1
Assignment 3 (Option B): Analysis and Comparison of eLearning
Implementation
Tasneem Irhouma
Master of Educational Technology (MET)
ETEC 520 66A 2021S1-2 Planning and Managing Learning Technologies in Higher
Education
Dr. Leah Macfadyen
August 12th, 2021
2
This paper aims to examine and compare how well e-learning has been implemented
into the inner-workings of two of the UK’s most prestigious and distinguished universities:
The University of Oxford and the University of Edinburgh. Both institutions hold vastly
impressive achievements dating back centuries, but their e-learning implementation proves to
show them at two very different stages.
The University of Oxford
The University of Oxford, located in Oxford, England, boasts the status of one of the
world’s oldest universities that presently teaches nearly 12,000 undergraduates and 12,000
postgraduates. Oxford currently only offers traditional in-person diplomas, though few
distance education programs and courses, both synchronous and asynchronous, are offered
that target professionals, part-time learners, and graduate students. To analyze Oxford’s elearning implementation, published Oxford strategy and action plans, coupled with
information scattered throughout the university website, will be referenced.
Recently, Oxford has invested in a new learning management system (LMS), and has
hinted towards an initiative to review its current Digital Education Strategy1 and refine it as
needed, though this still seems to be in the early planning phases; its publication is to be
expected in 2022. There is some evidence of some interest in initiating a blended course
format and support for online learning, but these seem to be a deviance in the Oxford norm.
The University of Edinburgh
With a history dating back to 1538, the University of Edinburgh (UoE) in Edinburgh,
Scotland, also boasts the status of being one of the world’s oldest universities, though its elearning implementation differs heavily from that of Oxford’s. UoE’s e-learning
implementation will be analyzed by evaluating its most recent UoE Strategic Plan.
11
https://www.ctl.ox.ac.uk/digital-education-strategy
3
In addition to offering a large number of massive open online courses (MOOCs) for
anyone looking to receive addition educational opportunities, UoE also offers a blended,
distant, and traditional learning experiences for its 33,000 students. Efforts to implement elearning within UoE are cited as early as 2004, where the university first released an elearning strategy2 that aimed to have e-learning as a “part of the core business” by 2007 (The
University of Edinburgh, 2004).
Strategies and Implementation Plans
Initiatives
The e-learning initiative at Oxford is not overtly mentioned as a priority within
Oxford’s 2018-23 Strategic Plan3, but is vaguely revealed within Education’s Commitment 3:
“We will ensure that teaching is informed by best practice, an inclusive approach to learning
and the opportunities for innovation offered by digital technology” (University of Oxford,
2018, p. 3). Initiative to implement e-learning is also hinted at in Resources’ Commitment 3,
where Oxford promises to “continue to invest in our information technology capability to
enhance the quality of our research and education and to streamline our administrative
processes” (University of Oxford, 2018, p. 6). This seems to indicate that Oxford is aware of
the importance of the opportunities e-learning presents, but does not see it as important
enough to be a significant focus in their strategic plan; however, Oxford recently announced
that their Digital Education Strategy is to be reviewed and republished in 2022, citing the
pandemic as a catalyst for the review: “Since then, we have since made extraordinary
progress in our online learning offering - with our progress dramatically accelerated by the
COVID-19 pandemic” (University of Oxford, n.d.-a). This indicates that the COVID-19
pandemic may have forced Oxford to reevaluate its strategic planning priorities as it became
2
3
http://www.docs.sasg.ed.ac.uk/gasp/strategicplanning/elearningstrategy.pdf
https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/field/field_document/Strategic%20Plan%202018-23.pdf
4
abundantly clear how necessary e-learning implementation is in an institution of that
prominence.
