• what the learner knows already
• what is being learnt
• the environment in which learning takes place

Over the years both informal approaches to learning and more formal theories have been developed by educationalists and researchers. Both can further our understanding of learning by clarifying some of our assumptions and providing structured evidence.

Learning takes place in a social context. The nature of that context can have a significant impact on an individual's approach to learning. The most important social factors in education are usually the nature of the assessment and the attitudes towards learning of peers, teachers and employers (if the learning takes place in a work setting). The organisational setting establishes the parameters of the learning task, including, most importantly, the 'contract' between students and teachers which sets the expectations and norms.

Over the last seventy years there has been a great deal of research carried out into co-operative learning in an attempt to assess whether or not group dynamics can be harnessed to facilitate learning. The overall conclusion of this work is that co-operative group work can lead to effective learning if the groups are properly structured to ensure co-operation and enable all members to have equal access to resources (Johnson and Johnson 1989). The social dynamics in a learning group create an opportunity for a learning dialogue between peers as well as between learners and teachers. In developing a learning environment we need to consider how to harness group dynamics to student-directed learning.

Cognitive theories of learning can provide the understanding of how people learn and suggest the strategies to facilitate learning which are necessary if the paradigm shift, discussed in the previous section, is to be achieved. Attempts to apply cognitive learning theory to teaching have produced some important principles, namely:

• learning occurs when the learner constructs a meaningful knowledge structure with the new material, seeking to relate it to what s/he knows already
• in order to acquire meaning the learner needs to be actively engaged with the learning material with access to relevant, timely and constructive feedback
• learning takes place in a social setting, which has a significant impact on how learning is approached

Teachers can facilitate learning this way by encouraging learners to play an active role in their own learning by asking themselves three fundamental questions:

• have I understood?
• what do I do next?
• how do I use my learning?

The reflection which these questions stimulates is a major part of cognitive learning in action.

Cognitive psychology has strongly influenced an approach to learning known as constructivism, (or constructionism). Constructivism emphasises that knowledge must be built by the learner in order for it to be meaningful. The constructivist approach is learner-centred and self-regulatory, with the learner taking on responsibility for his/her own learning. New knowledge can be added in a networked fashion, different learners may follow different routes in deepening their understanding of the topic. The role of the teacher moves away from being an information provider and into that of a facilitator and provider of feedback. The teacher has an important role in determining how learning should be demonstrated, and thus helping to set the parameters of the topic. The teacher also helps the learner reflect through encouraging dialogue around the three questions cited above. A major benefit of this approach to learning is that learners develop meta-cognitive skills which help to control their own learning; in other words learners learn how to learn.

In contrast the instructivist approach is a more teacher-centred approach, with the teacher not only responsible for deciding what is to be taught, but how and in what order. Material is presented in a pre-determined sequence following some expert view of the subject domain. There is an assumption that following a particular linear route through the subject is the most effective way of learning. Rather than emphasising the learner's understanding this approach tends to emphasise the teacher's presentation.

It might be argued that both approaches have a role in learning, perhaps at different stages of learning or for different aspects of a subject. For example, an instructivist approach to language learning in the early stages might be an effective way to help the learner develop the initial knowledge structure for that language. However a constructivist approach might be more appropriate in helping the learner to develop a richer understanding of the language once a basic structure has been established.

MacFarlane (1997) suggests that learners go through the following phases in the development of conceptual understanding:

• preparing to tackle the relevant information • acquiring the necessary information
• relating new information to previous knowledge
• transforming it through establishing organisational frameworks within which to interpret it
• developing personal understanding

To support these phases of learning MacFarlane (1997) proposes the following teaching functions:

Within a conventional teaching methodology the initial stages of orienting, motivating, presenting and explaining or clarifying are carried out through lectures, the instructivist approach. These functions can be facilitated through a more constructivist, student-centred approach, which, because

it utilises the whole learning environment (teachers, learners, resource materials and assessment procedures) can provide an effective and economical support for learning. To achieve this there needs to be a critique of both the purposes and techniques involved in conventional teaching and a widespread adoption of new methods which support the additional transferable skills now being required. It is also necessary to consider how technology can be used in improving the provision of learning and the support of teaching.

The practical implications of applying learning theories to teaching are that UHI staff develop a constructivist, dialogue-based approach to learning and teaching. This approach is an integral part of the paradigm shift from 'knowledge-based' to 'capability-based' learning. In most universities the move to a mass HE system has meant that the cost-effective lecture has largely replaced discussion for the individual student. Yet the pedagogical analysis here leads us to reject an educational philosophy based solely on the presentation of knowledge, in favour of an approach based on supporting the self-paced individual student. This involves emphasising learning rather than teaching. To shift the overall emphasis in this way implies many quite fundamental changes in teaching.

