Swiss Virtual Campus - case study

The Swiss Virtual Campus (Campus Virtuale Svizzera, Campus Virtuel Suisse, Virtueller Campus Schweiz, ABBREV: SVC) promotes learning over the Internet at the Swiss Institutions of Higher Education (Universities, Universities of Applied Sciences, and Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology). Students are no longer tied to a programme of lectures with set times and locations; they can acquire knowledge whenever and wherever they choose. Unlike many foreign e-learning initiatives, Swiss Virtual Campus is aimed primarily at undergraduate students and only secondly at mature part-time students.

The SVC programme was launched in 1999 on the proposition of the Swiss University Conference (SUC) and of its planning commission to promote the use of new information and communication technologies in the Swiss Higher Education Institutions (HEI). Besides this general goal, the main initial focus of the programme was to produce digital educational units which could be used by students of different institutions and recognized in their curricula. The overall policy goals, as stated in the Research and Higher Education Message 2000-2003 of the Federal government, were to promote the cooperation between HEI, to promote innovation in pedagogical methods and to produce high-quality educational materials. The programme was part of the activities managed by the SUC under the University Act in order to promote cooperation and modernization of the Swiss higher education system.

While the overall goals of the programme were not modified, the second phase (consolidation phase; 2004-2007) entailed a significant change in the implementation strategy, taking also into account the goal stated in the multiyear planning of Swiss universities of the Rectorʼs Conference (CRUS) to have at least 10% of the courses supported by new educational echnologies. Moreover, since it was foreseeable that the federal programme would come to an end (possibly with a third phasing-out period), a general goal of the consolidation programme was that the HEI themselves assume the responsibility in the development of elearning.

This was translated in the goal of developing an elearning competence centre (CCSP) in each Swiss HEI. These centres should consist of professional teams with the technological and pedagogical competences needed to develop elearning courses, with two main benefits: ensuring long-term accumulation of competences and experiences, also beyond the end of the individual projects, as well as a reduction of the development costs through scale effects and transfer of experiences from project to project. Moreover, these centres should permit better integration of the SVC projects in the overall university strategy. Additional funding was also provided to already existing projects to help their maintenance and integration in the participating universities.

Finally, two calls for proposals for new projects were launched in 2004 and 2005. While the general principles were the same as in the impulse phase, the blended learning approach was officially endorsed in the call, while the CCSP of the leading house was charged with the production of the elearning modules in collaboration with the project leader.

Finally, 118 projects (e-learning courses) were realized, covering a wide spectrum of disciplines.

The SCV web site is at http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/

SCV cooperation network

Institution

The present

• (1) Provide a general description of the institution in its current state, putting the e-learning into context.

The Swiss Virtual Campus programme ended on July 31st, 2008. No head and coordination is active at the moment. The local centers are continuing to do use the virtual content. Last update of SVC website : May 08, 2007.

• (2) What is the institution's annual budget?

Des 44 millions de francs de contributions fédérales alloués au CVS (fonds de l‘OFES, de l‘OFFT et du Conseil EPF réunis), 37 millions ont été affectés à l‘encouragement de projet du CVS. Ces montants ont été complétés par les „matching funds“ exigés des responsables de projet, atteignant un volume de financement similaire. On peut ainsi admettre que le volume total maximal des projets CVS oscillait entre 70 et 75 millions de francs.

• (3) How many students does the institution have (a) in total? (b) as full-time equivalents?

Number of Students in 2004 approx. 4/5 from cantonal universities; approx. 1/10 from the ETH domain; approx. 1/8 from UAS

• approx. 9’800 students at cantonal Universities (from 35 projects);
• approx. 1’300 students at the ETHZ / EPFL (from 9 projects);
• approx. 1’400 students at Universities of Applied Sciences (from 14 projects);
• totally approx. 12'500 SVC students at Swiss Institutions of Higher Education; but this number is hardly reached every semester.

33 project teams indicate to have regularly more than 100 students. 27 of these projects started with regular courses in 2003 or before.

• (4) How many staff does the institution have (a) in total? (b) as full-time equivalents?

Approx. 1020 names of persons having worked for the SVC were indicated up to now (the data from one project are missing).

Person-years invested: average: approx. 12 personyears per project; approx. 2/5 financed by the SVC. Totally at least approx. 600 person-years were invested into SVC projects. Before the start of the projects approx. 44 person-years were already invested into the themes of the projects; the SVC financed at least approx. 253 person-years (from one project the data are missing).

• (5) What is the institution's "business model"? (a) public (b) private (c) consortium (d) national programme. If (c) or (d) above, list the other partners (or the members) and for each briefly describe its role.

• (6) What percentage of the institution's students are based outside the home country?

• (7) Describe the institution's approach to virtual mobility.

Considering the official goals and objectives of the SVC programme as they were set in the Federal Message of 1998 and in the two calls for proposals, the degree to which the SVC programme has met its objectives is clearly limited. In particular, the objectives to “set up a virtual campus” or to “develop a substantial offer in distance-learning” have not been met. These objectives have not found strong support amongst the majority of the stakeholders, and this may explain why so few of the SVC projects were aimed at developing distance-learning programmes. As a result, the SVC programme has not been as successful as expected promoting real virtual mobility among the student population.

Percentage of Self Study or Distance Learning 1/4 for each group: 1. below or near 50%; 2. between 50% and 80%; 3. 80% or more; 4. depends on the course

details:

• 2 projects: below 20% ; 6 projects: between 20% and 50%;
• 4 projects: near 50%;
• 12 projects: between 50% and 80%;
• 12 projects: 80% or more. 29 projects could offer more than 80% of distance learning if they wanted it.

11 projects vary from one extreme to the other, according to the course.

• (8) Describe how the institution manages its "brand" (a) in general and (b) in respect of any e-learning aspects.

La taille du projet et lʼampleur de son financement ont inévitablement attiré lʼattention et ont donné un profil plus visible au e-learning.

The past

• (9) Give a narrative description of the institution's history since its foundation, concentrating on key dates, recent years and any e-learning issues.

