The Students' Experience of E-learning

The Student Experience of E-learning Laboratory (SEEL) is a three year initiative that seeks to develop the University’s capacity to discover more about the impact of e-learning on our students in an attempt to narrow the gap between the digital natives and immigrants (Prensky, 2001). In its first year the project team have gathered data on the student experience of using technology in support of their learning from across the University. Initial analysis suggests we should listen more carefully to our students and may need to review some of our current practices in relation to e-learning and explore some new ways of working. In this workshop we will outline some of the findings and consider implications for our future practice.

The exposure to verbal abuse of student nurses gaining placement experience

Clinical placement experience has a key role to play in the socialisation and preparation of future members of the nursing profession. Aggression experienced by healthcare workers is currently receiving considerable attention and student nurses have been identified as a group vulnerable to experiencing workplace abuse (Little 1999). The primary aim of the study is to gain a greater understanding of the nature, severity, frequency and sources of verbal abuse experienced by student nurses in health care settings in the south east of England, using as a definition, “the use of inappropriate words… causing distress” (Department of Health 2003). A convenience sample of 156 third year student nurses of all four branches of one preregistration nursing programme in the south east of England was studied with questionnaires distributed retrospectively; 11 4 student nurses returned the questionnaires equating to a response rate of 73%. Results 46% of respondents reported experiencing verbal abuse, 39% had witnessed other students experiencing verbal abuse and 61% reported that they were aware of other students experiencing verbal abuse. Students reported experiencing threats to kill, racial abuse, sexually orientated verbal abuse and bullying while gaining placement experience. Student nurses are a high risk group for experiencing verbal abuse whilst gaining placement experience.In the literature, mental health and learningdisability settings are viewed as high risk areasfor experiencing aggression (Beech and Leather 2003); this study suggests that student nurses experience verbal abuse in a variety of settings and verbal abuse may be more prevalent on general medical and surgical wards than previously expected.

Global experience with electricity liberalisation

This paper examines global experiences with electricity liberalisation relevant to the new legislation on electricity passed by the Indonesian parliament in September 2009. It covers experiences in the UK, EU, USA and ten major developing economies. Finally, the paper comments on a number of the issues emerging from this survey, in particular the reliance on public finance for extensions to electricity networks, the advantages of public finance for cheaper capital and for developing renewables, and the comparative evidence on efficiency.

The varieties of student experience - an open research question and some ways to answer it

Based on meetings of the Society for Research into Higher Education’s Student Experience Network over the past three years, the genuinely open research question is posed whether there is one or more undergraduate student experience within English higher education. Answering this question depends on whether what is taught or what is learnt is examined. If the latter, then a unitary student experience can be said to exist only in the narrowest of normative senses. What undergraduates actually learn – defined in the widest sense – is the $64,000 question of research on the student experience. Various ways to answer this question are proposed, including using students to research students. Conceptual tools to apply to findings can be developed from youth studies and cognate disciplines, particularly in relation to student identities and aspirations. Lastly, these proposals are placed in the wider context of comparative models of the varieties of student experience, including those emerging in the UK’s national regions.

Bridging the gap with teamwork: collaborative leadership for communities of practice in the learning and skills sector