A key emphasis must be on helping students to learn. A major effort should go into ensuring that they are capable of working independently, and often, at a distance. This may mean developing novel induction programmes which emphasise the acquisition of generic learning skills such as searching for relevant information, synthesising and analysing new material, applying it to a range of different examples, generalising and differentiating across a variety of cases and actively constructing schemata for new concepts. To facilitate this learning staff need to provide relevant, timely and meaningful feedback and encourage students to develop the skills of reflection and dialogue. In doing this there must also be real support for students in the use of the technology to support constructivist learning. Students must be trained to become effective learners.

UHI's staff will need a high level of support as they develop the skills which the flexible provision requires. Those skills will involve fluent use of the new learning technology, but more importantly perhaps, understanding of the pedagogical underpinning of new methods. Continuous professional development will involve not only training in ICT, but sharing experiences of personal innovations and learning about innovations and resources elsewhere.

The demands on students will be matched by the demands placed on teachers, who become the 'facilitators of learning' rather than 'purveyors of knowledge'. Implicit in this approach is recognition of the importance of work-based learning. In all this, ICT will be an enabler, permitting the UHI to build supportive learning environments across different communities within and beyond the Highlands and Islands and, significantly, allowing a refocusing of the role of pedagogy in the support of students and delivery of courses and schemes. The new learning environments therefore will be student-centred, seeking to reorient the focus from 'teaching' to 'learning' and will operate within a professional paradigm committed to the facilitation of learning. It will also allow the UHI to develop a new 'compact' with its clients and enable the UHI to make a significant contribution to the development of new learning and teaching methods for the Scottish and UK tertiary education sector.

Considering the evidence about how people learn gives guidelines for effective learning which can be used in the design of learning environments. A constructivist approach to learning is one which will enable us to help our students learn how to learn and to acquire the skills and capabilities they will need in their future lives. It will enable us to create a dynamic learning environment networked across the Highlands and Islands, but also with links to learning communities beyond this region. In order to use ICT effectively we are responsible for ensuring that we create learner-centred environments.

The use of information and communication technology to support learning environments is critical to the development of UHI. The technology can be used to allow communications across the distributed university to support learning, research and administration. Resources developed in one part of the network can be used anywhere; materials students would not normally have access to can be made available through virtual images, students and staff can communicate with colleagues across the globe. The technology has the potential to advance the paradigm shift discussed in section 3 by the creation of asynchronous, learner-centred interactive environments. However use of the technology itself will not automatically create this type of learning experience. It is our responsibility to develop materials which facilitate student-centred learning.

This section tries to answer the question "How can UHI best use ICT to create a networked university which puts students at the centre of the learning and teaching experience?"

The Dearing committee reported that the use of ICT as a tool for teaching and learning in higher education has increased rapidly in the last few years. In SuperJANET, the UK has the most advanced academic information technology network in the world. In Scotland the MANs (Metropolitan Area Networks) give the country an even more advanced infrastructure. Various projects and initiatives have already attempted to exploit the potential of new technology for learning and teaching. The largest of these, the Teaching and Learning Technology Programme (TLTP), has involved investment of over £32 million by the funding bodies to launch over 70 projects to develop computer-based teaching and learning course materials. In addition a 3 year project in Scotland, TALiSMAN (Teaching and Learning in Scottish Metropolitan Area Networks), funded by the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC) is currently being evaluated.

Despite these developments Dearing points out that ICT is far from being embedded in most higher education institutions. There are several reasons for this, two of the most important are the fact that most academics have had no training in or experience of using ICT as a teaching tool and that there is a shortage of staff skilled in developing computer-based course material. Even when resources from projects such as TLTP are made freely available within higher education, the take up tends to be restricted to those involved with their development.

UHI is entering the higher education sector at a time when the infrastructure is in place for use of ICT for educational purposes, but at a time when the sector has not adopted ICT strategies to any great extent. The use of ICT itself will not automatically lead to the achievement of the strategic aim quoted at the start of this section. ICT can be used to create student-centred learning environments, but it can equally be used to develop traditional instructivist materials. When considering the use of ICT in relation to the paradigm shifts in higher education (discussed in section 3) we see it can facilitate asynchronous, networked learning, with virtual objects and multimedia presentations. However, ICT will only lead to active, interactive, personalised and supportive learning if learning resources are deliberately designed to achieve these goals.