The SVC programme was launched in 1999 by a proposal of the SUC and of its planning commission to promote the use of new information and communication technologies in the Swiss HEI, following a number of studies and reports at the end of the 90’s showing that Swiss HEI were slow in introducing these instruments in education activities (CUS 1996 and 1997). Besides this general goal, the main initial focus of the programme was to produce digital educational units which could be used by students of different institutions and recognized in their curricula, hence the name of Swiss Virtual Campus (Conseil fédéral 1998). The overall policy goals, as stated in the Research and Higher Education Message 2000-2003 of the Federal government, were to promote the cooperation between HEIs, to promote innovation in pedagogical methods and to produce high-quality educational materials. The programme was part of the activities managed by the SUC under the University Act in order to promote cooperation and modernization of the Swiss higher education system. The so-called Impulse Programme in the years 2000-2003 was essentially focused on the realisation of projects for the development of on-line educational modules in specific subjects; in two calls for proposals, 50 projects were selected, covering almost all educational domains in Swiss higher education institutions. The projects were realised by consortia of different universities from a minimum of 3 partners up to a maximum of more than 10 partners for some projects, including higher education institutions, research institutes, support services and private companies. Projects were built as largely stand-alone teams including all the needed competences for their realization in the specific educational subject, in pedagogy, technology and design. Accordingly, the size of the projects was rather large, with an average federal contribution of 600,000 CHF; some projects received more than 1 mio. CHF of federal funding (plus the resources invested by the involved institutions; see the evaluation report of the impulse phase for detailed data). Overall, the Impulse Programme was financed by the Confederation with 30 mio. CHF for the universities, 7 mio. CHF for the UAS and 2 mio. CHF for the FIT; about 34 mio. CHF have been spent by the projects, the rest for the management of the programme and for specific support mandates in organization, pedagogy and technology. To these funds, we should add the matching funds for projects invested by the institutions themselves (at least the same amount as the federal funding). The evaluation of the impulse phase showed that the programme had been quite successful in promoting new initiatives for the introduction of ICT in higher education and had created a favourable environment for experimenting with e-learning in higher education (Gertsch, Perellon and Weber 2004); moreover, specific competences were developed and many of the realised educational modules were evaluated as being innovative and of quite good quality. During this phase, it became progressively clear that the goal of developing shared educational modules fully on-line was not well-adapted to the Swiss context, and, in practice, most projects shifted to a blended-mode approach, where the use of electronic resources was closely integrated with classroom work and therefore adapted by the course/teacher. A second concern was raised about the consolidation of the developed competences after the end of the projects and about their technical viability, since many projects were based on tools developed ad hoc (Lepori and Rezzonico 2003) and there were fears that the projects were actually too closely linked to individual people (with the risk of abandoning them for example in case of retirement of the SVC Final Evaluation. Background Report Lepori and Probst 17 involved professors). The creation of institutional centres of competence in the higher education institutions was also meant to answer to these issues which emerged in the impulsephase.

2.2 The Consolidation Programme: mission and outline

While the overall goals of the programme were not modified, the second phase (consolidation phase) took into account these experiences and, hence, entailed a significant change in the implementation strategy, taking also into account the goal stated in the multiyear planning of Swiss universities of the Rector’s Conference (CRUS) to have at least 10% of the courses supported by new educational technologies.

The main innovation has been the goal of developing elearning competence centres (CCSP) in each Swiss HEI, in a number of cases by strengthening already existing structures. These centres should dispose of professional teams with the technological and pedagogical competences needed to develop elearning courses, with two main benefits: ensuring long-term accumulation of competences and experiences, also beyond the end of the individual projects, as well as a reduction of the development costs through scale effects and transfer of experiences from project to project. Moreover, these centres should permit a better integration of the SVC projects in the overall university strategy, overcoming a weakness of the impulse phase projects, which were largely located at the level of individual chairs.

To strengthen these centres, the SVC devised three types of mechanisms:

• A basic funding for each centre linked to the number of students and teachers. For universities, the CCSP received a fixed allocation of 100,000 per university and per year plus a variable allocation depending on the number of students and teachers. For UAS, a similar mechanism was put in place through OPET funding.
• A stronger involvement of the centres in the SVC projects: both for the maintenance of the existing projects and of the new projects the involvement of the CCSP was required; for new projects, the CCSP received a fixed amount of money (overhead) to take care of the production of the elearning modules. This was particularly emphasised for the last series of projects, where the project proposal was jointly prepared and co-signed by the CCSP.
• Finally, a regular review of the CCSP functioning and activities by the SVC steering committee, meant largely as a coaching for the development of the centres.

Moreover, additional funding was provided

to already existing projects to help their maintenance and integration in the participating universities (on the average 60,000 CHF per project and year; no additional funding for UAS projects) which could be requested through applications evaluated by the SVC steering committee; maintenance was later also available for the new projects of the consolidation phase (3rd project series). The decision on maintenance was based on criteria related to the project network, the reduction of in-class hours, the number of users and the recognition in the curricula of the developed modules. The main aim of the maintenance was to finance updating of materials and to give more time and resources to integrate them in the curricula.

Two calls for proposals for new projects were launched in 2004 and 2005. While the general principles were the same as in the impulse phase, the new calls entailed a number of significant changes:

• the blended learning approach was officially endorsed (instead of developing completely online

modules);

• the CCSP of the leading house was charged with the production of the elearning modules in

collaboration with the project leader and had to be integrated from the beginning in the project;

• the amount of federal funding of the projects was significantly reduced. Each project received a basic allocation of 300,000 CHF, of which 100,000 as a fixed overhead for the CCSP (for the 4th call the amounts were reduced to 150,000 CHF, respectively 50,000 CHF; with a supplement of 50,000 CHF for some projects). UAS projects received lower funding.

Finally, a number of support measures and mandates were foreseen, concerning technical support – including the provision of national learning management systems – as well as pedagogy and organization of elearning.

Consolidation Phase

During the consolidation phase5, objectives from the impulse phase were partially resumed, modifications were made, experiences were integrated and the changing university landscape in Switzerland was given particularly close attention. The programme was based on the following four major focal points6:

• Development and consolidation of centres of competence, service and production (CCSPs) in every institute of higher education. This measure ensures that every Swiss institute of higher education has a service and production team to support the development of new online courses as well as the maintenance of already developed courses;
• Use and maintenance of already developed projects. Products of recognised quality which were developed already in the impulse phase received additional funds in order to guarantee their use and complete integration into the study programmes;
• Development of new courses. During the consolidation phase two calls for tender were initiated. In total, 64 projects were developed which were then distributed among the series 3 and 4 as follows: 32 projects were allocated to series 3, plus two additional projects promoted by the Federal Office for Professional Education and Technology (OPET) that the SVC coordination team managed, but that did not receive the «SVC» label. The remaining 30 projects were allocated to series 4;
• Services and coordination for institutes of higher education, including the realisation of a number of mandates. The main objective of these mandates was the rendering of services for institutes of higher education, in the technical area as well as in didactics. In addition to the objectives determined in the execution plan, the initiatives of the steering committee that helped to ensure the development and sustainability of the activities performed in the consolidation phase must be mentioned. In 2005 the steering committee introduced a monitoring procedure for the CCSPs and the projects of the SVC. This procedure was designed to support the management of the CCSPs and their projects, if necessary. The steering committee also initiated a dissemination project that offered various events and activities to help the projects and CCSPs win new perspectives for developing and using their eLearning products and services - even beyond their own area. The steering committee has also launched other initiatives to prepare and follow-up the post-SVC phase7.

The Impulse Programme - initial goals

The Swiss Virtual Campus programme is part of a process aimed at promoting the information society in Switzerland as well as enabling education - in particular higher education - to take advantage of the opportunities now available through new information and communication technology.

In this respect the programme hopes to provide students with virtual mobility that will enable them to play an active role in learning processes and follow high-quality courses on their computer monitors.

The principal concrete aim of the programme is to develop teaching modules that will be used through the Internet in several regular study programs of the Swiss universities.

Consolidation Programme

The Swiss Virtual Campus project is now in the phase of the 2004-2007 Consolidation Programme. This isfinanced by project-linked contributions in accordance with the Universities Promotion Law. The Swiss Federal Institutes of Technology and the universities of applied science are participating in the programme using their own funds.

At its meeting of 16 October 2003, the Swiss University Conference (SUC) approved the "2004-2007 Implementation Plan", which lays down the organizational and financial framework of the Consolidation Programme for the new financial period. Basically, the Consolidation Programme reaffirms the aims of the Impulse Program. A certain number of adjustments have been made to take account of the experience gained so far, and to position the Program better within the context of ongoing trends in higher education. They concern project finance and development, as well as program organization. The Consolidation Program involves four main financial aspects:

1. Competence, service and production centres in each university
2. Use and maintenance of projects developed
3. New course development
4. Services for universities and coordination.