The University of Edinburgh prides itself as being “at the forefront of digital
education”, claiming that “students’ learning and progress are supported by the latest learning
technologies, innovative teaching methods and committed personal tutors” (The University of
Edinburgh, 2018a). Within the UoE 2016 Strategic Plan4, the institution outlines two
principle strategic objectives to focus on: Leadership in Learning, and Leadership in
Research. Within the Leadership in Learning objective, UoE outlines specific aims to
“develop flexible study pathways. These will vary across disciplines but will include online
and blended learning opportunities and other innovative approaches to teaching and
assessment” (The University of Edinburgh, 2018a) and “promote the widely available
learning opportunities that we offer our local and global communities, including
opportunities for those not able to attend the University in person, such as lifelong learning
and digital education platforms, festivals and other channels” (The University of Edinburgh,
2018a). To promote Leadership in Research, UoE cites their objective of “invest[ing] in
digital services that are key to discovery, development and sharing” (The University of
Edinburgh, 2018b). UoE also outlines four key development themes, with one focusing on
digital transformation and data; the essence of this development area is to further transform
UoE’s environment to cater for new technological demands, including “offer[ing] a digital
education experience including online programmes that widen access” and cultivating a
digital culture where “every core service is fully digital” and “every student and staff member
is constantly updating their digital skills” (The University of Edinburgh, 2018b).
Bates and Sangrà (2017) emphasize the importance of comprehensive objectives and
goals when successfully planning the use of e-learning within institutions; both these
4
https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/atoms/files/strategic_plan_2016.pdf
5
institutions contrast heavily in the initiatives and objectives they prioritize. While UoE has
made it evident that they value technology as an educational tool and continue to develop
their e-learning strategies, Oxford seems more hesitant to reform traditional teaching methods
and resorts to generic objectives and buzz words within their strategic plans, though seems to
be more open to prioritizing e-learning initiatives, as suggested by its announcement of a
revised digital education strategy.
Implementation and Monitoring
Oxford releases an annual reporting that reviews the institution’s achievements and
progress in reaching their strategic objectives. In the Oxford Annual Review 20205, very little
is focused on the progression of e-learning and instead, focuses on research breakthroughs; it
is to be expected that the top research-intensive institution in the world would give more
focus to its research. Evidently pushed by the demands of the pandemic, the Oxford Financial
Statement 2019-20206 gives some insight into new e-learning implementation, where it
claims that Oxford made “a successful transition to remote-only teaching and open book
examinations” by “invest[ing] in its virtual learning environment and expanded its digital
library access” and transforming its formerly traditional classroom formats to “a combination
of online lectures and in-person small-group teaching, laboratory and practical work”
(University of Oxford, 2020, p. 8). The exact steps Oxford took to implement these new
changes is unclear, though their COVID-19 response states that they have “a range of new
tools and technologies to support your learning” and “are also investing in technology in the
classroom, so that students can access high-quality teaching, whether that be in-person or
online” (University of Oxford, 2021).
5
https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/Oxford_2020_Annual_Review.pdf
6
https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/field/field_document/Oxford%20University%2C%20Financial%20State
ment%202019-20_0.pdf
6
UoE’s strategy plan outlines how they plan to measure their success in achieving its
goals outlined in the plan. It mentions that performance will be measured against the
objectives though “a combination of quantitative metrics and narrative case studies” (The
University of Edinburgh, 2020); UoE’s University Court7 is responsible for overseeing the
performance levels and are responsible for monitoring “how our aims are being achieved at
operational levels and that indicate whether we will achieve our desired impacts” (The
University of Edinburgh, 2020). An annual progress report8 is published that monitors
strategic measures and offers notes on progress in terms of strengths and improvement areas.
Present e-Learning Support and Delivery
Governance
As indicated by Bates and Sangrà, “a model of governance is needed that enables both
the needs of the institution as a whole and the needs of the many end users to be
accommodated” (2011, p. 124). Oxford’s IT governance9 is led by their IT Committee, who
“develop, contribute to and implement the policies, governance and strategies for IT
provision across the University.” The exact responsibilities of the committee are restricted
behind the university’s firewall, but it is said that it is to “ensure its members get the
maximum benefit from IT – whether in research, teaching and learning or administration”
(University of Oxford, n.d.-b).
