Keynote presentation at European Conference on E-learning #ecel17

1. E-LEARNING IN HIGHER EDUCATION
ANALYZING TWO CRITICAL FACTORS:
ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGY AND
TEACHERS' PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
Neuza Pedro, IEULisbon

2. Profs. Neuza Pedro & João Filipe Matos
E-learning Lab of University of Lisbon
Team:

3. Architecture
FineArts
Dental Medicine
Human Kinetics
Medicine
Law
Pharmacy
Psychology
Sciences
Veterinary
Medicine Education
Education
Geography and
Spatial Planning
Social and
Political
Sciences
Social Sciences
Economics &
Management
IST
Humanities
Agriculture
6 000 Academic Staff50 000 Students

4. WITH SO MANY FACULTIES,
STUDENTS AND PROFESSORS A
COMMON VISION OF THE
CONCEPT OF E-LEARNING
WAS REQUIRED
(A lot of misconceptions about e-learning can always be found!)

5. #00 E-LEARNING:
THE (ULISBON) CONCEPT

6. conceptual continuum from Distance
Education to multiple methods of F2F
learning approaches were technological
tools and online environments are used
as mediators
E-LEARNING

7. F2F Distance
Asynchronous
Synchronous
e-Learning

8. F2F
IT for conventional teaching
Asynchronous
ICT for Active Learning
Synchronous
Distance
e-Learning

9. FOR PROMOTING
E-LEARNING IN HIGHER
EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS
2 CRITICAL FACTOR MUST
BE ADDRESSED !
(HEI which are not Open Universities!)

10. #01 CRITICAL FACTOR:
ORGANIZATIONAL
STRATEGY

11. Aim:
to identify and characterize the organizational
critical success factors (CSFs) for the
Implementation of E-learning in Higher
Education institutions.
National study: Portugal
(Monteiro, 2016)

12. 1st Phase: qualitative approach
A systematic literature review of 46 e-learning models = 11 selected
Eg. UNIQUe, eMM, ACODE e-Benchmarks, eQuality Learning Standards, …
Outcome: a list of 32 items/factors of the organizational dimension of e-learning.
2nd Phase: quantitative approach
Delphi panel formed by representatives of the Portuguese Public HEIs
2 groups:
Institutional Managers
e.g. Members of the Dean Executive Board; Heads of University e-Learning program
Operational Managers
e.g. e-Learning Office Coord.; Digital Learning or IT Support Services Managers
National study: Portugal
(Monteiro, 2016)

13. National study: Portugal
Table 1.Number of participants by institutional profile and type of institution.
n
Institutional
managers
(IM)
Operational
officers
(OM)
Polytechnic
subsystem
University
subsystem
Group of participants
Round 1
45 29 16 26 19
Group of participants
Round 2
34 25 9 21 13
Group of participants
Round 3
24 20 4 16 8
(Monteiro, 2016)

14. (Pedro & Monteiro, 2017)

15. TOP 1O
CRITICAL FACTORS

16. Definition of a clear institutional strategy for e-learning1st
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
The guarantee of adequate IT infrastructures and e-Learning systems
Support for the development of e-learning initiatives
Allocation of resources for e-learning activities
E-Learning support Staff
Faculty's professional development and training initiatives
Leadership and institutional responsibility
Accreditation of e-courses and online learning programs
6
A clear governance policy for e-learning
Research and Innovation projects related to e-learning

17. Institutional
strategy for
e-learning:
what does it
mean ?

18. a) ensure the existence of an appropriate
institutional plan for e-learning and
that its implementation is properly led;
b) make certain that resource implications
of e-Learning are properly understood;
c) recognize that organizational culture
issues must be carefully considered;
d) take into consideration the issues
related to professors’ professional
development and other staff involved in
e-learning initiatives.
(McPherson, 2012)
Institutional
strategy for
e-learning:
what does it
mean ?

19. #01 CRITICAL FACTOR:
ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGY
Why is it so
difficult?