Since 2004, operational programme management and the coordination office have been overseen by the Rectors' Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS). Competence, service and production centres at each university receive financial support. The SVC Commission was wound up at the end of 2003.

Project Maintenance Support

The Swiss Virtual Campus Consolidation Programme (2004-2007) gives funding for the use and maintenance of courses of recognised quality (see document below “Execution Plan”). The Competence-, Service- and Production Centres (CCSP) will be responsible for the maintenance funds, in close collaboration with the project leader and partners. Maintenance measures must be coordinated and agreed on between the project leader and the CCSP.

External environment

• (10) What is the institution's funding from government as a percentage of annual income?

Pour l’élaboration du „Campus Virtuel Suisse“ (CVS), la somme de 30 millions de francs a été allouée pour les années 2000 à 2003, ces subventions devant être complétées par des contributions des Hautes écoles („matching funds“) à hauteur de 50% en règle générale.

Comme les subventions fédérales (rentrant dans le budget de l’OFES) sont réservées à l’encouragement de projets des universités cantonales, conformément à la loi sur l’aide aux universités (LAU), les écoles polytechniques fédérales (EPF) et les Hautes Ecoles spécialisées (HES) ont dû chercher elles-mêmes leur financement nécessaire à une participation au programme. L’Office fédéral de la formation professionnelle et de la technologie (OFFT) auquel incombe la responsabilité des HES a affecté 12 millions de francs au programme CVS, qui proviennent du crédit en faveur des Hautes Ecoles Spécialisées, tandis que le Conseil des écoles polytechniques fédérales CEPF a alloué la somme de 2 millions de francs aux projets des EPF. La dotation comparativement faible des EPF pour leur participation au programme CVS s’explique en priorité par le lancement presque simultané d’initiatives, dans le même domaine, qui avaient bénéficié de fonds considérables (telles que programme-cadre „ETH World“ ou „New Learning Technologies“ NLT).

Les contributions fédérales, d’un montant total à fr. 44 millions (contributions de l’OFES, l’OFFT et du CEPF additionnées), versées dans le cadre du Campus Virtuel ont permis d’encourager cinquante projets des Hautes écoles depuis le lancement du CVS, chaque projet étant développé par au moins trois partenaires académiques, conformément aux critères d’encouragement du CVS. Le programme d’impulsion CVS de 2000 à 2003 a pris fin en décembre 2003 pour être remplacé par le programme de consolidation CVS (2004 - 2007).

• • Consolidation phase:

As was the case for the Impulse Programme, funding was provided separately for universities through the SUC, for UAS through OPET and for the FIT through the FIT themselves and the FIT board. Overall, the programme was allocated 30 mio. CHF for universities; additionally 7 mio. CHF were provided for UAS and 5 mio. CHF for FIT. UAS were confronted with limitations in the available budget: thus, UAS CCSP received a decreasing level of funding during this period, while the OPET decided not to finance maintenance of UAS projects of the first phase (or for UAS partners in university projects). Moreover, for 3rd and 4th series projects UAS received lower amounts of funding than universities and, actually, for the 4th series projects it was not possible to fund all projects selected by the SVC committee. The following table provides more information on the use of the federal funds.

'	Cantonal universities	Universities of Applied Sciences
New projects	9.7	3.1
Maintenance	6.3	0
Mandates	4.0	0.2
CCSP	8.0	3.2
Coordination	2.0	0.5
Total	30.0	7.0

Table 1. Federal funding for the SVC programme, 2004-2008, mio. CHF

To these federal funds,4.0 the substantial contribution by the involved higher education institutions, at least at same level, should be added (matching funds).

• (11) Describe the way that funding is provided for institutions in the institution's country, or state that it is the same as for other institutions in the country.

Le programme CVS est institutionnalisé à l’intérieur d’un cadre légal bien déterminé, la Loi fédérale sur l’aide aux universités (LAU) telle que révisée et adoptée au Parlement en octobre 1999. La LAU traduit elle-même une modification du paysage des Hautes écoles suisses marquée par un souhait plus fort de collaboration interinstitutionnelle et, en même temps, de mise en concurrence de ces institutions. Elle forme le cadre de référence à l’intérieur duquel prend forme le programme CVS et influence de manière significative son orientation et son implémentation.

• (12) Describe the legal status of the institution.

Not relevant because not an institution. The Swiss Virtual Campus is a programme or an initiative encouraging projects, not an institution in the strict sense. Note, the label "Swiss virtual Campus" is a confusing name all the more as its structure is composed of a steering committee and a coordination office, like many other Virtual Campus institutions/initiatives/consortiums. The actors in this programme are the institutions who developed projects (cooperation of 3 institutions at minimum by project).

The development of elearning in Swiss HEI has to be put in the context of the organisation of the Swiss higher education system which comprises three different types of institutions (Lepori 2007):

• the ten Cantonal universities are under the sovereignty of their respective Canton and cofunded by the Confederation and the other cantons. These are educational and research

institutions delivering undergraduate degrees as well as doctorates; seven of them are generalist universities covering most scientific domains (except engineering and, in some cases, medicine), while the Universities of Lugano, Lucerne and Sankt Gallen concentrate on a more limited range of domains.

• the two Federal Institutes of Technologies, in Zurich (ETHZ) and in Lausanne (EPFL), are

under the direct sovereignty of the Confederation and almost entirely financed by it; they have a similar degree structure to the Cantonal universities, but are almost entirely concentrated on engineering and natural sciences.

• the seven Universities of Applied Sciences were created in 1997 through the merger of

existing Cantonal professional schools at the tertiary level; they offer three-years professional Bachelor degrees, as well as continuing education and, from 2008, Master degrees. As a result of their origin, most UAS have a complex structure with geographically dispersed establishments in different Cantons; central strategies and structures are welldeveloped in some of them, but less in others (Lepori and Attar 2006). This organisation has a strong impact on the development of elearning support structures.

As a consequence, not only the different HEIs are subject to different rules, but also federal intervention is based on three different acts – the University Act, the FIT Act and the UAS Act – and channelled through different organizations (SUC for Cantonal Universities with SER funding, FIT board for the two FIT and OPET for UAS), which explains the complex organisation of funding of the SVC programme. This environment has to be taken into account to understand correctly the information presented in this chapter.

• (13) List the language(s) that the institution uses for instruction with the percentage of students studying in each. (Bilingual study can also be included.)

Language officially used in SVC are:

• English
• French
• German

Results impulse programme:

Languages approx. 1/10: in G F E 2/5: no translations 1/10: div. languages to E 1/10: translations only into national languages

• 4 projects: all in German, French and English; 10 projects: several languages without translations.
• 5 projects: parts in another language;
• 5 projects: German or French or Italian, with English;
• 3 projects: G F; 2 projects: G F I;
• 7 projects: only E;
• 2 projects: only F;
• 6 projects: only G.

This is the repartition of native languages in the student population: 65% German, 22% French, 7% Italian, 0.4% Rätoromanisch, 0.8% English, 5% other native language

• (14) Describe any specific cultural issues that affect the institution's students or state that that it is the same as for other institutions in the country. Mention any features relevant to e-learning.

