Professional development: assuring quality in e‐learning policy and practice
| Date | 10 July 2009 |
| Published date | 10 July 2009 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09684880910970641 |
| Pages | 233-249 |
| Author | Juliana Mansvelt,Gordon Suddaby,Duncan O'Hara,Amanda Gilbert |
| Subject Matter | Education |
Professional development:
assuring quality in e-learning
policy and practice
Juliana Mansvelt
School of People, Environment and Planning, Massey University,
Palmerston North, New Zealand
Gordon Suddaby and Duncan O’Hara
Centre for Academic Development and E-learning, Massey University,
Palmerston North, New Zealand, and
Amanda Gilbert
University Teaching Development Centre, Victoria University of Wellington,
Wellington, New Zealand
Abstract
Purpose – The paper reports on findings of research into the institutional and individual influences
on engaging in professional development (PD), reflecting on how PD might be made available in ways
which could support quality in e-learning.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper presents findings of a research project exploring
factorsinfluencing engagement in e-learningPD within New Zealand tertiaryeducation institutions. The
research comprised anonline survey of 408 individuals in three polytechnics and two universities and
40 qualitativeinterviews ascertainingbeliefs, experiences and practicesof staff regarding e-learningPD.
Findings – The survey and interviews suggest there are numerous factors which both help and hinder
quality of engagement in e-learning PD. Most PD engaged in by staff is informal. Engagement in formal
PD is influenced by organisational structure, co-ordination, poorly developed and/or implemented
e-learning policy, differences in managerial support, and individual beliefs and time allocation.
Research limitations/implications – The research is conducted in a small number of tertiary
institutions and may not be applicable to private or work-based training organisations.
Practical implications – Understanding impacts and influences on individual uptake and
experiences of PD provides insights into the sorts of institutional practices and policies likely to
improve quality in e-learning and in e-learning PD.
Originality/value – By focussing on staff experiences, this paper provides important insights into
practical considerations informing the development of e-learning quality enhancement and assurance
strategies.
Keywords Continuingprofessional development,Quality, E-learning, Tertiaryeducation, New Zealand
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0968-4883.htm
The authors would like to thank the study participants, the institutional collaborators Sue Dark
and Cheryl Brown (Open Polytechnic); Bronwyn Hegarty (Otago Polytechnic); Teri McClelland
(Southern Institute of Technology); Alison Holmes and Derek Chirnside (University of
Canterbury) and the New Zealand Ministry of Education for funding this project. The authors
also thank also to Professor Kerry Shepherd, Dr Sarah Stein and Irene Harris of Otago University
who were involved in a parallel Ministry of Education project for their scholarly discussions and
support.
E-learning policy
and practice
233
Quality Assurance in Education
Vol. 17 No. 3, 2009
pp. 233-249
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0968-4883
DOI 10.1108/09684880910970641
1. Introduction
Since the early 2000s New Zealand’s e-learning capabilities and quality have been the
subject of considerable reporting and research. The New Zealand Tertiary Education
Strategy (2007-2012) (Ministry of Education, 2006) states that Tertiary Education
Organisations (TEOs) should have in place systems and structures that ens ure
educators “continually update their knowledge of their subject and of effective
learning” and that they “foster professional learning communities, and offer the
resources and support needed for teaching and learning” (Ministry of Education, 2006,
p. 18). At the heart of this exhortation lies the issue of promoting and delivering quality
learning and teaching.
Focus on educational success
Central to the role of all TEOs is a focus on educational success. Educational success is
achieved when engaged, effective students receive quality teaching in quality learning
environments (whether that be in the classroom or the workplace). The government
(Ministry of Education, 2006, p. 18) expects TEOs to have in place the necessary
systems and structures to ensure that:
.individuals are motivated to learn, engaged and have the skills and information
needed to be effective students;
.educators continually update their knowledge of their subject and of effective
teaching and learning; are responsive to a diverse range of students and teach a
rich set of competencies in the content of a course; and
.they foster professional learning communities, and offer the resources and
support needed for teaching and learning.
This was clearly foreshadowed in the E-Learning Advisory Group (ELAG) report,
Highways and Pathways (Butterfield et al., 2002, p. 6) which stated:
It is imperative that professional development is a priority throughout the tertiary sector so
that academic staff have the abilities required for this new medium.
Despite the fact that e-learning capability has been reviewed and assessed in a number
of reports, little has been done to explore how institutional and personal influences
impact on e-learning and professional development (PD) experiences or what kinds of
systems and structures might facilitate knowledge building and delivery of effective
quality e-learning. The lack of focus on quality e-learning and teaching compounds the
issue of developing e-learning capability. As Guskey (1997, p. 39) stated: “Most
research reviews focus only on issues of quantity and neglect important quality
issues”. He went on to clearly link PD with quality in noting that PD is a natural and
continuous process which requires involving everyone in an organisation (McLaughlin
and Marsh, 1978; cited in Guskey, 1997).
After providing the background to e-learning capability in New Zealand Tertiary
institutions this paper reports on the findings of research into the experiences of staff
engaged in e-learning and e-learning PD, and using Marshall’s (2005, 2007) E-learning
Maturity Model (eMM) it reflects on the ways in which both personal and institutional
factors are seen to influence experiences and engagement in e-learning PD. The paper
concludes with a discussion of the variables influencing the application of quality
assurance and enhancement practices.
QAE
17,3
234
To continue reading
Request your trial