The remainder of this section will examine the types of ICT materials which can be used in education, and will consider how to apply these to create student-centred learning resources and the consequent implications for staff and students.

Information and communication technology provides a range of techniques that can be used for creating and sharing learning resources as well as for communication between students and staff in a learning group. Although there is some overlap between these two different functions it would be useful to examine them separately in order to give a clear idea of the options available.

Computer based resources have been produced which can be run from an individual computer, a CD ROM, networked on a local area network or intranet, or accessed via the world wide web and the internet. These resources range from very attractive multimedia packages, which integrate audio, video, animated graphics and hypertext, to relatively simple text based materials. However the educational philosophy of much of this material developed since the mid-1980's has been instructivist. The authors structure the material, sequence the presentation and through this keep control of the stages of learning. Even quite sophisticated hypertext, which does allow the learner to control the sequencing of information, is not truly interactive because there is no intrinsic feedback on the learner's actions (Laurillard 1993). What these resources have been able to offer is easy storage of and rapid access to materials and an opportunity for students to use them in their own time and at their own pace.

There is added value in the use of multimedia in learning materials if a range of different media is combined to present information in ways which aid understanding. The increase in 'vividness' from well-designed multimedia can also enhance student motivation. Most importantly multimedia can give students access to resources which are otherwise inaccessible, for example the literature student who can read Wilfred Owen's original manuscripts (some of which are stored in libraries in the USA) or the archaeology student who can 'visit' remote sites through virtual imaging. However these benefits do need to be actively integrated into a constructivist approach if the resulting materials are to be student-centred.

Access to learning resources using the World Wide Web does give the student the opportunity to control his/her learning through a choice of links to different sites, but even this can just be a way of reading novel materials without demanding any more action by the student than choosing where to go next. Web-based materials also need the student to interact with the information and use it in their own learning. It is not sufficient to produce materials in an electronic form; the author or lecturer must get the student to be active in learning and must give feedback on the learner's actions. The use of the Internet, or Intranet, is not restricted to web-based resources on particular subjects; it is an important way of accessing libraries and supporting journal materials. In some cases students will be able to get direct access to electronic books and journals, in other cases the internet is used as a means of ordering a particular resource.

Increasingly, computers are being used as a means of both synchronous and asynchronous communication. The growth in electronic mail and the potential to communicate one to one, one to many and many to many provides tremendous potential for using computers in learning dialogues. There is reliable software which enables both teleconferencing and one to one communication. Communication software makes it easy to send, retrieve and organise messages and allows the creation of special conference groups. Conference groups can have open membership or be restricted, depending on the needs and purpose of the group. They can be used for tutors and students to discuss course work; they can facilitate communication and self help amongst students who rarely meet face to face; and they can provide a discussion forum for staff. In a distributed university with many remote students, email and conferencing is essential to the creation of a learning community where all students and staff feel a part.

By itself, asynchronous computer conferencing only supports the discussion of task-based activity. Desktop conferencing, which allows the sharing of programs and data, will make it technically much easier to integrate tasks with associated discussion. Such a system can involve the students in both individual and group tasks, supported by a conference discussion. It can be interactive, adaptive and reflective. This can provide genuine cognitive support for the critical schema-construction stages of learning and it can also provide the framework for support at the social level.

In addition to using email conferencing, it is possible to have synchronous communication through video conferencing (VC). Ideally video conferencing should be used interactively, to allow participants at all sites to take part in a discussion, and to facilitate some of the social interaction which takes place in learning environments. Research on video conferencing does suggest that it is more effective when the group taking part have already met in a face-to-face situation and have already established some rapport. Video conferencing can be used for the remote delivery of lectures, but used this way it has all the disadvantages of the lecture itself. However the lecture does have some advantages which we must provide even if we discard the technique. As well as presenting knowledge to be acquired, the lecture sets the expectations and norms for the learners, signals what the lecturer regards as really important, serves to reassure the learner about progress and provides a social setting with fellow learners. How much of this can be supported through a virtual lecture is currently unclear.

Staff and students are faced with a range of ICT techniques which can be used to l create learning environments within UHI. None of these techniques are themselves going to create student-centred learning resources nor help us achieve some of the goals of the learning paradigm. What is going to determine whether we achieve these goals is how we use the technology.

To create student-centred learning environments, it is necessary to structure resources to meet the needs of a constructivist approach to learning. Learning activities are necessary which enable students to interact with the resources and construct their own cognitive schemata. They need tasks which will give appropriate feedback and they need to be encouraged to enter a dialogue with their tutors, fellow students and themselves (in an internal, reflective dialogue).

