Ofsted survey - Virtual learning environments: an evaluation of their development in a sample of educational settings

This 13/1/2009 Ofsted report, [28 pages, 130 kB PDF], describes itself as a survey which "evaluates how VLEs are developing with a selection of providers" in the school (primary through to secondary) and FE sectors, including work-based learning providers, and adult and community learning providers.

The selection of 41 providers (all in England, where Ofsted functions, and all visited between January and May 2008) is wide and representative, and the survey is unusual in that it is issued by an organisation that takes a hard nosed possibly pedestrian line that focuses on learners and learning, with no in built enthusiasm for technology. The survey includes two case studies - one based on Havering College, and the other on the TeesLearn VLE platform.

The "key findings", which make depressing if predictable reading, and the "recommendations" are below in full in the continuation post below.

Anyone responsible for VLE use, or for policy in this area should read the report in full. (My own reaction to it is that it is slightly off the pace with what the best providers are doing, and that it could have been more explicit about the benefits of "doing VLE things" at scale - as in the Scottish GLOW initiative. And are Ofsted and its predecessors in part contributors to the basically rather dire state of affairs reported, through its failure to integrate concrete assessment of the effectiveness of VLE use into the inspection regime?)

Key findings

• "In all the settings surveyed the concept of VLEs was relatively new. Colleges were making most use of them, primary schools the least.
• The best VLEs enhanced learning, giving learners the opportunity to reinforce aspects of their work as well as the chance to catch up on missed material. VLEs were least effective when they had little content or were just a dumping ground for rarely used files.
• There was no correlation between effective VLEs and any particular subject area.
• The main factor behind a successful VLE area was the enthusiasm of individual teachers or trainers and often linked with their good use of technology to improve learning in the classroom or workshop. College teaching staff mainly used their own developed materials; schools made more use of externally produced materials.
• No VLEs seen were fully comprehensive and effective over all curriculum areas; over three quarters had elements that were good, but less than a third covered most subjects.
• Learners surveyed were generally content to use material where it was available on a VLE, and appreciated the opportunities it gave them to manage their course work.
• The best VLEs had strong support from senior managers with good resources for development and maintenance. However, only three institutions had VLE strategies; development was normally a small part of an integrated learning technology strategy. None of the institutions had comprehensive formal qualityassurance arrangements for VLE material to confirm accuracy, relevance, currency, suitability, or usage.
• The self-assessment of VLEs and their impact on learning was underdeveloped.
• Direct costs associated with introducing and running a VLE were not a particular concern for larger organisations and those using systems freely available on the internet. However smaller institutions struggled with the costs of the routine maintenance of information technology systems and a VLE. Time taken by staff to produce material was seen as a major challenge in some providers.
• The main use of a VLE by students in colleges was on site, albeit out of lessons. Conversely, where there was less access to computers at the provider, for example in some schools, adult and community learning and work-based learning providers, more time was spent by learners on the VLE at home.
• Work-based learning providers visited saw great potential in the use of the VLE; but they had concerns as to whether they could, with their limited resources, fully exploit the potential.
• Only one example was seen of the use of a VLE shared across a consortium for use in the diplomas for the 14–19 age group."

Recommendations

"The introduction of VLEs is at an early stage in most contexts. A great deal of development work is being carried out by individual institutions, local authorities, Becta, the Learning and Skills Council, the Department for Innovation Universities and Skills and the Department for Children, Schools and Families. To assist in this work it is recommended that:

The Department for Children, Schools and Families and the Department for
Innovation, Universities and Skills with their relevant partner organisations should:

• continue to guide the development of electronically-based learning materials, in particular to support courses for 14–19-year-olds and for learners on adult and community learning programmes
• assess whether the intended process for evidencing teachers', tutors' and trainers' personal skills in information and communication technology for conferral of licensed practitioner status in the further education sector should cover the skills needed to develop and manage material on a VLE.

The Learning and Skills Council and its successor organisations should continue with the funding of work-based learning e-learning and VLE development and share good practice from current projects.

