a) An understanding of the constraints and benefits of different technologies
Description
One of the projects I have been involved in over the past few years has been the Open Course in Technology Enhanced Learning, ocTEL http://octel.alt.ac.uk/ . The course was first developed in 2012/13 and first ran over a period of 11 weeks in early summer 2013. While the project was managed by David Jennings as project manager and delivered in collaboration with a large team of members of ALT, I had overall responsibility for its delivery.
While I will return to other aspects of my work on this course in other parts of this portfolio the focus here is on the choice of technologies used to deliver the course and my role in that process. From the outset of the project there were a number of broad requirements that I had a role in establishing:
- financial constraints: set up by budget which I drew up initially for the project bid;
- accessibility and inclusion: need to ensure that the barriers to participating in the course were as low as possible, i.e. using technologies that support accessibility, but also which required only a minimum digital literacy to begin with;
- openness: I had a role in writing the Terms of Participation and overseeing the licencing of the course.
In addition we also had to manage the risk of running ALT’s first ever open online course and with no previous experiences to build on. Being able to scale up any technology we used was a major factor. One of my key tasks for the project was to work with the Project Manager to assess and manage the risks, not just for the project, but also for ALT as the lead organisation, as well as with the funder, the Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.
Reflection
The main technologies that we chose for delivery of the course were WordPress (for the main course platform) and a number of Plug-ins; CiviCRM (ALT’s existing CRM solution) for sign-up; TAGSExplorer for Twitter visualization and a course reader developed by Martin Hawksey – who led on much of the technical development and implementation of the course platform. We used Blackboard Collaborate for delivering weekly webinars and Google Apps, including hangouts, for project management and collaboration. All of these choices reflected the requirement to be scalable and robust.
One of the key things I thought about a lot with colleagues was what openness meant in the context of this course development. We wanted to use Open Source software/platforms wherever possible and the course was free to participants. However it was also important to make the greatest possible use of existing Open Education Resources (OERs) for creating the course materials and ensuring transparency for participants in relation to what data would be collected – providing easy ways to opt-out – and to state from the beginning that data collected would in turn be shared openly after the conclusion of the course.
Facilitated by the work led by Martin Hawksey on the course reader, bringing together course content tagged #ocTEL from across the web, participants were able to use tools/platforms of their choosing and still contribute to the course.
In my role I worked to ensure that we put ALT’s values of being open, transparent, participative and innovative into practice – working in collaboration with members who contributed a huge amount of time and expertise to make the course happen. We received over 1000 registrations and while there was a steep learning curve in the first week or two, the course ran successfully – meeting the aims originally set out for the project on budget and according to the plan we had set out (http://octel.alt.ac.uk/blog/2013/08/09/living-and-learning-in-the-open/).
Overall, the technology we chose worked well in that it coped with the number of participants, it had positive feedback from participants and it became a model platform for subsequent development. In particular the range of technology used had a positive impact on engagement in that it enabled users with a range of digital/technical skills to engage in different ways, from more passive auditing to more active contributing.
Things that I learnt along the way included that hundreds of activities per day generated too much email (filters and folders were set up very quickly), supporting participants from different time zones was extremely hard work for the first few weeks and supporting volunteer tutors who coped with unexpected levels of interest was equally important. It was interesting to compare how for example the course mailing list was used (in contrast with for example other mailing lists such as the ALT Members discussion list). Some participants had either followed guidance on how to manage their subscription or had previous experience while others expressed a feeling of being overwhelmed. Many of the lessons we learnt we put into practice the following year, when we ran an updated version of the course again without external funding.
Evidence
- Being part of the ocTEL team (project blog post, 29 October 2014)
- Living and learning in the open (project blog post, 9 August 2014)
- Feedback and evaluation (project blog post, 18 September 2014)
- ocTEL Final Report (which I co-authored), July 2013
Screenshot http://octel.alt.ac.uk/2013/course-materials/
b) Technical knowledge and ability in the use of learning technology
Description and evidence
Below I have listed the types of Learning Technology of which I have experience that seem most relevant in this context: most of them I currently use. Next to each I have provided an indication of my skill level and knowledge and where appropriate provided links to sites I have worked on.
