1. AMANDA POULTON

2. Are we wasting our time?
An exploration of the pedagogic
benefits of e-learning and e-
assessment as a way to make a more
effective use of librarian time
LILAC 2013

3. CONTEXT
• Growing demand for information literacy
– Student numbers
– Staff availability
– Focus on employability and interlinking with IL
skills
• Financial constraints
– Trying to do more with less
• Student profile
– Increasing home students from the region
– Distance learners and Placement students

4. BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF E-LEARNING
Benefits Challenges
• Increased active learning • Time to develop materials
– Interactivity can help develop • Students can choose not to
deeper learning participate
– Encourages students to make • Librarian skillset
mistakes and learn from them
• Teacher-learner interaction
• Flexible and accessible
• Students can feel isolated
• Students can review and revisit
material • Programme culture
• Reduces teaching time • Accessibility through firewalls
e.g. the NHS
• Reduces pressure on space
• Teaching can be technology
• Can be completed at a time
rather than learner-led
convenient to the learner

5. BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF E-ASSESSMENT
Benefits Challenges
• Easy to mark and • Reliant on Internet
moderate connectivity and computers
– Assessment possible for working
large numbers of students • Computer not flexible in
• Bank of questions makes marking
set up easy • Can‘t switch off the Internet
– has to be ―Open-book‖
• In a familiar environment
to the students (VLE) • Can be restrictive in terms
of type of assessment
(technology-led)

6. ―It is not just a question of providing
access to the technology but making sure
that it has a demonstrable impact on
student attitudes, behavior, knowledge
and understanding. Finally it must be
based on sound pedagogy‖
Edwards and McKinnell (2007)

7. ―As digital technology dominates students‘
behavior in everyday life, that technology
can be used to enhance the dialogue
between teacher and learner as new
ways of engaging students in learning
become available.‖
Biggs and Tang (2011)

8. CASE STUDY
• Pharmacy and related subjects
• Use of Blackboard since 2004
• Three taught sessions, one assessment
• E-learning only introduced 2012-13 in
line with new Pharmacy curriculum
• Mix of information and activities
• Pharmacy exam is now formative
• Backed up with drop-in optional face-to-
face workshops

9. EVALUATION
• Students asked to complete online
feedback form
• Six questions using Likert scale plus
three open questions
• Response rate of 14%

10. EVALUATION - RESPONSES
This course has given me the confidence/skills
to find the information I need for my studies
No response
3%
Neutral
16%
Disagreed/stron
gly disagreed
7%
Agreed/strongl
y agreed
74%

11. EVALUATION - RESPONSES
This course has given me the confidence/skills
to evaluate resources found on the Internet
No response
5%
Neutral
14%
Disagreed/stro
ngly disagreed
9% Agreed/strongl
y agreed
72%

12. EVALUATION - RESPONSES
This course has given me the confidence/skills
to cite references and compile bibliographies
No response
4%
Neutral
Disagreed/stron 11%
gly disagreed
8%
Agreed/strongly
agreed
77%

13. STUDENT FEEDBACK
"It was a very useful course"
"I think the library course was
better presented this year"
"I liked the visual representation we went through
in ‗Preparing your search and getting started‘‖

14. STUDENT FEEDBACK
"Could include more interactive
features or more quizzes"
"Maybe spread the content out further - found it
difficult having to read through the material released
each week in time for the next lot of material"
―Perhaps spending more time on real
teaching, instead of wasting time telling
students to complete useless stuff online‖

15. EXAM COMPARISON
2011/2012 2012/2013
Pharmacy – 75.7% Pharmacy – 83.8%
Biomedical Science – Biomedical Science –
69.2% 71.9%
Pharmaceutical and Pharmaceutical and
Cosmetic Science – 69.8% Cosmetic Science – 70.6%

16. A WAY FORWARD
• Enhance interactive elements
• Expand online learning course to other
subject areas
• Consider how to increase teacher-
learner interaction
– E.g. Assessment feedback
– Discussion boards, Twitter chat etc
• More structured drop-ins

17. THINGS TO CONSIDER
• Culture of students and programme
• Programme level
• Librarian engagement/interest with online teaching
• Staff training
• Availability of reusable learning objects to develop
online course
• All the same pedagogical principles of sound
course design apply e.g. Clear objectives
• Assessment mapped to objectives etc.
• Higher initial outlay of staff costs in year one

18. REFERENCES
• BIGGS, J. and TANG, C. (2011) Teaching for quality learning at
university. 4th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press/McGraw
Hill Education.
• EDWARDS, A and MCKINNELL, S. (2007) Moving from
dependence to independence: the application of e-learning in
higher education. In CAMPBELL, A. and NORTON, L. (eds.)
Learning, teaching and assessing in Higher Education:
developing reflective practice, pp. 68-79
• KAARTINEN-KOUTANIEMI, M. and KATAJAVUORI, N. (2006)
Enhancing the development of pharmacy education by changing
pharmacy teaching. Pharmacy Education, 6 (3), pp. 197–208.
• WAKE, M. and LISGARTEN, L. (2003) VLEs and Pharmacy—
Learning from Experience. Pharmacy Education, 3 (3), pp. 209–
214.

19. ACKNOWEDGEMENTS
• Thanks to the Pharmacy E-learning
team:
– Katie Fraser
– Ceri Laing
– Nathan Rush
– Joanne Tidswell