UoE’s Knowledge Strategy Committee10 was created for the purpose of “oversee[ing]
the University's knowledge management activities in the areas of Library, Information
Technology, technology enhanced learning, Management Information and e-Administration”
(The University of Edinburgh, 2017), which aligns with the committee structure outlined by
7
https://www.ed.ac.uk/governance-strategic-planning/governance/university-court
https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/atoms/files/annual_progress_report_to_court_december_2019.pdf
9
https://www.it.ox.ac.uk/governance-strategy-and-policies
10
https://www.ed.ac.uk/strategic-planning
8
7
Bates and Sangrà (2011, p. 111), coupled with the diffusion of technology management
(2011, p. 123).
Organizational Structure
Oxford’s Centre for Learning and Teaching11 (CLT) and its IT Service Centre12 work
jointly with students, faculty, and the institution’s constituent units to deliver available elearning tools. The IT Centre consists of a senior management team, with Oxford’s CIO13
heading the centre, while the CLT is headed by an executive director with an ample amount
of publications focusing on digital education and educational leadership14; this aligns with
Bates and Sangrà’s (2011, p. 124) idea of a technology professional being a potential leader.
However, the Digital Education Strategy Plan suggests that leaders within each faculty decide
what e-learning technology and direction will be implemented, indicated by Bullen (2017b)
as a collegial organizational culture. In essence, without a higher authority implementing or
incentivizing the use of e-learning, the degree of e-learning integration will depend on the
faculty.
UoE does not offer any information openly about the specific organizational structure
of the institution. However, led by the university’s CIO and librarian, UoE’s Information
Services (IS)15 is the primary body responsible for offering e-learning support and carrying
out e-learning initiatives outlined by the strategy plan. The IS seems to offer supporting tasks,
while specific colleges separately implement their own e-learning initiatives.
Learning Technologies
Oxford is currently in the process of phasing out its former virtual learning
environment (VLE), WebLearn, and replacing different tools within WebLearn with different
11
https://www.ctl.ox.ac.uk/#/
https://www.it.ox.ac.uk/home#/
13
https://www.it.ox.ac.uk/people/sean-duffy
14
https://www.ctl.ox.ac.uk/people/rhona-sharpe
15
https://www.ed.ac.uk/information-services
12
8
programs that specialize in those tools. For example, teaching and learning activities will all
be delivered using Canvas as the primary LMS, and file sharing and online collaboration will
be delivered with Microsoft Teams. It has also recently invested in Replay Lecture Capture, a
tool to automatically record lectures. As it prepares to make WebLearn read-only by 202216,
Oxford offers a number of guides and assistance to help students’ and faculty members’
transitions to the new tools flow more smoothly.
University of Edinburgh’s IS offers a number of different technological services and
tools to enhance the quality of e-learning; the institution boasts two VLEs, Learn and
Moodle, that are used to access course materials, assignments, lecture recordings, and grades
that supports more than 5000 courses and “used to support face to face teaching, blended
learning, and fully online courses” (The University of Edinburgh, 2019b). IS also offers
different guides on how to access and use e-learning tools, as well as additional workshops
and support on how to use these tools in the different classroom types.
Both universities show evidence of offering e-learning services and addition support
for the services. Oxford’s switch to a different VLE and investment in different e-learning
tools is an optimistic sign of the institution seeing the importance of e-learning integration.
Support and Infrastructure
Oxford’s IT Services manages and supports the core IT systems, tools, and services.
The infrastructure is managed on three levels: “the data and networks that are the foundation
of the University’s IT infrastructure”, which includes access to the university’s systems; “the
server and storage management needed for hosting applications”, and “the applications
themselves, used University-wide by both staff and students” (University of Oxford, n.d.-c),
which includes the VLEs and support services. Moreover, Oxford’s Bodleian Libraries17
16
17
https://projects.it.ox.ac.uk/new-projects-coming-soon#/
https://www.bodleian.ox.ac.uk/home#/
9
facilitates and manages online library services that also offers support and workshops for
online tools.
