Higher Education

, Volume 48, Issue 3, pp 379–395 | Cite as

Challenging hierarchies: The impact of e-learning

  • Norah Jones*
  • John O'Shea
Article

Abstract

New developments in e-learning and increasinglysophisticated learning technologies arebeginning to make a major impact in U.K.universities. It is clear that universitiesneed to change to accommodate the impact oftechnology on learning. Communicationtechnologies that are free from time or placeconstraints provide new challenges touniversities on how they should be organised. The paper reflects on the university's strategicplanning process and outlines the developmentprocess of an e-learning initiative. Examplesof the emergent change agenda are identifiedand finally possibilities for futuredevelopment are explored. It isclear that the impact of e-learning willrequire universities to re-think fundamentallytheir thinking and therefore their strategiesin a whole range of areas. There hasbeen much focus on technological advancementbut much less on how technology impacts onstrategic planning. This paper addresses thisgap in the literature by examining oneuniversity's strategic responses to thischallenge of e-learning. The learning attachedto this case study could be used to help otheruniversities respond to the change agendabrought about by e-learning.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beardwell, I. and Holden, L. (2001). Human Resource Management-a Contemporary Approach. London: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Beer, M. and Eisenstat, R. (2000).'The silent killers of strategy implementation and learning’, Sloan Management Review, vol. 41(4). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Summer, pp. 29–40.Google Scholar
  3. Berlant, L. (1998).'Collegiality, crisis and cultural studies’, in Watson, D. (2000), Managing Strategy. Bucks: Open University, Bucks, pp. 105–116.Google Scholar
  4. Buck, M. (1997).'The global demands for change’, in Field, J. op. cit., pp. 19–28.Google Scholar
  5. Drucker, P. (1993). Post-Capitalist Society. NewYork: Harper.Google Scholar
  6. Ehrmann, S. (1995).'Flashlight’, Change 27(2), 20–27.Google Scholar
  7. Evans, T. and Nation, D. (eds.) (2000). Changing University Teaching. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  8. Hanna, D. (2000). Higher Education in an Era of Digital Competition. Atwood: Madison.Google Scholar
  9. HEFCE (2000).'Strategic planning in higher education’, HEFCE Report 00/24.Google Scholar
  10. Helm, P. (1997).'Teaching and learning with the new technologies: For richer, for poorer; for better, for worse’, in Field, J. (ed.) (1997), Electronic Pathways. Adult Learning and the New Communication Technologies. Leicester: National Institute of Adult Continuing Education (England and Wales), pp. 41–49.Google Scholar
  11. Hofer, C. (1973).'Some Preliminary research on patterns of strategic behaviour’, Academy of Management Proceedings, 46–59.Google Scholar
  12. Inglis, A., Ling, P. and Joosten, V. (2002). Delivering Digitally. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  13. Jarzabkowski, P. (2001).'Strategy as social practice: An activity theory perspective’, working paper, Aston Business School. Birmingham, research.abs.aston.ac.uk/wpaper/0117.pdfGoogle Scholar
  14. Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  15. Martin, E. (1999). Changing Academic Work. Developing the Learning University. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University.Google Scholar
  16. McLuhan, M. (1967). The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of Effects (with Quentin Fiore, Harmondsworth, Allen Lane). The Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  17. Mintzberg, H. (1989). Mintzberg on Management, Inside our Strange World of Organisations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  18. Muilenburg, L. and Berge, Z. (2001).'Barriers to distance education: A factor analytic study”, The American Journal of Distance Education 15(2), 7–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nunan, T., Ricmor, G. and McCausland, H. (2000). Cited in Rich, T. (2001) op. cit.Google Scholar
  20. Oakley, B. (1997).'Will universities survive the knowledge economy?’, Interface, IEEE Newsletter, April, p. 72.Google Scholar
  21. Paquette, G. (1998).'Virtual learning centers for XXIst century organisations’, The Virtual Campus, Trends for Higher Education and Training (by Verdejo, F. and Davies, G.). London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
  22. Prendergast, G. (2001).'Creating effective online collaborative educators’, pp. 1–7. www.abacuslearningsystems.com.Google Scholar
  23. Rich, T. (2001).'E-learning futures. Report of AUA study group’, Perspectives Policy and Practice in Higher Education 5(3), 68–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosenberg, M. (2001). E-Learning. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  25. Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline. The Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation. London: CenturyBusiness.Google Scholar
  26. Senge, P., Kleiner, A., Roberts, C., Ross, R., Roth, G. and Smith, B. (1999). The Challenge of Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organisations. London: Nicholas Brealey.Google Scholar
  27. Sloman, M. and Rolph, T. (2003). Change Agenda. London: CIPD.Google Scholar
  28. Toffler, A. (1985). The Adaptive Corporation. New Yrk: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  29. University of Glamorgan (1999). Guide to Strategic Planning and Management.Google Scholar
  30. University of Glamorgan (2000 and 2001). Internal Strategic Plan.Google Scholar
  31. Wilson, A. (2000).'Strategy and management for development’ in Scott, P. (eds.) (2000), Higher Education Re-Formed. London: Falmer Press, pp. 29–44.Google Scholar
  32. Wright, S. (2003).'Enhancing the quality of teaching in Universities”, LTSN Generic Centre. Learning and Teaching Support Network, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norah Jones*
    • 1
  • John O'Shea
    • 1
  1. 1.The School of Humanities and Social SciencesUniversity of GlamorganTreforest, CF37 1DLUnited Kingdom (author for correspondence, E-mail

Personalised recommendations