20. National study: Portugal
Less than 30% of the
institutional managers of e-
learning has any kind of
training in this field
58%

21. A possible answer:
The problem might be that many of the decision makers
of our Higher Education Institutions do not have
the knowledge and the experience that could make
them able to create an organizational strategic plan for
E-learning

22. #02 CRITICAL FACTOR:
TEACHERS’
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT

23. Staff development is a critical and imperative issue, but this aspect seems to
be seen as an institutional responsibility more than an individual
responsibility.
In an online survey answers by North-American Professors, near 70% agreed
that technology training was universities responsibility.
This (may) comes from the fact that most Universities set up new
technological infrastructure and E-learning projects without any (or very
little) input collected from faculties (Georgina, & Olson, 2010).

24. Most Professors,
Researchers,
Teaching
Assistants don’t
have any training
in 2 out of the 3
core domains of
Teaching
Knowledge

25. Technical- Pedagogical Training
1
2
1
4
2
9
20
0 5 10 15 20 25
E-TUTORIA E MODERAÇÃO ONLINE
COLIBRI
RECURSOS EDUCATIVOS DIGITAIS
CONCEPÇÃO DE ESPAÇOS ONLINE
OUTROS MOODLE
MOODLE AVANÇADO
MOODLE INICIAL
39 Workshops

26. Technical- Pedagogical Training
E-learning Lab Ulisbon frequently develops Staff
Development training (hands-on workshops) that
aims to promote technical and pedagogical skills.

27. Ex. Create a
Course on
Moodle
The basic
functionalities of
Moodle activities
and resources are
explored
but organized
knowledge about
Online Learning is
presented.
For example…

28. Teasers
Eg. Story,
controversial
questions
Objectives
• …
• …
• …
Examples
Prerequisites
Contend aligned
with objectives
• …
• …
• …
Exercises Quizzes
Reflection
and
application
to
Real World
Scenarios

29. #02 CRITICAL FACTOR:
TEACHERS’
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT Is training really
relevant?

30. Analysis of the
impact of
Workshop
attendance on
the quality of
professors’ LMS
courses
(intensity of use)
(Cabral, Gonçalves & Pedro, 2012)
Moodle courses classification
. No activity
. Low intensity
. High intensity
Professors’ attendance to workshops
. None
. 1
. 2
. 3 or more

31. Analysis of the
impact of
Workshop
attendance on
the quality of
professors’ LMS
courses
(intensity of use)
(Cabral, Gonçalves & Pedro, 2012)

32. Conclusions
● Professors and researchers tend to attend only
1 workshop
● Professors who haven’t attended any
workshop have a high proportion of courses with
‘No activity’
● Faculties who participated in 3 or more
workshops do present significant differences in
the quality of use of the LMS in their online
courses.
(Cabral, Gonçalves & Pedro, 2012)

33. #02 CRITICAL FACTOR:
TEACHERS’
PROFESSIONAL
DEVELOPMENT Why is it so
difficult?

34. Limited amount of time available for teaching related activities
Lack of benefits from personal investment in professional training activities
Research vs Teaching
Reputation: ++
Funding: ++
Reputation: --
Funding: 0

35. Managing R&D projects
1st
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
Publishing
Supervision (PhD, Masters, Undergraduates)
Teaching ????
Service and Administrative duties
Apply to R&D project calls, grants, etc.
…
6 Organize/Attend Scientific events
Managing R&D Lab and Teams At ULisbon an article
in published every 2
hours

36. Research vs Teaching
Considering this list of priorities,
how can a professor find the
motivation to invest their time in
attending workshops for improving
their Digital skills and Pedagogical
competences ?

37. In summary:
Staff development initiatives are required but its quality
(pedagogical and technical) its more important that its quantity
and benefits should be provided to professors who attend it
The definition of an (clear and shared) organizational strategy
for e-learning has proven to be a decisive success factor for the
implementation and development of e-learning projects in HE
1.
2.

38. Many thanks!
nspedro@campus.ul.pt
/neuza-pedro-56062912
/profile/neuza_pedro
/npedro
lisboa.academia.edu/neuzapedro