UoE’s IS is the primary manager of the university’s IT, library, and physical
infrastructures, while providing assistance and technology necessary to navigate them,
specifically in nine distinct directorates: “IT infrastructure and services, information security,
library services, museums and collections, learning and teaching technologies & services,
digital skills training support, web services, hardware and software management and remote
learning capabilities” (The University of Edinburgh, 2019a). Online and phone support is
offered throughout these different fields, as well as a general IT helpline.
Both institutions offer strong infrastructure and assistance that aid in creating a more
effective e-learning environment. One area of improvement for both is to offer longer support
hours; Bullen emphasizes that wide-scale implementation of e-learning requires support
hours beyond the conventional 9-5. (Bullen, 2017a) This is especially important as distance
learning and online courses become more widespread.
Budget and Funding
Oxford’s latest financial statement18 does not specifically mention e-learning as an
area of financial interest within their budget, but there are some subtle mentions that suggest
some level of funding going towards e-learning. One of the strategic priorities mentioned in
the financial statements is “to sustain high levels of investment in technology in order to
compete within a rapidly evolving digital environment” (University of Oxford, 2020, p. 7)
and “to continue to invest in our information technology capability to enhance the quality of
our research and education and to streamline our administrative processes” (University of
Oxford, 2020, p. 7); this suggests that e-learning funds are taken from other “base funded”
18
https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/field/field_document/Oxford%20University%2C%20Financial%20State
ment%202019-20_0.pdf
10
(Bullen, 2017c) areas, specifically within their publishing and research items. The next
annual financial statements may offer more insight into the funds spent on new e-learning
implementation; as the pandemic served as a catalyst that forced Oxford to invest in new
digital technologies, Oxford claims that “it is too soon to say what the financial impact of the
pandemic will be on the University in terms of publishing income, student income, research
income and exhibition, conference and trading revenue” (University of Oxford, 2020, p. 8)
UoE’s financial statements19 show prioritization in three areas that the institution
deems of top value, with one being virtual infrastructure. Though the specific information in
their budget and funding is limited, the emphasis on virtual infrastructure and digital tools,
coupled with the aforementioned strategic goals related to e-learning, indicate that UoE offers
a budget to its colleges and administration for supporting e-learning initiatives. Furthermore,
the Institute of Academic Development20 incorporates a grant-funded model, as outlined by
Bullen (2017c).
Though both institutions are not open about a specific allocated budget for e-learning,
UoE’s consistency with prioritizing e-learning in their strategic plan for nearly 2 decades,
coupled with its emphasis on the importance of virtual infrastructure indicates that their elearning is more than likely sufficiently funded. Oxford, conversely, has not shown much
interest in allocating funds specifically towards e-learning, with the exception of new
technological infrastructure needed after the forced move to online learning and technological
tools needed for research.
19
20
https://www.ed.ac.uk/files/atoms/files/202007_uoe_annual_accounts_2020_27_online.pdf
https://www.ed.ac.uk/institute-academic-development
11
Conclusion
Both Oxford and University of Edinburgh rank as one of the top universities in the
world; despite their prestigious rankings and reputations, both institutions stand at two
contrasting places in terms of their e-learning implementation.
UoE has evidently recognized the importance of e-learning within an institution and
has made ample efforts to implement it at various levels throughout. Taking into account
UoE’s strategic planning and the efforts carried out to achieve their outlined goals, the elearning implementation in UoE has successfully reached Stage 5 of Bates’ introduction of elearning, sustainability: “The institution has established a stable system of e-learning that is
cost effective and scalable” (2007, p. 48).
