SVC- Lessons learned - consolidation programme

Ils en ont tiré un bilan globalement positif, même s'ils ont constaté qu'il existe encore de grandes différences entre les hautes écoles concernées.

Il relève ensuite que ce Comité partage les doutes des experts quant à l'avenir des projets CVS.

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.

The involvement of the rectors remains crucial Elearning can be sustainable only if it becomes …ʼin place ofʼ…instead of “nice to have” things. The true benefits of elearning can only be realised when there is a reconceptualisation of the curriculum and of the process of teaching and learning. This change requires staff development, a technology watch function and most of all, leadership in overseeing the changes needed to remain abreast of changes in higher education teaching and learning. Excellence in teaching should be considered one criterion for promotion.

The panel noted that some projects had produced very good elearning products, had won awards and were continuing to be used. Nevertheless, others have been at a fairly basic level – access to a virtual learning platform by all students and teachers putting powerpoint slides on their class website, are not considered to be elearning elsewhere.

Some of the CCSPs had clearly been very effective and were positioned to continue. Others clearly were not. Similarly, a few projects had integrated the Bologna process changes with the SVC project, but most had not

Some professors had certainly improved their teaching, acquired new teaching methods and diversified their testing, but on the whole, the panel did not feel that enough professors had made these changes to sustain the elearning impetus.

In describing the framework of the policy followed by SVC, it is remarkable that Bologna happened at the same time but was not consequently the target of SVC. If we compare the policy of HEAD and JISC (UK) to that of SVC then it is obvious that the idea of assisting the transformation to Bologna and integrating elearning into the student lifecycle did not occur in the SVC project

Concerning the distribution of elearning across the landscape of the curricula the answer is: the funded projects and their developed content are more like archipeligoes in the Pacific and not solid continents. Nevertheless, a number of goals underneath the country-wide level may have been achieved.

There also was no change management component involved, that is to the teaching-learning organisation, as it has remained untouched. In particular, they need direct support from the rector, and in some cases this appeared to be lacking.

The CCSPs need to exchange ideas about how they should be organised, and how to carry out training and staff development. Meetings took place during the funding period, and some meetings still continue but without this impetus, it was questionable whether this exchange of ideas would continue

There were a number of issues raised by the SVC project which the panel did not have the time to tackle in any depth. One of these was the issue of distance or fully online programmes. The panel noted that through the course of the SVC project, the practice of blended learning was adopted over that of distance learning. This seems entirely appropriate to the panel, as distance education requires a different structure and support system than is currently in place in Switzerland. Nevertheless, the panel could foresee niche applications of fully online courses in the Swiss system.

There should be links between the CCSPs and institutes that do research in the field of education, and there should be links between the CCSPs and staff development for Higher Education. CCSPs need an overall co-ordinator

Secondly, projects themselves see their future perspectives as rather positive and affirm that the developed products are and will be used in education in most cases, even if lack of funding might impair future developments. CCSPs and monitoring visits give a more differentiated view, where the projects which are based on standard technical solutions will be maintained, while more innovative and niche projects will have more difficulties.

Firstly, during the time of the SVC Programme most Swiss HEIs developed an elearning strategy and established a support centre which will be further continued after the end of programme. Most respondents in rectorates and CCSPs were quite confident in the future and stated that responsibility for elearning can now be fully taken by the institutions themselves. At the same time, a number of problematic cases emerged where the CCSP is still in development or the situation is largely unclear. Thus, in our opinion, support and promotion of CCSP has been the most successful part of the whole Consolidation Programme and a solid heritage for the future development of elearning.

e-learning strategy unclear (for HEI).

A national research programme in the field of technology-enhanced learning should be launched in order to sustain the initiative.

Finally, it should be stated explicitly that the aim of all elearning activity should be excellence in teaching. Currently one aspect of excellence is the enhancement of student-centred learning. In this regard, there should be increased input from students in these developments.