Mayes (1997) suggests that we can think of cognitive learning as comprising three stages: conceptualisation, construction and dialogue (see section 3.2.2). He suggests that these stages of learning require different types of 'courseware' or computer-based learning materials. This is shown diagrammatically below:

Adapted from Mayes 1995

Primary courseware is authored by experts, secondary courseware is created by tutors and tertiary courseware is produced by students and tutors together. Primary courseware is mainstream material developed using a wide range of tools and, increasingly, with a range of experts contributing different skills. In the future it is unlikely that individual lecturers will author their own materials, just as few write their own text books, primary courseware will be produced for a mass educational market with individual lecturers linking this material to other resources for their own students. To meet the learning requirements primary courseware must be designed to be genuinely interactive and allow students to manipulate the material and to ask 'what if?' questions. (For example, in economics material on economic modelling should allow students to change different parameters and observe the consequences.)

Secondary courseware supports the learner's task-based activities, it combines both instructions, the tasks themselves, the environment in which the task is carried out and the tools (software and hardware) used to carry out the tasks. Tertiary courseware is a novel concept, which involves stimulating a dialogue and can include the 're-use' of the outcomes of other people's learning. Examples of 'recycled' learning include databases of 'frequently asked questions' and Answer Gardens, developed at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), (Ackerman and Malone 1990). The Answer Garden allows the development of databases of commonly asked questions that grow "organically" as new questions arise. Questions which do not yet have satisfactory answers in the database are automatically routed to appropriate experts (tutors), and then inserted, together with their answers, into the network. Other techniques which can be used for tertiary courseware are video and tele-conferencing, tutorial groups and self help groups.

The framework developed by Mayes is useful in highlighting the different types of material necessary for different phases of learning. It helps us to focus on the need for task-based activities and dialogue in the learning process (secondary and tertiary courseware) as well as the orientation and information giving material included in primary courseware. The main challenge is to develop materials which stimulate activity and dialogue and to use the technology in such a way that these fundamental aspects of learning can occur even when face-to-face meetings happen very rarely.

The major implication for staff is the need to acquire both the technical skills necessary for competent use of ICT equipment and an understanding of how to apply the technology in the development of student-centred learning environments. There are a variety of ways of achieving this, including formal courses on the use of technology and supported individual and group work on the development of student resources. In addition, UHI intends to integrate the relevant skills into a module for the MA in Professional Development which can also be used for staff accreditation with the Institute of Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. If UHI's ninth strategic aim is to be achieved staff development in this area is an essential and on-going priority.

Staff will need to assess the needs of their students (current and predicted) and availability of appropriate resources to determine what materials should be developed within UHI and what can be sourced elsewhere. MacFarlane's classification of educational material in a knowledge economy (discussed in section 3.3) can be used to help decide where efforts are best expended. He suggests that there are three levels of resources, specialist, core and foundation. Specialist primary courseware materials should be developed in those areas where UHI has recognised expertise. In addition, secondary and tertiary courseware will be needed for UHI's own students. Core materials could be developed in house, although the subject-centred primary courseware could also be developed in collaboration with other HE institutions. The primary courseware at foundation level is likely to be imported, but staff will still have the responsibility for its selection and for secondary and tertiary courseware.

In developing materials there should be an emphasis on networking groups of staff in cognate disciplines who will agree on what is required and will share the development of materials, agreeing in advance to use the materials produced by other team members. As well as being economical, this strategy stimulates dialogue and reflection about teaching and becomes an integral part of ongoing staff development. Networks of staff developing materials in different subject areas must also be facilitated to ensure the spread of 'best practice' across UHI. Staff should be actively encouraged to research areas of interest and relevance in the use of ICT for learning and to collaborate with colleagues in other institutions who have parallel interests. This networking will develop UHI staff, facilitate the establishment of assessment standards for learning materials and ensure that learning materials attain the highest possible quality standards.

To achieve these goals it will be necessary to have a mechanism for giving staff the time to carry out the work and to actively reward successful innovations in teaching.

Students will benefit from increasingly effective and efficient learning which will equip them with the capacities and learning skills they will need in their future lives. As UHI students they will become members of a learning community which they will be able to access despite physical or temporal remoteness. Through the communications technology they will be able to access learning resources, take part in discussions and chat to fellow students as well as being able to reach other resources via the Internet. Physical resources which would be inaccessible can be viewed as virtual objects. Assignments can be carried out and submitted electronically.

To capitalise on ICT for learning we need to ensure that it is used consciously to ensure learning is student-centred and to help us move towards the paradigm of the 'learning institution'. It is not ICT per se that will do this, but how we apply it. This section has examined some of the key issues in developing resources, the implications for staff and students.