| Type | Skill level | Activities carried out | Link to examples |
| Drupal | Content Editor, Administrator | Page authoring, content editing, basic site and user management, views, account and permissions administration | http://www.alt.ac.uk |
| CiviCRM | Administrator | System set-up and configuration, module configuration, interface design, form and user view design, management generally | https://www.alt.ac.uk/civicrm/contribute/transact?reset=1&id=6 |
| HTML | Basic | Writing basic HTML pages | https://www.alt.ac.uk/about-alt/what-we-do |
| Google Apps | Administrator | Site set-up, configuration, design, domain-mapping, architecture, Google Apps Calendar, Docs, GMail, Drive, Sites, Google+ … | ALT owns its own Google Apps domain which I set up |
| Blogger | Administrator | Blog set-up, configuration, design, domain-mapping, architecture, page set-up, gadgets and content posting | http://cemeteryscapes.blogspot.com/ |
| WordPress | Administrator | Blog configuration, design, domain-mapping, architecture, page set-up, gadgets and content posting | http://feltag.org.uk/ |
| Moodle | Administrator | Module creation, configuration, design, content upload, training, assessment processes, forums, archiving, template creation. | I no longer have access to the Moodle platform I worked on |
| Blackboard Collaborate | Administrator | System administration, session management, session set-up, recording, running sessions | http://repository.alt.ac.uk/view/divisions/ldcomp/2012.html |
| Adobe Connect | Presenter | Session set-up and running | ALT Conference recordings prior to 2013 |
| Instant Presenter | Presenter | Session set-up and running | No |
| Prezi | User | Design and presentation | https://prezi.com/-d8xgjn2ot9y/association-for-learning-technology/ |
| Powerpoint | Advanced | Design, animation, presentation | Presentation https://marendeepwell.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/future_salford_md_2015.pdf |
| EPrints | Administrator | Site set-up, basic EPrints configuration, user management, repository management, content creation | http://repository.alt.ac.uk/ |
| Twitter and various Twitter clients | Admin/user | Managing accounts, writing and scheduling tweets, I tweet for projects/my organisation/myself | For myself @marendeepwell
https://twitter.com/marendeepwell For my organisation @A_L_T |
| Open Conference/Journal system (OCS, OJS) | Administrator | Set up, administration, management of journal/conference submission and review processes | http://www.researchinlearningtechnology.net/index.php/rlt |
Reflection
While I like using technologies and pride myself on being able to pick up new things quickly, the most important aspect of my work with technology is to understand how whomever I work with or supporting is going to relate to it. I am rarely the end user or even the person supporting the end user, so my task is usually that of trying to understand first what end users want to achieve and then how those who support/administrate the technology should support the end user. Thus writing procedures or guides to using a technology or a new workflow is more important than my own ability in usage.
One example of this is a recent piece of work I did with a colleague, setting up a new conference booking form. This involved: 1. doing it myself (and at times in collaboration), 2. documenting the build process for the person managing it and 3. writing a guide to supporting the end-user together and 4. contribute to a form for the end user in case they couldn’t use the online form.
The process of collaborating on building a new process to me is both useful and difficult. On the one hand you share a learning process by trying out a new use case with someone (using screen sharing for example) and getting their input. On the other hand it can be difficult to collaborate when you are not sure how to do something or whether your approach will work. Sometimes a half hour experiment turns into a dead end, a lesson in what not to do. In other instances sharing the process, describing and documenting it while you are doing it can be time consuming. It also takes confidence to work efficiently in such a context. Most people with whom I have worked prefer to figure things out for themselves before sharing how it is done. In my case, I have found that this kind of collaboration gives me a better result, often with a process that is easier to understand for others as it is a workflow or procedure that has been arrived at by two different perspectives. It also offers more opportunities to discuss or assess related issues or dependables, i.e. if we do ‘x’ in this system, how are users going to do ‘y’ in another system and so forth.