Not relevant, we are talking about a country scale initiative.

• (15) Describe the external quality assurance and/or accreditation regime affecting the institution, or state that it is the same as for other institutions in the country. Mention any features relevant to e-learning.

Evaluation of Teaching by the Institutions: institutional evaluation of teaching is not yet dominant.

• 4 projects reported on evaluations of teaching by the institution in intervals of 3 semesters to several years.
• 6 projects indicated to be supported in their student enquiries by the institutional office for the evaluation of teaching or by another support office of the institution.
• 14 projects indicated to evaluate their courses every time.

Standards: approx. 1/10 active users

• 6 projects use e-learning standards like SCORM and / or QTI (IMS)

---

In general the SVC projects made considerable efforts to assure quality. Their most important concern is the enhancement of the quality of teaching. On the one hand ponderous peer reviews assured the content quality of the material, on the other hand several forms of student feedback were used to assess acceptance in the future user groups. When applying for maintenance for the SVC Consolidation Program the results of an internal project evaluation have to be presented. The projects are therefore obliged to internal quality assurance. The projects handle this obligation in different ways:

• Some projects, like 991053-SWISSLING, had very intense evaluations with internal evaluation teams, often project partners. Especially the students were intensely asked on their learning experiences, but also further aspects of teaching / learning scenarios were investigated. Nearly all projects have at least started to do such internal evaluations with their students.

• Another form of internal evaluation doesn’t concern the quality of the learning processes, but

of the material. Peer review processes take place in all projects in which several partners use the same material. This is not always done as systematically and supported by the computer as it is done with 991017-DOIT. These processes are mostly seen as something evident, and are not even mentioned. Peer review processes are ponderous, but they contribute a lot to the acceptance of the material by the partners. Often the professors continue to use only their own material, but they are conscious of the whole spectrum of project material, and there are first attempts to use material that has been created by other persons, sometimes also in foreign projects.

• The project 200114-SUPPREM is the only one to follow another strategy. There is no peer

review, referring to the academic freedom of teaching. All parts of the material are available to the partners, and there is already an interest in sharing material.

• (16) Describe the approach to credit transfer with other similar institutions.

It seems accreditation was considered since the bigining as the material, courses developed must be integrated into normal cursus.

Pour terminer cette vue d’ensemble de l’état de réalisation et de mise en oeuvre des projets CVS, il nous reste à décrire l’intégration des cours de e-learning développées dans d’éventuels systèmes de points de crédit. Selon les rapports de projet analysés, les produits e-learning de vingt-quatre projets CVS sont mis en oeuvre dans le cadre d’un système de points de crédit (ECTS). Celui-ci peut se présenter sous deux formes: Soit les points ECTS récompensent le fait même que les modules ou cours de e-learning ont été traités ou suivis avec succès, le cas échéant avec en complément un examen à passer en mode présentiel; soit les modules ou séquences de e-learning sont intégrés en complément à l’enseignement présentiel, en parallèle de ce dernier, et ponctuellement à titre substitutif, dans le cadre de leçons (présentielles) dotées de points ECTS. Dans ce cas, les étudiants ne doivent pas seulement fournir la preuve qu’ils ont traité les parties de e-learning, mais doivent également attester d’autres résultats pour obtenir des points ECTS. Le reporting de projet ne permet pas de déterminer exactement la forme la plus fréquente d’attribution de points ECTS pour récompenser les produits élaborés dans le cadre du CVS. Toutefois, en ce qui concerne l’intégration de ces produits dans des systèmes de crédit, il apparaît que la possibilité est offerte aux partenaires participants d’octroyer un nombre variable de crédits à une offre d’e-learning donnée d’après l’importance et le rôle de cette dernière dans un cursus particulier.

Status in 2004: ECTS Points, Certificates,Exams: Approx. 1/3: more than 8 points; Approx. 1/4: between 4 and 8 points; Detailed: 15 projects offer courses summing up for more than 8 ECTS credit points (= approx. 240 working hours of students). 12 projects: between 4 and 8 credit points; 9 projects: between 1 and 4 credit points. 9 projects are not implemented or the number of credit points is 13 Approx. 1/5: between 1 and 4 points. Approx. 3/10 of all projects have changed the exams and have therefore truly obligatory online parts. still open. 2 projects belong to the category “Educational Support”; therefore they do not offer any courses for regular students. 5 projects indicated the credit points for the virtual offers separately. In 14 projects the use of the online learning environment is obligatory. The other projects do the exams as before. The use of the SVC material cannot be truly obligatory there. (Basis: 47 projects)

• (17) List the main associations that the institution is a member of, with a note as to the relevance of each to e-learning (if any).

Not relevant. SVC is not a member of any institution as SVC is a National programme. Universities participating in SVC are probably the members of several association. This should be elaborated.

• (18) List the main international partners of the institution, in the order of strategic importance, with priority given to collaborations involving e-learning.

Nothing available that can proof international partnership with other institutions.

Strategy

Both the monitoring reports and our interviews show a quite diverse situation concerning elearning strategies and commitment of the rectorates in Swiss HEIs. In some of them, either there is an elearning strategy approved by the rectorate or elearning is directly integrated in the overall institutional strategy. In these cases, it was also easy to find an interview partner in the rectorate or directorate (mostly the vice-rector education), who was able to give precise answers concerning the university objectives and measures for elearning. In these cases, there is also a strong push towards integrating the elearning strategy with the overall development of education and didactics and exploiting elearning to solve some of the issues raised by the Bologna reform, including the need for restructuring curricula, the increase of the workload of teachers and the increasing number of students. In other cases the situation is more difficult, since, as emerged from our interviews, the development of elearning at the institutional level is essentially a task of the CCSP leader who has also to convince the rectorate of the importance of elearning and of the need for funding the CCSP. Lack of institutional support was in these cases explicitly indicated as a problem for the diffusion of elearning; a consequence is also the different levels of development in the departments, depending on their preferences and interests. In some cases (see the CCSP description), CCSP leaders still have to get their strategy approved by the rectorate and, in one case, the strategy was refused by the university directorate. However, in our opinion, the overall picture looks positive, since in the directorates of most Swiss higher education institutions there is an awareness of the importance of elearning and of the need for investment in this area. Large variations are however found in the degree of implementation of such a strategy.

(Do not include annual plans.)

• (19) Describe or provide a document describing the current institutional strategy.

Both the monitoring reports and our interviews show a quite diverse situation concerning elearning strategies and commitment of the rectorates in Swiss HEIs. In some of them, either there is an elearning strategy approved by the rectorate or elearning is directly integrated in the overall institutional strategy. In these cases, it was also easy to find an interview partner in the rectorate or directorate (mostly the vice-rector education), who was able to give precise answers concerning the university objectives and measures for elearning. In these cases, there is also a strong push towards integrating the elearning strategy with the overall development of education and didactics and exploiting elearning to solve some of the issues raised by the Bologna reform, including the need for restructuring curricula, the increase of the workload of teachers and the increasing number of students. In other cases the situation is more difficult, since, as emerged from our interviews, the development of elearning at the institutional level is essentially a task of the CCSP leader who has also to convince the rectorate of the importance of elearning and of the need for funding the CCSP. Lack of institutional support was in these cases explicitly indicated as a problem for the diffusion of elearning; a consequence is also the different levels of development in the departments, depending on their preferences and interests. In some cases (see the CCSP description), CCSP leaders still have to get their strategy approved by the rectorate and, in one case, the strategy was refused by the university directorate. However, in our opinion, the overall picture looks positive, since in the directorates of most Swiss higher education institutions there is an awareness of the importance of elearning and of the need for investment in this area. Large variations are however found in the degree of implementation of such a strategy.