While UoE has been acknowledging and developing a solid foundation for e-learning
since 2004, and shows initiative to enhance the quality of their e-learning through their
strategic planning priorities, budgeting, and monitoring, Oxford, by comparison, indicates
that there are several areas of improvement within their e-learning implementation. Oxford
focuses much of its efforts and planning into developing research and scientific
breakthroughs, the primary area of focus and what Oxford is most famous for; as the most
highly rated research-intensive institution in the world, coupled with its strong ties to
tradition, Oxford may not see much need to implement new technology or prioritize
technological tools to enhance the academic experience. However, in light of the COVID-19
pandemic, there have been indications that Oxford is now reevaluating its stance on elearning, evident by its in-progress Digital Education Strategy review and new investments
on virtual infrastructure. With these considerations in mind, it appears that Oxford is between
Stage 3, Chaos, and Stage 4, Planning, of the distinct e-learning introduction stages, as
outlined by Bates (2007, p. 48).
12
While it is not possible to incorporate e-learning practice seamlessly, UoE is one
institution that can be looked at as a standard that highlights effective e-learning
implementation. Looking at the structure and planning that UoE executed may offer some
valuable insight to Oxford and other universities of similar e-learning introduction stages
looking to heighten their e-learning evolvement.
131
References
Bates, T. (2007). Strategic Planning for E-learning in a Polytechnic. In Making the transition
to e-learning: Strategies and issues (pp. 47-65). IGI Global.
Bates, A.W. & Sangrà, A. (2011.) Managing Technology in Higher Education: Strategies for
Transforming Teaching & Learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bullen, M. (2017a). 2.2 – IT Infrastructure & Suppor t. Planning and Managing Technologies
in Higher Education. http://blogs.ubc.ca/etec5202015/unit-2/unit-2-it-infrastructure/
Bullen, M. (2017b). 2.3 – organizational culture. Planning and Managing Technologies in
Higher Education. http://blogs.ubc.ca/etec5202015/unit-2/unit-3-organizationalculture/
Bullen, M. (2017c). 3.4 – Funding Models. Planning and Managing Technologies in Higher
Education. http://blogs.ubc.ca/etec5202015/unit-3/unit-3-funding/
The University of Edinburgh. (2004, October 6). University of Edinbur gh e-learning strategy
plus implementation plans: Knowledge management strategy chapter 4 milestones.
http://www.docs.sasg.ed.ac.uk/gasp/strategicplanning/elearningstrategy.pdf
The University of Edinburgh. (2017, February 20). Knowledge strategy committee.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/governance-strategic-planning/governance/universitycommittees/jointsentatandcount/knowledgestrategycommittee
The University of Edinburgh. (2018a, April 17). Leadership in learning.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/governance-strategic-planning/strategic-planning/strategicplan/strategic-objectives/leadership-in-learning
The University of Edinburgh. (2018b, April 17). Leadership in research.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/governance-strategic-planning/strategic-planning/strategicplan/strategic-objectives/leadership-in-research
141
The University of Edinburgh. (2019a, November 6). About ISG.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/information-services/about
The University of Edinburgh. (2019b, November 14). Learn.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/information-services/learning-technology/virtualenvironments/learn
The University of Edinburgh. (2020, January 20). Measuring success.
https://www.ed.ac.uk/governance-strategic-planning/strategic-planning/strategicplan/measuring-success
University of Oxford. (n.d.-a). Digital education strategy review. Centre for Teaching and
Learning. Retrieved August 13, 2021, from https://www.ctl.ox.ac.uk/digitaleducation-strategy
University of Oxford. (n.d.-b). Governance, strategy and policies. IT Services. Retrieved
August 12, 2021, from https://www.it.ox.ac.uk/governance-strategy-and-policies
University of Oxford. (n.d.-c). Networks and infrastructure. IT Services. Retrieved August
13, 2021, from https://www.it.ox.ac.uk/networks-and-infrastructure
University of Oxford. (2018, October 30). Strategic plan 2018–23.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/field/field_document/Strategic%20Plan%2020
18-23.pdf
University of Oxford. (2020). Financial Statements 2019–2020.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/sites/files/oxford/field/field_document/Oxford%20University%
2C%20Financial%20Statement%202019-20_0.pdf
University of Oxford. (2021, August 9). Returning students and offer holders (2021/22
academic year) | University of Oxford.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/coronavirus/students/returning-and-offer-holders