e-Learning Maturity Model - RELEVANT TO TERTIARY SECTOR
The idea of e-maturity is prevalent in this section, which before today I had not heard of! E-maturity is the idea that institutions need to have a sustainable framework in order to maintain, develop and secure e-learning over a period of time. This framework must be able to be replicated, extended and sustained even with the integration of new e-learning technologies and/or approaches.
Video - Dr Stephen Marshall from VUW
- Developed the e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM) in response to the problem experienced by lecturers in losing their academic work when others left (i.e. lecturer moved to another institution)
- Planning and standardised approach needed to ensure materials/info isn't lost
e-Learning Planning Framework (eLPF) - RELEVANT TO SCHOOL SECTOR
What?
What?
- It is important to consider an ecological perspective as it leads to better understanding of the issue (Harrison, Tomas, & Crook, 2013).
- e-Maturity reached by setting student expectations, strong home-school links, and organisation of student work and resources (Harrison, Tomas, & Crook, 2013).
- Students able to track their progress, see their homework and work covered in class (Harrison, Tomas, & Crook, 2013).
- The e-Learning Planning Framework is a "tool to help schools and teachers measure their e-learning capability" (Ministry of Education, n.d.). It provides a roadmap to help schools see where they sit in terms of e-learning, and steps they can take to support this further. (Ministry of Education, n.d.)
- There are 4 phases of the ELPF - Emerging, engaging, extending and empowering. These phases involve leadership, professional development, teaching, learning, infrastructure, technology and outside factors (Ministry of Education, n.d.).
- Useful for schools to see where they are 'sitting' and also provides valuable feedback on how to improve or move forward in the process. Leadership and staff can be involved in a survey that can be tailored to suit the needs of the school, staff and students.
- It is important to note that the eLPF is not a punitive framework, but actively tries to encourage schools to adopt effective digital technologies and pedagogy.
- The eLPF has 5 different components that all have to be in sync and work cohesively in order for it to work. These 5 components include: leadership & strategic dimension, professional learning, teaching and learning, technologies and infrastructure, and beyond the classroom. The infrastructure is arguably the most important foundation for e-learning, as it cannot happen without adequate wireless and internet connection. The shift needs to come from the 'top' and trickle down through the staff and students. If SLT are not 100% sold on the idea, then the staff will think it is not important. Teachers need to be shown and given the opportunity to explore how their pedagogy will change, and how to do this. The community needs to be included in all proposals, as they are important drivers of change too.
 |
| Source: TKI, http://www.elearning.tki.org.nz/Professional-learning/e-Learning-Planning-Framework |
So what?
After reading about the eLPF I can see its value and potential when applied to a school setting. This framework has been designed specifically with the New Zealand school sector in mind, and was also made by New Zealand teachers and other involved in education. This makes it valuable as it is specific and useful to our context. It is very useful to school leadership in order to gauge where they are sitting on the spectrum in terms of eLearning within the school. It is also valuable as it provides the opportunity to gain feedback from teachers and other via the survey. It is important to note that the eLPF can be adapted and changed to suit the needs of individual school.
A critique of the eLPF is that some of the stages within the eLPF are quite vague and very 'ministry'. Unless a large proportion of the staff and SLT complete the survey then an accurate picture of the school cannot be justified.
Now what?
NOTE: Please read next blog post on applying the eLPF to my school context.
A critique of the eLPF is that some of the stages within the eLPF are quite vague and very 'ministry'. Unless a large proportion of the staff and SLT complete the survey then an accurate picture of the school cannot be justified.
Now what?
NOTE: Please read next blog post on applying the eLPF to my school context.
Questions to answer:
1. Does the process of maturing to support the adoption of digital technologies occur only in one direction or can an organisation become less mature?
An organisation can go in either direction when it comes to being mature with digital technologies. Dr Stephen Marshall discussed the idea that when tech-saavy lecturers leave a university they often leave with their ideas, work and resources. This can mean an organisation loses some of its digital technology maturity, and they are back at square one again.
2. Does the adoption and rejection of different digital tools make this an over simplification?
Yes, as different digital tools suit different contexts.
3. If so, is maturity the best term for this phenomenon?
As Niki Davis states wisely "perhaps maturity should be contested as a term so that a word is used that does not appear to assume that digital technologies are inevitable". I would have to agree with this comment, as the word 'maturity' can have a negative connotation. If an organisation is not seen as mature when it comes to digital technology, there can be negative outcomes such as loss of face in the academic world. Both tertiary and secondary institutions need to be seen as proactive and relevant when it comes to digital technologies.
 |
| Stages of the eLPF. Image retrieved from https://magic.piktochart.com/output/1650583-how-to-use-the-elpf |
Kia ora Simone, I have really enjoyed reading your blog and I can clearly see how you have researched the two models and considered the implications or questions this raises for you. I smiled when I read your critique about the stages and that some come across as quite vague and 'ministry'. Your first question is a really good one, in my blogpost about the eLPF here http://learning0utloud.blogspot.co.nz/2015/08/mapping-your-e-learning-journey.html I talk about how I have frequently seen schools data show a move backwards through the phases after the second time administering the eLPF and in my experience this has come down to a learning journey for staff. Once they start working towards e-maturity and have more in depth knowledge of what this could look like through the use of the eLPF, they start to realise that what the thought they knew or were doing is just the tip of the iceburg. This is not uncommon and is a valid outcome even though some may be disappointed with the results. Sometimes teachers may feel they are very knowledgable/confident/skilled in relation to e-learning but its not until they start digging deeper, doing research, trialling initiatives and making changes that they realise that there is so much more to learn and work towards than they initially thought.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your feedback Tamara! I agree with your comments that teachers need to continue to research and trial new e-Learning ideas. Also fits with the NZC's idea of being a "lifelong learner".
ReplyDelete