Collaborative approaches in leadership and management are increasingly acknowledged to play a key role in successful institutions in the learning and skills sector (LSS) (Ofsted, 2004). Such approaches may be important in bridging the potential 'distance' (psychological, cultural, interactional and geographical) (Collinson, 2005) that may exist between 'leaders' and 'followers', fostering more democratic communal solidarity. This paper reports on a 2006-07 research project funded by the Centre for Excellence in Leadership (CEL) that aimed to collect and analyse data on 'collaborative leadership' (CL) in the learning and skills sector. The project investigated collaborative leadership and its potential for benefiting staff through trust and knowledge-sharing in communities of practice (CoPs). The project forms part of longer-term educational research investigating leadership in a collaborative inquiry process (Jameson et al., 2006). The research examined the potential for CL to benefit institutions, analysing respondents' understanding of and resistance to collaborative practices. Quantitative and qualitative data from senior managers and lecturers was analysed using electronic data in SPSS and Tropes Zoom. The project aimed to recommend systems and practices for more inclusive, diverse leadership (Lumby et al., 2005). Collaborative leadership has increasingly gained international prominence as emphasis shifted towards team leadership beyond zero-sum 'leadership'/ 'followership' polarities into more mature conceptions of shared leadership spaces, within which synergistic leadership spaces can be mediated. The relevance of collaboration within the LSS has been highlighted following a spate of recent government-driven policy developments in FE. The promotion of CL addresses concerns about the apparent 'remoteness' of some senior managers, and the 'neo-management' control of professionals which can increase 'distance' between leaders and 'followers' and may de-professionalise staff in an already disempowered sector. Positive benefit from 'collaborative advantage' tends to be assumed in idealistic interpretations of CL, but potential 'collaborative inertia' may be problematic in a sector characterised by rapid top-down policy changes and continuous external audit and surveillance. Constant pressure for achievement against goals leaves little time for democratic group negotiations, despite the desires of leaders to create a more collaborative ethos. Yet prior models of intentional communities of practice potentially offer promise for CL practice to improve group performance despite multiple constraints. The CAMEL CoP model (JISC infoNet, 2006) was linked to the project, providing one practical way of implementing CL within situated professional networks.The project found that a good understanding of CL was demonstrated by most respondents, who thought it could enable staff to share power and work in partnership to build trust and conjoin skills, abilities and experience to achieve common goals for the good of the sector. However, although most respondents expressed agreement with the concept and ideals of CL, many thought this was currently an idealistically democratic, unachievable pipe dream in the LSS. Many respondents expressed concerns with the 'audit culture' and authoritarian management structures in FE. While there was a strong desire to see greater levels of implementation of CL, and 'collaborative advantage' from the 'knowledge sharing benefit potential' of team leadership, respondents also strongly advised against the pitfalls of 'collaborative inertia'. A 'distance' between senior leadership views and those of staff lower down the hierarchy regarding aspects of leadership performance in the sector was reported. Finally, the project found that more research is needed to investigate CL and develop innovative methods of practical implementation within autonomous communities of professional practice.

Student Experience of E-Learning (SEEL)

The Student Experience of E-Learning project (SEEL) was an institutional response to the university’s HEA/JISC Benchmarking exercise (Ryan and Kandler, 2007). The study had a social constructivist approach which recognised the importance of listening to the student voice (JISC 2007) within the University of Greenwich context, to interpret the student experience of e-learning. Nearly 1000 students responded to an online survey on their approaches to, and their use of, learning technology. The quantitative and qualitative questions used included identifying study patterns, using specific online tools, within the context of learning and beyond, and student’s attitudes towards using e-learning in their studies. Initially, individual responses to questions were analysed in depth, giving a general indication of the student experience. Further depth was applied through a filtering mechanism, beginning with a cross-slicing of individual student responses to produce cameos. Audio logs and individual interviews were drawn from these cameos. Analysis of the cameos is in progress but has already revealed some unexpected results. There was a mismatch between students’ expectations of the university’s use of technology and their experiences and awareness of its possible use in other contexts. Students recognised the importance of social interaction as a vehicle for learning (Vygotsky 1978, Bruner 2006) but expressed polarised views on the use of social networking sites such as Facebook for e-learning. Their experiences in commercial contexts led them to see the university VLE as unimaginative and the tutors’ use of it as lacking in vision. Whereas analysis of the individual questions provided a limited picture, the cameos gave a truer reflection of the students lived experiences and identified a gulf between the university’s provision and the students’ expectation of e-learning and their customary use of technology. However it is recognised that the very nature of an online survey necessarily excludes students who chose not to engage, either through lack of skills or through disillusionment and this would constitute a separate area for study.