• (20) Describe or provide a document describing the current learning and teaching strategy.
• (21) Describe or provide a document describing the current e-learning strategy.

Do not include or refer to annual plans except as necessary to provide budgetary information.

• (22) What is the percentage of students (a) taking courses wholly or largely delivered by e-learning (b) taking courses where the amount of institutionally supplied/guided e-learning is "significant" (i.e. has an impact on staff or students) and (c) taking courses where the where the amount of institutionally supplied/guided e-learning is insignificant? In each case comment on the answer.

While the overall goals of the programme were not modified, the second phase (consolidation phase; 2004-2007) entailed a significant change in the implementation strategy, taking also into account the goal stated in the multiyear planning of Swiss universities of the Rectorʼs Conference (CRUS) to have at least 10% of the courses supported by new educational technologies.

• (23) Give the percentage of the institutional budget that e-learning represents. Comment on how it is measured including the assumptions made, whether it is appropriate and any trends.

considering that SFr 37 millions of federal funds were invested in the SVC impulse programme, the actual “outputs” of the programme (in terms of e-learning products) may seem to be somewhat disappointing. However, there is no ready-to-use benchmark that would help to assess the actual cost of the development and implementation of e-learning programmes in higher education, thus making it difficult to speak precisely in terms of lack of efficiency. In addition, it seems highly probable that some of the framework conditions of the programme (notably the principle of matching funds and the requirement for inter-institutional cooperation), as well as the lack of solid e-learning experience amongst project partners have raised the costs of the different projects.

• (24) Categorise the role (if any) of external funding in fostering the development of e-learning as (a) not relevant, (b) useful, or (c) essential. Comment on the choice.

(c) essential.

La participation des universités au programme est subventionnée dans le cadre des contributions destinées aux projets d’innovation et de coopération selon la loi sur l’aide aux universités (LAU). Celle des écoles polytechniques fédérales (EPF) et des hautes écoles spécialisées a été soutenue respectivement, pour cette première période, par le Conseil des EPF et l’Office fédéral de la formation professionnelle et de la technologie. Les hautes écoles participant aux projets ont dû également contribuer à leur financement.

Structure

• (25) Describe the institutional structure, preferably supplying an organogram.

The organisational structure of the SVC programme has been largely the same throughout its whole life (see Figure 1). The main change from the impulse to the consolidation phase has been the transfer of operational tasks to the CRUS.

While the general responsibility has been attributed to the SUC – taking the formal decisions on funding of CCSP and projects -, the implementation of the programme has been assumed by a steering committee SVC-SC, composed by ten experts in the field, including two foreign experts. The SVC-SC has been responsible for evaluating the CCSP applications, for organizing the call for new projects and the selection process, for defining mandates and support services and, finally, for organising the reporting and monitoring of the activities. The programme coordination was transferred for the consolidation phase from the SUC to the CRUS, with the aim of strengthening the link of the SVC to higher education institutions. Although the programme was launched by the SUC, UAS were integrated into it both concerning the projects and the programme organization; thus, the Federal Office of Professional Education and Technology (OPET) progressively transferred all tasks, except the contracts and payments, to the SVC coordination, which was charged also with the monitoring of CCSP in UAS, of the project selection and monitoring (including financial reporting). With this aim, the OPET financed half a position in the SVC coordination, while the SVC-SC included also UAS representatives.

Participation of FIT was slightly different, since both ETHZ and EPFL developed their own support centres without direct support from the SVC programme; FIT participated in some of the projects and mandates, but their degree of involvement has been lower, especially in the consolidation phase (both institutions disposed also of their own funds for educational innovation and elearning). The FIT board has always been represented in the SVC-SC. In accordance with the Federal Council’s message, the Swiss Virtual Campus is to be run by the existing Swiss University Conference and taken over by the new SUC when it commences operations.

Two bodies were set up to prepare and implement the entire Programme: the SVC Commission and the SVC Steering Committee. The creation of two supervisory bodies ensures that there is close contact with universities, which is essential for the success of the Programme, and that the proposals submitted are given an impartial assessment by recognised specialists.

The main responsibilities of the institutions are as follows:

• Swiss University Conference (SUC)

Under the agreement between the Swiss government and the university cantons on collaboration in the university field, the SUC provides project-linked funds (Art. 6 Para. 1 Item b) and thus assumes responsibility for the Programme. It approves the Implementation Plan and appoints the members of the Steering Committee and its chair upon the proposal of the CRUS.

• Rector's Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS)

The development of online courses and their integration with university curricula are eminently academic areas. Together with the opportunity to strengthen the engagement of the rectorates at the local level through the creation of competence centres, it was deemed appropriate that the operational implementation of the SVC Programme at the national level should also come under the rectorates. This approach was approved by the CRUS, to which the operational implementation was entrusted as of 1 January 2004. The programme coordination office (administration) will be attached to the CRUS for administrative purposes, in the same way as it is now under the SUC. In addition, the CRUS ensures the link between the rectorates and the Programme, a function hitherto handled by the SVC Commission, which was wound up at the end of 2003.

• SVC Steering Committee

The Steering Committee is responsible for implementing the Programme. Its brief is as follows:

• • to carry out the Implementation Plan for 2004-2007
  • to define the qualitative criteria for project selection
  • to organize submissions for projects
  • to evaluate and select drafts and project applications for universities, and propose finance plans for them
  • to evaluate drafts and project applications for universities of applied sciences and forward them to the OPET
  • to monitor and support projects during their development phase
  • to define the mandates to support the Programme and the development of projects; it can decide to place mandates up to an amount of 50,000 francs per contract
  • to submit reports
  • to inform the public

The Steering Committee consists of 10 members, including the chair and two foreign experts. The State Secretariat for Education and Research SER (former Federal Office for Education and Science FOES), OPET, CRUS und SUC each delegate a permanent observer. Guests may be invited to take part in meetings.

The Committee may set up technical groups. It submits its financial proposals to the CRUS for the attention of the SUC.

• Coordination of the SVC Program

The main task of the SVC coordination office (administration) is to assist the Steering Committee in the performance of its duties and in securing the link with and between university competence centres. Its other tasks include:

responsibility for all matters pertaining to programme organization drafting of qualitative and financial reports budget preparation following up mandates and projects in cooperation with the Steering Committee Event organization.

• State Secretariat for Education and Research SER ( former Federal Office for Education and Science FOES)

The SER is responsible for credit management, auditing and reporting, and issues guidelines for this purpose.

• Federal Office for Professional Education and Technology (OPET) The OPET promotes the introduction of eLearning at the Universities of Applied Sciences. The OPET is also represented in the Steering Committee SVC.

• (26) Classify the e-learning support model as (a) hub (b) distributed (c) hub and spokes (d) complicated (e) non-existent. Comment on the choice.
• (27) Describe in more detail the structure for the e-learning operation and how it maps into the institutional structure.

