Slide 1

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 2

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 3

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 4

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 5

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 6

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 7

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 8

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 9

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 10

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 11

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 12

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 13

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 14

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 15

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 16

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 17

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 18

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 19

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 20

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 21

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 22

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 23

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 24

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 25

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 26

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 27

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 28

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 29

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 30

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 31

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 32

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 33

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 34

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 35

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 36

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 37

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 38

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 39

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 40

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 41

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 42

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 43

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 44

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 45

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 46

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 47

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 48

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 49

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 50

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 51

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 52

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 53

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 54

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 55

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 56

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 57

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 58

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 59

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 60

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 61

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 62

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 63

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 64

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 65

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66


Slide 66

E-learning at Universities in Saudi Arabia: Active steps toward collaborative success, Medina, 26-28 May, 2008

Challenges in setting up
an International Virtual Campus
Pierre-Yves Burgi
University of Geneva

Presentation Outline
 Background
 Case study 1 : e-LERU
 Case study 2: Swiss Virtual Campus
 Perspectives

 Questions

2

Background

3

Virtual Campus (V.C.) : Definition 1
« refers to the online offerings of a university
where studies are completed either partially
or wholly online, often with the assistance
of the teacher »
(adapted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Campus)

(Blended learning)
4

V.C. : Definition 2
« Part of a university or faculty that offers
educational facilities at any time or, in theory,
any place, by Internet »
(from www.elearningeuropa.info)

5

Two-step in Institutions’ maturity
(within V.C.)
1. Rationalization of academic processes, without serious
impact on pedagogy

2. Pedagogical structures and way of thinking are challenged
Granularity can be smaller, e.g. Bates’ 5 development stages
(www.elearningeuropa.info/directory/index.php?page=doc&doc_id=5943&doclng=6
)

6

V.C. Levels

International Level (macro level)

National Level (macro level)
Open
Universities
Campus Level (meso

7

Aparte: Open Universities
“A large and diverse institution of higher learning created to
educate for life and for a profession and to grant degrees”
(Collins Essential English Dictionary)

Product of governmental planning set to fulfill national
missions, through an industrialist model of operation.
More than 40 in the world, e.g., OU UK, the Arab Open
University, Al-Madinah International University, etc.
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Open_universities)

8

Examples of V.C.
 State University of New York

CL

 Numeric University of Strasbourg
 The Finnish Online University of Applied Sciences
 Swiss Virtual Campus
 Bavaria’s Virtual University
 Canadian Virtual University

NL

 African Virtual University
 e-LERU, Real Virtual Erasmus, The Virtual Campus for a
Sustainable Europe, EUCOR, Baltic Sea Virtual Campus
 Universitas 21, Universitas 21 Global
 Global Virtual University, Worldwide Universities Network,
Global University Alliance, IVIMEDS

IL

9

… what is not a V.C.
 M.I.T. Open Courseware (show-off, ”intellectual
philanthropy”)
 Merlot, ARIADNE, EdNA, etc. (LOR)
 JISC, Switch, etc. (National Support in ICT)
 …and other consortia like IMS, OKI, etc.

10

Major issues in setting up a V.C.
• National
Policies (M)
• Access (M)

IL

• Calendar (D)

• Language (M)

NL

• Culture (M)

• Teachers (D)

• Distance (M)

• Administration (M)

CL

• Quality (D)

meso

• IP (M)

• Technology (M)

macro

• Sustainability (D)

D: difficult
M: moderate
11

Success/critical factors
CL

 Small scale, reactive
 Lack of long term vision

NL

 Political incentives
 Competition between institutions
 Sustainability

IL

 Stems from major programmes
 High motivation to share practices
 Sustainability, quality label
12

Case Study 1:

13

What is e-LERU?
 Began as a 2-year European Community funding
(programme
)
 Total cost about US$ 1.5 millions

 8 participating universities from the LERU network
 Targets the setting up of a European Virtual Campus
 Promotes e-modules and top-science talks

 Participates in the implementation of the researchbased education concept
 Website: http://www.e-leru.leru.org
14

e-LERU Virtual Campus: The offer
Portal
http://eleru.leru.org
E-Modules
Online courses

Joint
courses

Top Science
High Level filmed
conferences

Modules
from a
single
university

« Watch » system
Database of free elearning resources in
Life Sciences

Freely accessible to all
Integrated to a
curriculum

Research-based education based on ICT
15

LERU Network
Founded in 2002 by a group of 12 European universities
with the objective of creating a common policy forum of top
research universities in Europe.
It was extended to 20 universities in January 2006, totalling
over 500’000 students and 100’000 staff.
Main Objective :
“Promotes the values of high-quality teaching within an
environment of internationally competitive research”
16