As I use a lot of open course technology, the challenge of knowing how it works and keeping up to date rarely stops. With frequent updates it has become more important for me to know where to find answers to technical questions rather than to know the answer. There is no “IT Department” in ALT and while there is a lot of knowledge in the membership and the staff team, the best place to look for practical solutions is usually a forum or mailing list. Part of the staff development for relevant members of my team is to be introduced to these and start connecting with these resources in their own right. One of the most serious issues I have encountered is too much expertise/knowledge residing with one individual. In an organisation this small that is a difficult risk to manage. Documentation is a key part of managing this risk as is working in collaboration to share/pass on skills. This is another reason why knowing where to look for answers is so important. I aim to develop critical digital literacy in myself and others as part of how we use technology, always asking not how to follow a particular process, but conveying its overall aim and purpose. If you know what outcome you are trying to achieve you can usually find a way to do it. A workflow on the other hand that doesn’t set out an aim, but just a process to follow, is much less useful to me.
Alongside this we also aim never to use customised code where other options would serve. This is to help us to keep our tools as strongly supported as possible and be able to upgrade quickly when needed. Where we do develop our own content we generally release it back into the open community to contribute to the code base/development of the relevant platform/software. While I don’t personally do a lot of development I do ensure that we keep to this principle.
c) Supporting the deployment of learning technologies
Description
Up to 2014 I was responsible for the induction and training of all staff in the use of ALT’s membership and events management system on the main ALT website https://www.alt.ac.uk/, which is implemented in CiviCRM. Launched in 2011, I managed its original design and led on its implementation reporting to the organisation’s former Chief Executive. This system generates the majority of the organisation’s revenue via membership and events. While it supports the work of our members, it constitutes the core of internal processes and workflows, facilitating service delivery, administration, finance and communication.
My task was originally to devise and organise an induction and training plan, produce the necessary documentation and then incorporate these materials into the existing online Operations Handbook. I also had to determine who needed training in what area, plan and schedule training sessions and provide support to all staff as they were confronted with the challenge of preparing for the system to go live and the start of it being used. It is worth noting that during this period staff also left and joined the team, which brought with it the additional requirement of providing continuity and confidence to a rapidly changing group of people who have to work together.
What I did:
- in the original development phase, providing weekly updates to all staff via e-mail to keep them informed of progress;
- in the run up to launching the system, carrying out individual induction sessions with each member of the team, taking into account their level of IT skills and previous experience;
- planning, organising and leading hands-on group training sessions in CiviCRM basics to allow the team to learn and work together;
- using the online Operations Handbook, a Google Site at first, now a shared Google Drive folder, as the central repository for all documentation, which provided continuity and also allowed staff access from anywhere;
- encouraging staff to contribute to the Operations Handbook, posting questions adding their own tips or listing processes which still had to be documented;
- working together to identify problems and issues with the new system, which I fed back to the developer, updating staff on progress;
- discussing how the new system would change our way of working and trying to prepare in a practical manner, taking into account that most members of the team had only recently joined.
Reflection
In the context of my role, my ‘learners’ are my staff team, usually 4-6 individuals with different administrative or managerial roles. In the first two years 2011/12 the key issues I encountered were problems with transferring data and workflows previously in an existing Access database. In use for over 10 years the database had grown organically and the data contained in it was variably consistent at best. In addition some workflows were partially documented while others were not documented, making it necessary to establish new processes from scratch in most cases. My challenge was to give staff confidence in and ownership of the new system, while at the same time ensuring the key operations continued to be carried out to generate revenue. While overall my efforts were successful there were a number of areas where so much intervention was needed to enable a process to happen that it took considerably longer than planned before the relevant member of staff was able to use the new system effectively.
In the following two years 2013/14 I changed my role and my overall responsibilities changed to focus more on high level process and become less operational. However until the appointment of a new Chief Innovation, Community and Technology Officer in spring 2014 I continued to work hands on with the system and currently still work on some of the more complex areas of the system. Handing over the system to someone else has been a challenging and rewarding experience – relinquishing control as well as gaining much more resource to develop and improve it. I view effectively sharing or relinquishing control as a learned activity, a key component of making innovation sustainable.
As the organisation has a small staff team I have the opportunity to have this hands on knowledge of working with the core systems we use day to day and I find that this gives me a number of advantages in firstly giving me a better understanding of the work my team carries out day to day and some of the problems they encounter, secondly it makes me more aware of the user experience we deliver and thirdly it makes me focus on the practical delivery of some of the decisions I take and their consequences. It continues to be a valuable learning experience for me as well as contributing to my understanding of our operational strategy.
Evidence
- CiviCRM basics training document
- CiviCRM contributions training document
- See also evidence at the end of the previous section (1b) for a more recent example