In the institutions where the CCSPs have found stable positions, they have been mostly integrated in the central services, as a part of the vice-rectorate for education; in a number of cases, the CCSP is strongly integrated with the support service for didactics, emphasizing the fact that it is considered as an integral part of the improvement of the educational quality. Thus, SVC Final Evaluation. Background Report Lepori and Probst some CCSPs make a clear link with reforms of curricula as in UNISG – where elearning has been explicitly targeted to support the self-study component – and with the introduction of Bologna; many CCSPs are directly integrated in the process of reform of curricula. A special case is southern Switzerland, where the two HEIs (USI and SUPSI) have decide to join their forces in a single support centre, while in Lucerne the university has delegated the support centre to the pedagogical school.

In a number of cases, the CCSP has been decentralized inside a specific faculty or institute: this reflects the existence of a specialised service at this level (like AUM in the faculty of medicine in Bern), but also the will to have units which still keep a strong link with research on educational technologies, thus avoiding a pure function of service. This is clearly the case for UNISG, EPFL and USI-SUPSI, whose CCSPs are integrated in three institutes with a strong research function in the field, cooperating together in the new doctoral programme on new media in education funded by the Swiss National Science foundation. Other CCSPs found this link with (mostly practice-oriented) research in the field through participation in networks and organization ofinternational events (like the conference of the Gesellschaft für Medien in der Wissenschaft GMW in the German-speaking universities). Some of our respondents clearly stated that the relationship to research is critical in a fast-evolving field like educational technology: it seems that developing a well-functioning CCSP in a long-term perspective entails also a difficult balance between service activities and link to research (with their different internal logics and ways of functioning).

Institution	CCSP	Organization	FTE	LMS
UNIBAS	LearnTechNet	Network	6.9	WebCT, OLAT
UNIBE	VC-Supportzentrum	Network	1.5 (centre)	ILIAS
UNIFR	Centre NTE	Centre	4-5	Moodle
UNIGE	Réseau e-learning	Network	1.75 (centre)	Dokeos + Moodle
UNIL	RISET	Network	5	Moodle
UNILU	E-Learning-Zentrum	Centre	1.7	Blackboard
UNISG	Institut für Wirtschaftspädagogik	Centre	5	Studypoint
UNINE	Coordination elearning	Network	1	Claroline
UZH	ELC	Centre	6.35 (ELC)	OLAT
USI- SUPSI	eLab	Centre	6.6	Moodle
HES-SO	Cyberlearn	Network	2 (centre)	Moodle
FHNW	eLearning Services	Network	-	-
BFH	InnoTeach	Centre	3	Moodle + Sharepoint
FHO	Kompetenzzentrum elearning	Network	?	-
HSLU	Fachstelle Neue Lernmedien	Centre + delegates	2.9	ILIAS
ZFH	CSPC e-Learning	Network	1.2 (centre)	-
EPFL	CRAFT	Centre	17	Moodle
ETHZ	NET	Centre	9.3	various

At the organizational level, roughly speaking, we can distinguish between two different models for the establishments of a CCSP: • The model of the individual centre gathering in a single unit the competences needed for elearning: this model characterizes UZH, UNIFR, USI-SUPSI, UNILU, UNISG and, among the UAS, the HSLU. In some cases, the centre also has delegates in the departments and faculties to allow for a better integration with education. • The network model where the CCSP is composed by the coordination of different units, for example a didactical centre and the informatics services; this model characterizes UNIGE, UNIBAS and UNIL and most of the UAS. This models answers better to the needs of decentralised institutions like UAS or where different centres existed already before the establishment of the CCSP. The interviews showed that both models can function well and, at the end, it is left to individual institutions to find a solution which suits their situation best, even if one has to recognize that network structures are to some extent more difficult to manage. A further concern is about the size of the centres since for some institutions it might be that a critical mass for offering different services and ensuring continuity (for example if the CCSP leader leaves) is not attained. From this perspective, our opinion is that some of the small and more decentralised structures are still rather fragile and depend on the person of the coordination itself and thus consolidation will be required in the next years.

• (28) Describe the committees that oversee e-learning (including the rank and role of the Chair in each relevant committee) and their relationship to the organisational structure.

Learning and Teaching processes

This has a focus on learning and teaching with other aspects viewed from this perspective.

Learning and teaching design and delivery

• (29) Describe how choice of pedagogies and technologies is made for a typical programme that is envisaged to include significant e-learning.

Pedagogical Consulting and Support approx. 1/5: individually organised pedagogical support

At least 15 projects had a pedagogue as a partner or as a team member. At least 4 projects engaged external experts (e.g. independent consultants) for external evaluation and consulting. Many projects mentioned the support centres of the institutions. 8 projects mentioned explicitely to have had positive experiences with IntersTICES, 11 projects with eQuality.

• (30) Describe what scope staff have at delivery stage to refine or in some cases override design decisions made earlier.

Design Rules for the Material approx. 1/5 had a clearly defined concept

15 projects indicated to have developed exact guidelines for the design of the material. For 3 projects this wasn’t relevant because design was done independently by one single person.

Learning and teaching development

This includes materials and IPR.

• (31) How much e-learning content is sourced from outside the institution? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment (an exact percentage is useful).

The new forms of cooperation are manifold. Very rare up to now is the sharing of courses, of students and of teaching material. First the teaching material has to be developed and finished solidly. Up to now the effort of finishing the development of content material despite delays and exaggerated plans has rather slowed down further cooperation initiatives that would presuppose such material.

Many plans for cooperation fail because of the orientation of the material in the content details. Something that seems to fit may well go too much into detail and be too specialised at a closer look. Usually the material is not yet structured systematically into a general and a specialised part in order to make parts of it usable in other contexts. There is still the problem of examples, anyway. They reach their aim only if they are likely to rise interest and to convince. Unusual examples from foreign domains can restrain the learning success.

Fostering the sharing of online material is tightly linked with technical, legal, pedagogical, social and psychological questions; it is a complex domain.

• (32) Of all e-learning content sourced from outside the institution, what fraction is OER? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment.

• (33) When staff in the institution develop content, is the content (a) owned by them and licensed to the institution, (b) owned by the institution but with some licensing back to staff, (c) owned by the institution but with no licensing back to staff, (d) unclear or disputed IPR position? Whatever option is chosen, provide a narrative describing the situation in more detail.

Most projects have plans for further cooperations, but no new users yet. Sharing fails for instance because a project has received the right to use a software free of charge, and it would cost for the new partner. Or because copyright questions aren’t clarified enough to take the risk to let a larger target public use the material; they fear lawsuits. Or because they don’t trust the quality of their own material and want to make further reviews.

• (34) When content is sourced for a programme within the institution, how much is sourced from other departments within the institution? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment (an exact percentage is useful).

• (35) What is the role of student-generated content in the institution's programmes? Use a scale of 1-5 with a comment.

Learning and teaching evaluation and quality

• (36) Describe the quality procedures (a) in general terms and (b) with respect to e-learning.

Student Questionnaires regularly in regular courses. All projects did at least tests with single students. 35 projects indicated to have done student enquiries in regular courses.

• (37) Describe the approach to evaluation of programmes (a) in general terms and (b) where such programmes have significant e-learning components.

• Evaluation of the impulse programme (2000-2003)

Au début du mois de janvier 2003, la Conférence Universitaire Suisse (CUS) a donné mandat au Centre de formation continue de l’Université de Berne (KWB) d’évaluer le programme d’impulsion „Campus Virtuel Suisse“ (CVS). Pour l’exécution de ce mandat, le KWB a travaillé en coopération avec l’Observatoire Science, Politique et Société (OSPS) de l’EPF de Lausanne, tout en assumant la responsabilité du projet.