LERU Partners

Universiteit van Amsterdam
University of Cambridge
University of Edinburgh
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität
Freiburg
Université de Genève
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität
Heidelberg
Helsingin yliopisto
Universiteit Leiden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
University College London
Lunds universitet
Università degli Studi di Milano
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität
München
University of Oxford
Université Paris-Sud 11
Université Pierre et Marie Curie
Karolinska Institutet
Université Louis Pasteur
Strasbourg
Universiteit Utrecht
Universität Zürich
17

e-LERU Milestones
Jan. 2005

Jan. 2007

« Setting up of the
virtual campus »

2010

« Consolidation
period »

Increase the training
Building of the virtual campus
offer
architecture
Development
of the first training Partner’s agreement
offer
 Open to e-LERU students

 Enlarge the partnership
to new LERU Universities

« Exploitation
period »
 Increase the
training offer,
possibly with joint
masters
 Open up to external
students, employees,
lifelong learners

January 2007 : End of the EC funded project
18

Lesson learnt about
Teachers’ involvment
Administrative issues

Quality
Intellectual property
Technology
Sustainability
Culture

19

Teachers’ involvment
Follows the principle of :
 Stage of technology adoption

Tim
e

Enhancements to traditional course
configurations
LMS
Learning objects
New course configurations
Stage of innovation

Adapted from R. Zemsy &
W.F. Massy 2004

20

and :
 e-learning’s adoption cycles

Teacher collab.

From R. Zemsy & W.F. Massy 2004

… in all, less than 10 active e-modules …
21

Complex relationships
Administrativ
e support

Technical
support

Tutors
Coordinator
s

Administrativ
e support

Teacher
s

Students
Teachers
Students

Technical
support
22

Administrative issues
 Calendar: semesters between countries not
synchronized
 Integration of e-modules within specific curricula
 Weak support from university boards
 Recognition of students’ credit between universities:
--> Erasmus program targeting student’s mobility helped
(learning agreement + transcript of records)

23

Bologna Declaration, 1999
Targets a series of reforms to make European Higher
Education more compatible and comparable, more
competitive and more attractive for our European
citizens and for citizens and scholars from other
continents. The three priorities of the Bologna process
are:
1. Introduction of the three cycle system
(bachelor/master/doctorate)
2. Quality assurance and recognition of qualifications
3. Periods of study
24

Quality
Two main aspects of “quality”:
1. Content perspective, linked to school reputation

2. Didactic and pedagogical perspectives, linked to
teaching methods
Difficult topic because challenges teachers’ business!

25

1. Content perspective
Out of the scope of e-LERU. Related to
 International policies, such as the Bologna process

 Accreditation and quality assurance agencies (at
European level and beyond, e.g. UNESCO)
 University ranking
 Excellence networks (e.g. LERU, COIMBRA, etc.)
 Audits, etc.

26

2. Didactic and pedagogical
perspectives
« Most doctoral graduates who become college professors
have not taken a single course in educational
methodologies »
E.S. Abuelyaman (2008) Prince Sultan University, Saudi Arabia

« It should become clear that developing the competence
of teaching personnel can be seen as one of the decisive,
strategic challenges for the institution of higher education
as a whole »
S. Seufert and D. Euler (2006) University St-Gallen, Switzerland

27

How far should e-LERU impose quality
check?
--> not further than guidelines about :
 Best practices specified through a practical grid

 Being compliant with ECTS accreditation (Bologna)
 Harvesting student feedback
 How copyright can be respected and work shared

28

Intellectual Property
 Law varies between countries but IP always applies
 Complicated by the fact Internet is not geographically
delimited

 Books, music, paintings, pictures, ppt presentations,
conferences, scheme, database, computer programs, online courses, etc. are copyrighted works
 Didactic/scientific work is also copyright protected
 Exception for educational purposes does not in general
applies to virtual campuses
 Quotation right applies
29

Google Image

30

How to manage copyright?
 Transfer of rights (usually economic rights)
 License of rights (grants of certain rights)
 Recommended licensing model when creating teaching
material: Creative Commons
by

share alike

noncommercial

no derivative
work

http://creativecommons.org
Example: OpenLearn of OU

31

Technology
 No common LMS
 No common authentication system
Solutions:
 A Portal for e-modules
 A common streaming server for top-science talks