Providers should:

• develop specific VLE strategies that identify senior management responsibilities
• ensure that VLEs are designed to enhance learning and are not just a storage or communication facility
• put in place quality assurance procedures that evaluate VLE usage and set standards, but that also balance the need for individual staff responsibility for their own material, with a requirement to ensure that widely available material is relevant, current, understandable to individuals, and suitable for the institution
• routinely conduct an assessment of the impact of VLEs on learners' outcomes
• develop staff development systems where whole-institution events concentrate on understanding the potential benefits of the VLE and sharing of good practice, as well as a general awareness of strategy, while skills needs are met on an individual basis
• link VLE development with improving the effective use of integrated learning technology in classrooms and workshops
• ensure, where appropriate, that a VLE is used to support learning across any consortium developing 14–19 diplomas or other shared provision."

Comments

[Walt Patterson]

As a former Inspector I would echo Seb's comments regarding insufficient emphasis on integrating ICT into the inspection regime. This, coupled with a lack of training for inspectors in what to expect from well-planned deployment of ICT in support of learning, has meant that most inspection reports either make only fleeting reference to a school's ICT provision, or praise a development that is well behind the leading edge.

My own experience of VLEs in colleges mirrors that reported by OFSTED. Most often they become repositories for all the notes, worksheets, powerpoints that a lecturer has ever produced for a unit or course, rather than an organiser for learning.

And I fear that Seb is overkind to Glow. The potential is there, but in some LAs not much is happening on the ground. Scottish Learning Festivel 2009 might tell us a better story - we hope.

[kevin brace]

Our experiences of working in and with Colleges and Universities echoes the Oftsed report findings (sadly). The main issues is the time to up-skill academia at all levels - i.e. lack of it. Plus a radical redesign in curriculum to move towards more collaborative active student centred'ness, would help exploit the true potential of a VLE.

Regards Kevin Brace. JISC RSC East Midlands elearning advisor

[Kristianstill]

Thanks for this Seb. It's a great summary, one which I can share with the Leadership team. Its good to have another voice of reason in your corner...... especially when its Ofsted and your talking to SLT. Hindsight bottled.

==
Kristian - bear in mind that most of the post is copy and paste from the Ofsted report. The bit in brackets is the only "synthesis" on my part. Cheers, Seb.

[Ray Tolley]

Seb, I must disagree with your comment that this is a "is wide and representative" report. When Becta has repeatedly demanded over the last few years that EVERY school should have a VLE installed by Spring of 2008, how can a survey that only includes two schools be "representative"? [Response from Seb: the dozen schools reviewed of which five are secondary schools are listed by me at the foot of Ray Tolley's comment. Apparently the introduction to the report says that only two secondary schools were covered.]

I discussed some of the reasons for this recently in the TES blog at:

http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/t/284674.aspx?PageIndex=2/

See my entry at entry #14.

My own research some two years ago had responses from almost two hundred schools which identified similar findings. An incredible amount of money has been spent and continues to be spent on installing VLEs into every school. But, as I suggest in the TES response, there has been an almost total failure to provide any enlightened training as to what this 'thing' is for and how it might be used or abused.

The pressure to get Remote Access available to every home is a lofty ideal and the Home Access initiative to subsidise the availability of equipment in homes for every child (according to 'poverty' indexes) is yet further provoking this rush to get VLEs installed.

However, the fundamental error in all of this has been not to involve the real stakeholders in this initiative. Parents, pupils, and ordinary classroom teachers have not been involved in the discussions about the plan to install a VLE in their school.

Again, as I suggest in the TES article, few teachers have been involved in any discussions as to how the VLE will change teaching and learning. For many the VLE is something of an elephant being explored by a group of blindfolded people. Only when the blindfolds are taken off and people are able to put together all the different aspects of their discoveries will we be able to begin to use the VLE efficiently.

See more of my discussion of VLEs on my website, or my e-Portfolio blog at www.efoliointheuk.blogspot.com.

==
Ray - I'm confused by your long comment that only 2 schools were included.

This is the list of schools covered.

All Saints C of E Junior School, Fleet
Bridgewater High School, Warrington
Castle Hill St Philip's C of E Primary School, Wigan
Hamble Primary School, Hampshire
Hilbre High School, Wirral
Lincoln Gardens Primary School, North Lincs,
Lynn Grove VA High School, Norfolk*
Parkside Pupil Referral Unit, Ipswich*
The Compton School, Barnet
Sir William Borlase's Grammar School, Marlow*
St. Philip’s Catholic Primary and Nursery School, Leeds
St Joseph's Catholic Primary School, Seaham, County Durham

Those with * were reviewed remotely, it seems.

Seb