Making the Institutional Business Case for Introducing Learning Design Tools
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5334/2005-16Keywords:
e-learning development, IMS Learning Design, learning design, Learning Design tools, vendor lock-In, effective uptake, innovation, educational technology,Abstract
Commentary on: Chapter 21: Challenges in the Wider Adoption of Learning Design: Two Exploratory Case Studies. (Griffiths, Blat, Casado, GarcÃa, MartÃnez, Sayago, 2005)
Abstract: This paper explores constraints around institutions, particularly in respect of the potential for effective uptake of LD tools within institutions. It seeks mechanisms that may reduce the balance of effort so creation of UOLs based on LD is more justifiable in institutional contexts. It attempts to illustrate how apparent similarity between what are substantially different contexts can mask potential LD benefits. This can affect adoption of LD either through LD-based tools or through vendor-reliance of an institution.
The role of teams of LD experts, not affiliated to mainstreaming work in an institution, is also examined. Particular attention is paid to how they are contributing to reducing institutional load in providing the type of support described. This may help increase eventual uptake of individual LD developments.
Editors: Colin Tattersall and Rob Koper.Interactive demonstrations: Some footnote links can only be accessed by members' login to the community area relevant to the discussion in this paper. Viewing the development versions of tools and UoLs described will require registration and/or approval with the relevant community. This includes:
- UNFOLD (Understanding New Frameworks of Learning Design) CoP site. Registration details available from: https://www.unfold-project.net:8082/UNFOLD/join_form
- Moodle Open Universiteit Nederland. Registration details available from: http://moodle.learningnetworks.org/
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2005 The Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms (if a submission is rejected or withdrawn prior to publication, all rights return to the author(s)):
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Submitting to the journal implicitly confirms that all named authors and rights holders have agreed to the above terms of publication. It is the submitting author's responsibility to ensure all authors and relevant institutional bodies have given their agreement at the point of submission.
Note: some institutions require authors to seek written approval in relation to the terms of publication. Should this be required, authors can request a separate licence agreement document from the editorial team (e.g. authors who are Crown employees).
Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License