32

Portal

e-module
selection

List of partners for
the selected emodule
33

Top-science talks

34

Culture
 Stronger synchronous interactions on Southern
Countries

 Supervision methods vary according to the universities
 Distance promotes a common learning culture
 Language barrier (can be an advantage to students
whishing to learn new languages)

35

Dealing with culture
differences
The Bologna process aims to smooth out differences:
 Courses should be readable and understandable by
instructors and students from all over Europe
 Wider use of English
 European training and education network promoting
cultural management
… but culture differences is also a richness to value

36

Sustainability model
Local team contribution in
each partner university
corresponding to 25% FTE

Membership: 8000€ per
partner

Currently 7 participating universities for consolidation period :
(coordinator)

Advantages for the participating universities:
 Increase their training offer with modules from other LERU universities
 Encourage teaching collaborations
 Attract international students
 Bring in new technologies in the university through a mutual exchange of
best practices
 Show their research and educative strengths through the Top Science
program
37

Organizational structure
University Board of
Partner Universities
e-LERU Executive Board /
e-LERU Project Steering Committee
Central
Coordinator

Task Force
«Products»

Task Force
«Technology»

38

e-LERU Movie

mms://mediaWM01.cines.fr/3517/windows/canalu/colloques/elerufinal04052007.wmv

39

e-Module example:
SUPPREM
 SUPPREM aims at producing a bundle of interdisciplinary web-based courses, oriented toward
sustainability and private or public environmental
management (http://supprem.unige.ch)
 3 e-modules in Environmental Sciences made of
« bricks »
 1.5 ECTS for each brick
 Collaborations with University of Strasbourg and
University of Zurich
 Bachelor and master levels
40

Synchronous course

« Synchronous teaching »
41

Asynchronous course

« Asynchronous teaching »
42

Case Study 2:

43

What is the
Swiss Virtual Campus?
 An eight-year Swiss project
 Total cost about US$ 160 millions

 10 Universities, 2 Swiss Federal Institutes of
Technology, and several Universities of Applied Sciences
 Targets the setting up of distant education
 Website: http://www.virtualcampus.ch

44

Swiss Virtual Campus (SVC) : The offer
The SVC aimed at creating new learning environments to
improve the quality of teaching and learning, while
benefiting from the Bologna process for virtual mobility.
So far:
 80 courses online covering a wide variety of fields
 Establishment of skills, service and production centers
(CCSPs) in all Swiss universities

 Specific mandates focusing on technology, IP issues,
(quality) evaluation, pedagogical support, and
management
45

CVS Milestones
« Setting
2004
up
National « Setting up of the
policies in virtual campus »
ICT »

19961999

2000

Realization of the first 50 online
courses

« Consolidation
period »

Setting up of eLearning
Competence Centers in
each University
Finishing up 62 new
online courses
About 20 projects have
been transferred into
sustainable teaching
structures

7/200
8
« Exploitation

period »
 Increase the rate
of project integration
into teaching
structures
 Swiss e-HUB ?

July 2008 : End of the Swiss funding
46

New lesson learnt (with
respect to e-LERU)
National policies
Integration of online courses

Sustainability

47

National policies
 National single sign-on system based on Shibboleth
(http://shibboleth.internet2.edu/)
 Selection of projects based on common criteria:
• Minimum 3 partner (Swiss) institutions
• Matching funds
• Pedagogic objectives
• Number of target students
• Multilanguage
• Use of the European credit transfer system
(ECTS as defined by Bologna declaration)

48

Integration of online courses
Course offering (50 projects)
eLearning as
supplement

46

blended
learning

58

partly distance
learning

24

distance
learning

24

22

Others
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)

70

49

Use of eLearning (47 projects)
46

Use of eLearning

optional

40

obligatory

19

not decided yet
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Adapted from S. Seufert & D.
Euler (2006)
50

Sustainability
So far, of the online courses (from S. Seufert & D. Euler):
 20% could be transferred into sustainable structures
 20% still demonstrate a certain chanced for being
sustained
 over 50% exhibit major hindering factors for their
sustainability (integration, financial, technology, learning
culture)
 10% are anticipated not to survive
Online course costs between US$ 330 K and over 3’000 K

51

(techo-pedagogical
research unit)

TECFA

CCSP
Steering committee
Vice-Rector in charge of teaching
E-learning Rector’s delegate
Head of Pedagogical unit
Head of ICT unit

Pedagogy
Unit

ICT
Unit

Teaching commission
ICT commission

Skills, service and production centers at the
University of Geneva

Teachers
52

Online courses

53

Simulation

54

Glopp

55

Glopp

56

Future of CVS ?
Initially, targeted pure e-learning.
Today CVS is used for blended learning, which
corresponds more to teachers’ and students’ demands.
This fact can be seen as a failure (e.g. UK e-University),
but it is the way things are!
Swiss Campus 2008-2011: has been canceled

Swiss e-HUB ?

