This document discusses findings from European benchmarking exercises on e-learning. It describes two benchmarking projects - the EADTU E-xcellence+ benchmarking tool and an ESMU e-learning benchmarking exercise involving nine European universities from 2009-2010. The author conducted case studies of these projects to analyze their values and impacts. Key findings included benefits like self-assessment, identifying best practices, and quality improvement. Limitations included issues like time commitment and varying interpretations of benchmarks.

1. Findings from European benchmarking
exercices on e-learning: value and
impact
Ebba Ossiannilsson
Professor Pekka Kess
Oulu University, FI
Footprints
W:www.oulu.fi; www.lu.se/ced
E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@oulu.fi
E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@ced.lu.se
FB:Ebba Ossiannilsson
T:@EbbaOssian
Phone: +4670995448
S:http://www.slideshare.net/EbbaOs
siann

2. Outline
• The projects and research area
• Benchmarking
• Research approach
h h
• Findings; benefits, values and limitations
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

3. The Excellence project by the European Association of
Distance Teaching Universities, EADTU
Products Services
Management http://www.eadtu.nl/e-xcellencelabel
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

4. EADTU Benchmarks and indicators
Products Services
Management
Strategic management
Products; Curriculum design, Course designe, course delievery
Support; Student and staff support
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

5. Benchmarking elearning in European universities
…exercise on e-learning launched in the spring of 2009
…initiated by the University of Southern Denmark (SDU) and gathering a
group of nine European universities. April 2009 - December 2009.
…co-organised b ESMU and E
i d by d European A
Association of Di
i i f Distance T hi
Teaching
Universities (EADTU; www.eadtu.nl), combined ESMU’s collaborative
benchmarking approach (benchmarking through a comparative exercise of
g
good practices between universities) and EADTU’s more individually-oriented
p ) y
approach. EADTU’s E-xcellence online tool, consisting of a set of 33 e-learning
benchmarks, was used as a starting point to the benchmarking exercise
http://www.esmu.be/projects/94-benchmarking-
http://www esmu be/projects/94 benchmarking
elearning.html
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

6. Benchmarking is an exemplar-driven
teleological process operating within an
organization [sic] with the objective of
intentionally changing an existing state of
affairs into a superior state of affairs (Moriarty,
2008, p. 30).
Benchmarking is an exemplar driven teleological process
exemplar-driven
operating within an organization [sic] with the objective of
intentionally changing an existing state of affairs into
a superior state of affairs. (Moriarty, 2008, p. 30).
…the ´locus´ of benchmarking lies between the
current and desirable states of affairs and
contributes to the transformation p
f processes
that realise these improvements. (Moriarty and
Smallman, 2009, p. 484)
...is a technique, method, process, activity, incentive, or
q , ,p , y, ,
reward which conventional wisdom regards as more effective
at delivering a particular outcome than any other technique,
method, process, etc. when applied to a particular condition
or circumstance
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

7. Self evaluation for quality enhancement
benchmark careers.com
benchmark-careers com
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

8. What can be achieved/how to improve
….high performance
hi h f
High
perfomance
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

9. The Benhmarking process
Determine
what to
benchmark
Form a
Take action benchmarking
team
Collect and
Identify
analyse
benchmarkong
benchmarking
partners
information
Ossiannilsson, E. (2011). Findings from
European benchmarking exercises on e-
learning: value and impact CreativeEducation
impact. CreativeEducation.
Manuscript in press.
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

10. Research approach:
About values and impacts of
benchmarking
Exploratory multiple case study strategy,
Yin, 2003, 2009
Cross case anayses, with embedded and
multiple unites of analyses
p y
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

11. Why?
•Why did your university joined the
benchmarking project?
•What was your opinion of the process
after it completion?
ft its l ti ?
•In your opinion, where there any
drawbacks within the project process?
•Do you have any additional thoughts
regarding the involvement in the
benchmarking?
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
Photo: CC AT NC SA Some rights reserved by Leo
June 2011
Reynolds

12. Respondents
E excellence+ e learning
E-excellence+ e-learning benchmarking exercise
Α Alpha x
Β Beta x
Γ Gamma x
Δ Delta x
Ε Epsilon x
Ζ Zeta x x
Respondents involved in the benchmarking projects, EADTU E-xcellence+ and the ESMU e-
learning benchmarking exercise. Ossiannilsson, E. (2011). Findings from European
benchmarking exercises on e-learning: value and impact. CreativeEducation. Manuscript in
press.
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

13. cc. Ossiannilsson (2011). Findings from European benchmarking exercises
on e-learning: value and impact. CreativeEducation. Manuscript in press.
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

14. Benefits
self-assess institution respond to national performance indicators
and benchmarks
db h k
strengthen institutional identity
better understand the process
enhance reputation
measure and compare
set new standards for the sector
f
discover new ideas,
set targets for improvement
obtain data to support decision-making
van Vught et al., (2008). A practical guide.
g ,( ) p g
Benchmarking in European HE. ESMU
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

15. Added values
Cultural issues.
C lt l i
Commitment
Attitudes
Passion
Internal processes and involvement
Quality enhancement
Involvement
Management and commitment. Dedication
Collaboration and networking
Courage Reflection
The concept of rhizome
The
Th concept of b
t f becoming
i
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

16. Universities involved in local seminars,
E-xcellence+, b EADTU
E ll + by
University Number individuals Local seminar Date
(I) Alfa
Alf 15 13-14 N
13 14 November 2008
b
(II) Beta 20 11-12 March 2009
(III) Gamma 10 20-21January 2009
(IV) Delta 50 19-20 February 2009
(V) Epsilon 80 9-10 March 2009
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson
30 June 2011

17. The Loop
Quality
Policy improvem
statement ent and Implementation
Transparency quality
assurance
Dialogue
Commitment
Teambuilding Management
Some key findings on the use of EADTU benchmarking QuickScan tool.
An emerging framework on values.
Ossiannilsson (2011).
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

18. Limitations
Time?
Commitment?
Benchmarks?
Interpretations?
Language?
Who is involved?
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011

19. The door is
open …
What next?
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011
Bild: Wikimedia Commons, Push the button, CC BY SA

20. TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011 Ossiannilsson & Landgren, 2011

21. Opening Pandora’s box
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
Some rights reserved by Christiaan Botha June 2011

22. Thank you!
Kiitos!
TIIM2011_ Oulu_Ebba Ossiannilsson 29
June 2011
Photo: CC AT NC SA Some rights reserved by Travelin' Librarian

23. Findings from European benchmarking
exercices on
e-learning: value and impact
Footprints
W:www.oulu.fi; www.lu.se/ced
E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@oulu.fi
E:Ebba.Ossiannilsson@ced.lu.se
FB:Ebba Ossiannilsson
T:@EbbaOssian
Phone: +4670995448
S:http://www.slideshare.net/EbbaOs
siann