Part+5+-+Conclusions

= Conclusions = ==

====New Zealand's approach to the implementation of e-learning has been effective in that it has provided resource and support for grass-roots development. This means that practitioners have been able to explore the use of ICT in education by experimenting and sharing with each other. ICT Clusters have been most successful in developing e-learning, particularly at primary school level.==== ====At secondary school level, the provision of Virtual Learning Environments and other software to schools has assisted e-learning, with particular success in the sciences, and this is still expanding across curriculum areas. This is also supported by the adoption of E-portfolio, which enables students to maintain online access to their work over the years of their formal education, from primary to tertiary. In terms of teacher take-up of e-learning, in many ways this is developed through online forums and sharing that emulates the ICT cluster model. An excellent source of this kind of support is the Ministry's TKI site as well as assessment related resources on the NZQA's NCEA site.====

[[image:British Flag Wallpapers (2).jpg width="360" height="320" align="left"]]
====With the availability of personal devices to students, alongside the provision of software platforms, government funding is now being put into network infrastructure (such as Ultra Fast Broadband), rather than the supply of computers to schools. This will also assist in making e-learning more accessible to schools and students in remote or poorly provisioned areas.==== ====The United Kingdom's initiatives in e-learning have been on a much larger scale than New Zealand's. They are also marked by some spectacular failures. However, there has been highly effective implementation of e-learning due to the provision of strong network capabilities (SuperJANET) as well as regional and online support for teachers. Becta, while no longer functioning as a quango, still exists as an online community similar to New Zealand's TKI, but not related to the DfE, which offers the TES site. The government-funded JISC, which has had such a large influence on e-learning in the United Kingdom, continues to support education at every level through infrastructure, funding and providing online resources and training for teachers.====

= What implications are there for future implementation and e-learning development in New Zealand? =

====The key difference between the approaches taken towards e-learning by the United Kingdom and New Zealand are reflected in the level of success in implementation. The UK has tended towards delegating leadership to arms-length committees and organisations (Quangos), most of which have struggled to sustain a cohesive approach to e-learning support, demonstrating "the need for strategies to be formulated at the beginning rather than at the end of major programmes of investment if the full benefits are to be realised” (Mee, 2007, p. 3). JISC is the real exception to this and has much to be proud of as an organisation. In recent years the UK's Department for Education had taken back responsibility for strategy and supporting e-learning in schools, and this will help to provide the overarching vision and direction educators are looking for and may help to align the mixed messages educators have received to this point.====

====New Zealand has largely provided direction and resources to support teachers in their endeavours, rather than relying on other organisations to 'make it happen'. This has had the effect of combining 'top-down' direction with 'bottom-up' implementation which, on the whole, seems to be a positive way forward. “Although encouraging bottom-up change is an important policy option, it is not possible—or even desirable—to do away with central or local government intervention, particularly where that is appropriate to provide a statutory and institutional framework within which e-learning innovation could flourish” (Nash, Dutton, & Peltu, 2004, p. 3). ====

==== Areas for concern are the competing pressures that school leaders and staff experience, and which have resulted in “piecemeal and incremental change rather than the predicted 'transformation'...Calls for radical innovation and the development of new approaches to learning made possible by digital technologies have occurred alongside a tight standards and target driven agenda" (Mee, 2007, p. 6). Assessment requirements, particularly at secondary school level, have the potential to inhibit innovation and build resistance, along with the pressure of ever-improving results in an increasingly competitive environment. The Ministry of Education must be realistic in terms of how much change and accountability schools can sustain.====

====So far New Zealand's approach has found the balance in its top-down, bottom-up strategy. As technology changes education, however, there is the possibility of increasing pressures from the government sourced in New Zealand's ability to compete on the global economic stage. Increasing directives and higher expectations of compliance will have the effect of increasing resistance from educators who feel their professional or managerial autonomy is being eroded. It is important that teachers retain control over the development of e-learning as, while clearly a priority for education, it must be supported by thoughtful pedagogy; “New digital technologies can support effective learning, but innovation in learning should not start from technology” (Sharples et al., 2009, p. 18).====

Why e-learning should be the future - media type="youtube" key="rvyP-cwpHN8" height="315" width="560" align="center" Kraft, (2010).

** Discussion point: In your experience of implementing e-learning, how successful do you think NZ's 'bottom-up-top-down' balanced approach has been? What would you change? ** include component="comments" page="Part 5 - Conclusions" limit="10"