57

Perspectives

58

CVS
UK e-U

e-LERU

Parameters

V.C
.

Scottish

IU

Image “Inflationary Multiverse” from Andrei Linde

Multiverse paradigm

59

Stretching the mould
 No revolutionary changes are expected from ICT in
higher education (lack of online culture)
 Lack of educational concept (e.g. social
constructivism); education is still thought of in terms of
face2face
 New technologies, yes, but no clear relation to
problems in the teaching/learning processes in campus
universities
 Necessity to become more focused and strategic
in policies regarding the use of ICT

60

Success factors of V.C.
E-learning is confused with distance education. Yet,
only in the latter (OU) the industrial model applies.
 economic resources must be provided
Collaboration in production phase, yet little sharing of
courses between universities in the delivery phase
 organizational teaching structure must be
revised, ways of thinking must be challenged
Consortia type venture is relatively easy to set up, yet a
pro-active institutional role in getting teachers involved
is harder
 improve internal marketing of ICT
61

Bottom-up approach
Pervasive computing: teachers use ICT without thinking
about it. Example:
 Lecture capture
 Whiteboards
 LMS
 Learning object repositories (mutualization)
 Simulation tools, 3D visualization, etc.

“Blackboards need water in auditoriums, not so for
electronic whiteboards”

62

Mutualization of learning resources in
Switzerland

63

Final thoughts
 Challenges start at the meso (institutional) level
 Institutes’ e-learning maturity varies within V.C.
 There are synergies between V.C.
 Not terribly wrong to say V.C. are out of control
 OU and V.C. are two disparate models
 Human resource management will have a crucial role
to play in relation to the new teacher generation
 Pervasive computing and resource sharing (LOR) are,
right now, our next hope!

64

References
Abuelyaman, E. S. (2008). "Making a smart campus in Saudi Arabia." EDUCAUSE QUARTERLY 31(2): 10-12.
Collis, B., and van der Wende, M. (2002). Models of Technology and Change In Higher Education. An international comparative
survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education, Center for Higher Education Policy Studies.
Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2005). "'Distance education' and 'e-learning': Not the same thing." Higher Education 49: 467-493.

Guri-Rosenblit, S. (2006). "Eight paradoxes in the implementation process of e-learning in higher education." Distances et savoirs
4(2): 155-179.
Hedberg, J. G. (2006). "E-learning futures? Speculations for a time yet to come." Studies in Continuing Education 28(2): 171-183.
Holma, J., and Junes, S. (2006). Trainer's and professional's guide to quality in open and distance lerning, University of Tampere.
Lepori, B., Cantoni, L. & Succi, C. (2003). The introduction of e-learning in European universities: models and strategies. Digitaler
Campus. Vom Medienprojekt zum nachhaltigen Medieneinsatz in der Hochschule. M. V. Kerres, B. Münster / New York / München
/ Berlin, Waxmann: 74-83.
Lepori B., R. S., Succi C. (2004). eLearning in Swiss Universities. Recent Developments and Future Prospects. EUNIS, Bled,
Slovenia.
Middlehurst, R., and Woodfield, S. (2006). "Quality review in distance learning: Policy and practice in five countries." Tertiary
Education and Management 12: 37-58.
Seufert, S., and Euler, D. (2006). Sustainable Implementation of eLearning. Final Report SVC Mandate.
Stensaker, B., Maassen, P., Borgan, M., Oftebro, M., and Karseth, B. (2007). "Use, updating and integration of ICT in higher
education: Linking purpose, people and pedagogy." Higher Education 54: 417-433.
Valcke, M. (2004). ICT in higher education: An uncomfortable zone for institutes and their policies. 21st ASCILITE Conference
Perth.
Zemsku, R., and Massy, W.F. (2004). Thwarted innovation. What Happened to e-learning and why, University of Pennsylvania.

65

Thank you !

http://www.unige.ch/dinf/ntice

66