning (internally funded)
Website / To be set up and maintained by VLE Project Officer (internally funded)
Carry out an extensive literature review/desk study / Project Researcher and CLQE Researcher / HEA & MDX funded
Sampling and identification of modules to be studied / Project researcher
Observations of online interactions and phenomena / Project researcher
Analysis of tracking data / Project researcher
Interviews / Professional transcription costs / HEA funded / £1000
Analysis of interview data / Project researcher and CLQE Researcher / HEA & MDX funded
Authoring of toolkit / Director of Learning and Teaching(internally funded), Head of e-Learning (internally funded), CLQE Researcher (internally funded) and project researcher (HEA funded) / MDX & HEA funded
Pilot phase / MDX academic (internally funded) and project researcher evaluation
Revise toolkit as appropriate / Head of e-Learning (internally funded), MDX Researcher (internally funded) and project researcher
Design, layout and print toolkit /
- Designer (internally funded)
- Printing costs - approx £2000
Conference and launch of toolkit / Up to £9000
The event will be lead by the Director of Learning and Teaching. / MDX funded
Reports, publications and conference presentations / Head of e-Learning (internally funded), MDX Researcher (internally funded) and project researcher
- Conference attendance - £1500 (HEA)
- Travel, accommodation & subsistence - £1000 (MDX)
References: