Design for learning in virtual learning environments—insider perspectives
(2006)Zusammenfassung
The purpose of this project is to develop a better understanding of how Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs)
are used in designing for learning in blended or face-to-face settings. Accelerated by Open Source initiatives,
VLEs have recently become a standard feature of post-16 educational institutions. They offer a range of
affordances which demand varying investment of time, imagination and effort. By focussing on the
experiences of teachers, learners and learning technologists, this project explores how VLEs are being
incorporated into educational practice.
People from ten institutions, using Moodle, Blackboard or WebCT, were involved in the project. E-learning
leads (ELLs) gave background to the circumstances of VLE use in their institution via interview, and
mediated contact with teachers. The experiences of sixteen teachers were explored in two questionnaires
which covered the background to their course areas. A subsample of nine teachers from six institutions, in
eight separate subject areas, were interviewed at their workplace to explore the their VLE designs further. To
understand the learner perspective better, three focus groups of learners studying with three of the above
teachers were carried out. The perspectives of support staff were invited, but it emerged that the teachers
interviewed were not delegating their VLE work. All interview data were transcribed and analysed to generate
models of the different aspects of designing for learning with virtual learning environments. Some key
findings emerged:
Designs for learning in VLEs are not necessarily represented on VLEs;
The designs themselves and whether or not they are represented depend on many diverse factors, with implications for the reusability and sharing of designs;
There is a perceived dichotomy between learner-centredness and technocentricity in the use of VLEs;
and
Differences were observed between free and commercial VLEs with respect to procurement, support, and contingency plans.
The ensuing report was then negotiated with all participants prior to wider publication