A set of questions were used to structure the evaluation which took place over a period of sixteen months:

• What are the visions, the goals and objectives of the SVC programme according to its principal stakeholders? What are its expected effects and impacts?

• How do different stakeholders assess the relevance and coherence of the programme? How well do the objectives of the SVC reflect the structural and strategic needs and interests of the institutions concerned?

• What promotion strategies were adopted? What kind of projects were promoted?

• How are the implementation and management of the programme to be judged? What procedures and rules governed the realisation processes of the SVC and its projects? How well did they function?

• What are the most significant results, effects and impacts of the SVC programme? How well has the SVC programme met its objectives?

• How are SVC project results used? How well are they integrated in the curricula of participating institutions?

To address these evaluation questions the following methods and procedures have been applied:

• Analysis of SVC documents and online materials, as for example, SVC execution plan, calls for proposals series 1 and 2, project proposals, project reports, reports on e-site visits, websites of SVC and its projects etc.;

• Semi-structured interviews with 48 key persons and stakeholders of SVC (members of the SVC Steering Committee, the SVC Commission, representatives of the SUC, the federal offices concerned and of participating institutions);

• E-mail questionnaire to project leaders and coordinators (response rate: 50%);

• Review of the 2003 project reporting (24 intermediary and 13 final reports);

• Review of the 15 project submissions for maintenance support.

Consolidation programme:

Evaluation of SVC is being carried out by Professor Robin Mason of the UK Open University. This phase starts with a meeting in April 2008 and continues with interviews of key officials and stakeholders in June 2008. An evaluation report is available and have information of interest:

Meta Learning and Teaching processes

Communications

• (38) Describe how the institution communicates good practice in e-learning within itself, focussing on communications across internal boundaries.
• (39) Describe how the institution communicates its good practice in e-learning to organisations outside.

The brochure is part of SVC policy pursued from 2004-2008 aimed at introducing and expanding SVC products and services beyond the Swiss community of higher education. As a part of this policy, all eLearning products and eLearning services received an additional platform for sharing information. In addition, the policy encouraged the creation of new networks and cooperation projects.

• "Swiss Virtual Campus Consolidation Phase – 2004-2008 CCSPs, projects and mandates Overview"

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/SVC-Brochure-En.pdf (English version) This brochure introduces all products and services that were developed during the consolidation phase of the federal programme called Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC).

• It continues the SVC’s first brochure that was published under the title «The first 50 projects – 2000-2003».

Together they offer an overview of the entire duration of the SVC.

• (40) Describe how the institution communicates good practice in e-learning from outside organisations into its own organisation.
• (41) Describe recent occasions on which institutional leaders or managers have made presentations with significant reference to e-learning.

Value for money

• (42) Describe the annual planning procedure (a) in general and (b) how it handles e-learning aspects.
• (43) Describe the decision-making process for a typical academic programme, with particular reference to how e-learning aspects are handled.
• (44) Describe the decision-making process for a typical large IT project such as selection and installation of a new VLE.
• (45) Describe the approach to budget management with particular reference to the staff versus non-staff issues in budgeting for e-learning.
• (46) Describe the procedures in the institution for assigning or negotiating teaching workload to/with staff, taking account of non-traditional styles of teaching as well as classroom teaching and taking specific account of e-learning.

Staff

Teachers, lecturers, trainers and equivalent support roles

• (47) Describe the approach to development of e-learning technical and pedagogic skills among staff, taking account of the different needs of different categories of staff. Set this within the context of staff development generally.

Technical consulting and support more than 1/2 individual

• 8 projects indicated Edutech as an important consultant and support. 9 projects referred to support structures of their institution.
• 7 projects didn’t need technical support because of their own competencies.
• 11 projects indicated to have profited from the SVC mandate Edutech (http://www.edutech.ch).

• (48) Describe (a) the current level of staff competence in e-learning and (b) the expected level of staff competence in five years time. In each case use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• (49) Describe the extent to which staff attitudes to e-learning are favourable or not. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• (50) Describe the way that the institution rewards and recognises staff with competence in e-learning, in (a) monetary and (b) non-monetary terms.

Management and leadership

This subsection concerns leaders (Rectors, Vice-Chancellors, etc) and academic and support service managers (Deans, Directors, etc). These do not need to have specific knowledge of e-learning details but must have the necessary strategic, management, costing and foresight capability to preside over decisions on key e-learning issues such as procurement of a new VLE, development of a new distance learning programme, rebalancing the library and its staff more towards web 2.0 and less to books, etc. This will require appropriate manager and leader training.

• (51) Describe the approach to development of e-learning-related skills among (a) managers and (b) leaders.
• (52) Describe the current level of (a) management and (b) leadership competence in e-learning related skills appropriate to their levels. In each case use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• (53) describe the extent to which (a) management and (b) leadership attitudes to e-learning are favourable or not. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.
• (54) Give details of the job description of the most senior manager/leader in the organisation who spends a significant portion of his/her time on e-learning matters (e.g. the Director of E-Learning).

Students

Contributions to the Project from Students: 10 projects have integrated contributions from students into project material.

• (55) Describe the approach to development of e-learning skills among students, taking account of the different needs of different categories of students. Set this within the context of students' more general information literacy and communication skills.

• • 72 % understand quickly how to learn with the virtual learning offering.
  • 26% rate the item negatively or are undecided.

• • 63% of the students estimate that their learning processes are supported by the virtual learning offering.
  • 36 % rate the item negatively or are undecided.

• (56) Describe (a) the current level of student competence in e-learning on entry to the institution and (b) the expected level of student competence on graduation from the institution. In each case use a 1-5 scale with a comment.

A line is writen in the report for this purpose. But the matching information cell is empty. ???

• (57) Describe the extent to which student attitudes to e-learning are favourable or not. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.

The small number of statements on learning with virtual learning offerings could mean that students are open and do accept the implementation of eLearning.

• (58) Describe the extent to which students understand the demands on them placed by e-learning systems (e.g. for assignment handling).

72% consider the learning goals to be stated clearly. 18% are indecisive or consider the learning goals as unclear.

• (59) Describe the current approach to handling student plagiarism, both prevention strategies and detection strategies.
• (60) Describe the current (i.e. at last survey) level of student satisfaction with the e-learning aspects of their courses. Use a 1-5 scale with a comment.

60% consider the learning offering as appropriate to achieve the declared learning goals. 35% are undecided or disagree.

Technology

(61) For each of the following technologies relevant to e-learning describe how much it is used on a scale of 1-5 and add a comment if appropriate.

Edutech was in charge to provide support to SVC with technological matters.

• VLE and/or content repository

Plate-forme nationale (WebCT Vista) auprès de SWITCH: Comme une bonne partie des projets CVS est destinée au WebCT, une plate-forme nationale WebCT Vista a été créée auprès de SWITCH sur mandat du CVS. Celle-ci compte mille „seats“ dans un premier temps, disponibles pour les projets CVS correspondants. En fonction des résultats de cette première plate-forme, une sera, possiblement, ouverte.

