Evaluation of the quality and promotion of open learning materials

In the UK, Open Learning has been used in industrial training for at least the last decade. Trainers and Open Learning practitioners have been concerned about the quality of the products and services being delivered. The argument put forward in this thesis is that there is ambiguity amongst industrialists over the meanings of `Open Learning' and `Quality in Open Learning'. For clarity, a new definition of Open Learning is proposed which challenges the traditional learner-centred approach favoured by educationalists. It introduces the concept that there are benefits afforded to the trainer/employer/teacher as well as to the learner. This enables a focussed view of what quality in Open Learning really means. Having discussed these issues, a new quantitative method of evaluating Open Learning is proposed. This is based upon an assessment of the degree of compliance with which products meet Parts 1 & 2 of the Open Learning Code of Practice. The vehicle for these research studies has been a commercial contract commissioned by the Training Agency for the Engineering Industry Training Board (EITB) to examine the quality of Open Learning products supplied to the engineering industry. A major part of this research has been the application of the evaluation technique to a range of 67 Open Learning products (in eight subject areas). The findings were that good quality products can be found right across the price range - so can average and poor quality ones. The study also shows quite convincingly that there are good quality products to be found at less than 50. Finally the majority (24 out of 34) of the good quality products were text based.

Qualitative psychology at M level: a dialogue between learner and teacher

There are now more postgraduate programmes that include qualitative methods in psychology than ever before. This poses problems for teaching qualitative methods at M level because we still lack consistency in what qualitative methods are taught at the undergraduate level. Although the British Psychological Society requires accredited undergraduate programmes to include qualitative methods, we hear very different stories from colleagues across the UK about provision and quality. In this article, we present a dialogue between learner and teacher about our own experiences of qualitative methods in psychology at M level. We report our own learning experiences of qualitative methods at the undergraduate level, reflect on current methods of teaching at M level, and consider ways of moving forward. As well as focusing specifically on current practice at our institution, our discussions also branch out into wider issues around the fundamental characteristics of qualitative methods, pragmatically and philosophically, as well as our own accounts of what we enjoy most about using qualitative methods in psychology.