This report collates the work of the Learning Environments and Technology Working Group which was convened to explore the development of an appropriate learning environment for UHI in the new millennium. In addition to recommending the publication of a report summarising their debate, the LET group also proposed that UHI funded projects within the network to develop examples of using ICT in a constructivist, learner-centred way.

Eight LET projects have been established which aim to develop a range of different resources covering the creation of web-based learning resources, strategies for student support and the creation of a staff development resource. The projects all involve the collaboration of several colleges and, in themselves, provide staff development in the use of technology to facilitate learning. A LET Project Officer, funded jointly by UHI and the Scottish Further Education Unit (SFEU), has been appointed to co-ordinate the development of these projects. The LET projects are due to be completed by July 1999. Their findings will be used to enhance UHI's use of ICT for learning in a way that is congruent with the approach recommended in this report.

Many of the ideas of the LET group and the results from the LET projects will be taken forward by the Learning Environments and Research Network (LEARN) which will be established within UHI during 1999. The aim of this network is to facilitate best practice in support of learning throughout the UHI learning environment, harnessing new information and communication technologies to this end.

To summarise, section 1 of the report outlines the unique features of UHI and considers the changes taking place within the higher education sector. The conclusion is that UHI is in a position to develop novel strategies and practices for learning and teaching which are pivotal to its existence, and which are relevant to higher education globally. The learning paradigm shift discussed in section 2 reinforces UHI's whole philosophy. It requires the development of learning networks that are learner-centred, interactive and emphasise the development of skills and capabilities rather than the mechanical acquisition of information. In this environment students will take responsibility for their own learning while teachers take the responsibility for stimulating learning rather than the presentation of information. These networks require a constructivist approach to learning, considered in detail in section 3. A benefit of the constructivist approach is that it helps students learn how to learn, an essential requirement of higher education in the next millennium. The use of ICT is essential in the everyday work of UHI as well as in helping to create a constructivist, student centred learning environment. However it is not the application of ICT per se which will do this, but how the technology is applied. Some of the key issues involved in using ICT to implement the UHI philosophy were outlined in section 4 along with a discussion of the benefits for staff and students.

In developing a learning and teaching strategy UHI is in a fortunate position. Its requirements as a federal, distributed network of thirteen institutions, the impact of global changes in higher education, the implications of the learning paradigm shift and a constructivist approach to learning all coincide with the preferred education philosophy of the organisation. The appropriate application of modern information and communication technology can help ensure that this philosophy is realised.

Membership of the LET Working Group changed as the group has progressed with its work.

The following is a list of all participants of the group throughout its history:

Ackerman M, Malone T, (1990), 'Answer Garden: a tool for growing organisational memory', paper presented at the Conference on Office Systems, New York.

Department for Education Employment, 1997, White Paper entitled Towards a Development Strategy for Rural Scotland

Dearing R, (1997), Higher Education in the Learning Society, London, HMSO.

Fryer RH, (1997), Learning for the Twenty-First Century: First Report of the National Advisory Groups for Continuing Education and Life Long Learning, Sheffield, DfEE.

Garrick, R (1997), Higher Education in the Learning Society (Report of the Scottish Committee of Inquiry), London, HMSO.

Johnson DW, Johnson RT, (1989) Cooperation and competition: theory and research, Edina MD, Interaction.

Kennedy H, (1997) Learning Works: Widening participation in Further Education, Coventry, FEFC.

Laurillard D, (1993), Rethinking University Teaching A framework for the effective use of educational technology, London, Routledge.

MacFarlane AGJ, (1997), Information, Knowledge and Learning, paper presented to the Learning Environments and Technology Working Group of the University of the Highlands and Islands project.

Mayes JT, (1997), Towards a framework for learning technology, paper presented to the Learning Environments and Technology Working Group of the University of the Highlands and Islands project.

Papert S, (1990), 'An introduction to the 5th anniversary collection, in Harel I, (ed) Constructionist Learning, Cambridge MA, MIT Media Laboratory.

Rumelhart DE, Norman DA, (1978), 'Accretion, tuning and restructuring three models of learning, in Cotton JW, Klatzky RL (eds), Semantic factors in cognition, Hissdale NJ, Erlbaum.

The full membership of the Working Group is listed in the appendix.

This section is based on material presented to the group by Professor AGW MacFarlane.

Adapted from MacFarlane 1997

The section on 'how people learn' (3.2) is based on a paper presented to the group by Terry Mayes of Glasgow Caledonian University

LET Working Group Report