• email or bulletin boards
  • Course e-Mail
  • Discussion-Forum
• automated assessment
• Web 2.0 tools especially blogs, wikis and social networks oriented to the institution
  • textbooks
  • Collaboration : 12% use the virtual offerings for collaboration and 15% only partly
• e-portfolios
• laptops - and comment on student ownership issues
• audio or video podcasting or streaming - and comment on student ownership issues
• mobile devices (not laptops) - and comment on student ownership issues

And finally:

• Provide a description of any other technologies with significant use in the institution.

• • Flash Notes: Flash Support for SVC Projects
  • 19 projects have developed software.

Futures

A la demande du président du Comité de pilotage du Campus Virtuel Suisse (CVS), nous vous transmettons quelques informations sur la situation et l'état actuel de la négotiation concernant la réalisation d'un "service national de plateforme":

Le Comité de pilotage du CVS a soumis à la Conférence Générale (Conférence des Recteurs des Universités Suisses CRUS, Conférence Suisse des Hautes Écoles Spécialisées CSHES, Conférence Suisse des Recteurs des Hautes Écoles Pédagogiques CSHEP) la proposition qu'un service national de plateforme soit offert par SWITCH à partir de janvier 2008. Il est prévu que la plateforme WebCT Vista et une plateforme en logiciel libre soient hébergées. Une répartition du financement entre des contributions fédérales fixes et des frais d' exploitation variables en fonction du nombre d'utilisateurs doit permettre une utilisation peu onéreuse de l'offre. La CRUS, la CSHES et la CSHEP plaident pour la mise en place d'un service national de plateforme à partir de 2007 et recommandent à SWITCH de négocier avec le Comité de Pilotage du CVS pour réaliser l'hébergement et l'opérationnalisation des plateformes correspondantes. Le Comité de pilotage du CVS dispose de licences auprès de WebCT Vista jusqu'à la fin 2007 et négocie pour le moment avec SWITCH pour l'acquisition de licences à vie. Les négociations doivent être conclues entre WebCT, SWITCH et le Secrétariat d’Etat à l'éducation et à la recherche SER. La Conférence universitaire suisse CUS doit approuver formellement la décision. Nous espérons qu'une décision sera encore possible cette année. La fusion de WebCT et de Blackboard a peu d'influence sur le service de plateforme à court et à moyen terme. A long terme, une modification concernant les produits software est possible.

• (62) Describe the expected changes as they relate to e-learning within the institution's current strategic horizon (from the institution's strategy documents).
• (63) Describe any changes further downstream that the institution is now considering or concerned about.
• (64) Describe how the institution handles the foresight aspects of its operation with regard to e-learning.

After the Swiss Virtual Campus

Already at the beginning of the consolidation phase it had been determined that the costs for funding eLearning projects should gradually be integrated into the normal budgets at the institutes for higher education. The Rectors’ Conference of the Swiss Universities (CRUS) confirmed this plan in September 2007 and emphasised that in the future the development of eLearning as an inherent component of teaching would lie in the sole responsibility of the institutes for higher education. With this in mind, all stakeholders have prepared for the transition and the handing over of projects to the two major stakeholders: the centres of competence, service and production (CCSPs) and the foundation SWITCH, both of which will offer a package of central services for the teaching staff after the SVC phase.

CCSPs The centres of competence, service and production (CCSPs) at the various institutes of higher education have been implemented or strengthened in the SVC’s consolidation phase and will essentially continue to function in the post-SVC phase and promote the development and the use of educational technology. Although the size and organisational structure of the CCSPs may vary among the different institutes of higher education, the services they offer can be classified into two major categories: support in didactic or technical questions as regards implementing eLearning tools, and support for the executive boards at the institutes of higher education regarding the strategic integration of new educational technology to improve the quality of academic teaching.

SWITCH SWITCH has always been a preferred contact of the SVC. Particularly within the framework of the mandates assigned by the steering committee of the SVC, SWITCH has developed a broad range of services for the eLearning community. Over the course of time, this collaboration has evolved into the «eduhub»8 concept, first initiated by the SVC and consequently elaborated and implemented by SWITCH. This concept enables SWITCH to regularly offer the Swiss eLearning community an entire package of activities and central services9. One of the more important activities was setting up the «Educational Technology Working Group» which provides a platform for various representatives of the CCSPs and the stakeholders who are responsible for new educational technology at the institutes of higher education. The working group aims to promote educational technology in academic education in Switzerland by cooperating mainly on a national level. Other goals include political lobbying and international networking.

Teaching staff However, beyond establishing the central services that are now available, it is obvious that the success of eLearning in the post-SVC phase and in the coming years will also depend on teachers and lecturers, their enthusiasm and commitment, and their conviction of the benefit of new educational technology.

• (65) Describe how the institution handles advanced development oriented to e-learning (e.g. by a "sandbox" lab, innovation centre, etc).
• (66) Describe how the institution analyses and takes into account present and future markets for its offerings.

A big challenge for the next few years will be to use, maintain and disseminate these results without direct federal funding within ordinary teaching assignments and supported by the existing service units within institutions of higher education (IHE). The use of existing material for further users should be profitable for the projects.

• (67) Describe how the institution analyses and takes into account present and future competitor suppliers for its offerings.
• (68) Describe how the institution analyses and takes into account the views of other stakeholders, including but not restricted to employers, local authorities and the social partners (unions).

References and reports

Add what you can.

Impulse phase:

• Evaluation report of the impulse programme (2000-2003)

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/evaluation/Impulsprogramm_fr_total.pdf (French version with summary in English)

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/evaluation/Impulsprogramm_dt_total.pdf (German version)

• Documentation "The Swiss Virtual Campus and the Swiss Universities" for the pavillon at the exposition Learntec 2003

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/brochures/Learntec_03_E.pdf (English version) http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/brochures/Learntec_03_D.pdf (German version) http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/brochures/Learntec_03_F.pdf (French version)

Consolidation phase:

• Execution plan 2004 – 2007 - French version

http://www.virtualcampus.ch/docs/svc_cp/Execution_Plan_f.pdf

• Execution plan 2004 - 2007 - German version

http://www.virtualcampus.ch/docs/svc_cp/Execution_Plan_d.pdf

Swiss Virtual Campus - Consolidation Phase – 2004-2008 - CCSPs, projects and mandates Overview

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/SVC-Brochure-En.pdf (English version)

Campus Virtuel Suisse - 2004-2008 - CCSP, projets et mandats - Tour d'horizon

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/SVC-Brochure-Fr.pdf (French version)

Konsolidierungsphase - 2004-2008 - CCSP, Projekte und Mandate - Überblick

http://www.swissvirtualcampus.ch/docs/SVC-Brochure-De.pdf (German version)

Swiss Virtual Campus Status Report 2004 Consolidated Results of the Mandate “SVC Status Reports and Project Monitoring” concerning the Projects of the Impulse Program 2000−2003

http://www.virtualcampus.ch/docs/mandates/SVC%20Mandate%20Status%20Reports.pdf

• Evaluation report of the consolidation programme (2004-2007) - French, German and English version

http://www.cus.ch/wDeutsch/publikationen/SVC/SVC-Evaluationsbericht-2004-07-online.pdf

---

SVC- Lessons learned - impulse programme

SVC- Lessons learned - consolidation programme

Swiss Virtual Campus - Case study (F)

Swiss Virtual Campus - Case study (D)

---

> Switzerland
> Programmes

>> Case studies