Core Definition Explanatory Context Related Terms and Concepts Key Research Reports Synthesis of Research Findings Literature Review Policy Implications Implications for Stakeholder Groups Practical Applications Events Bibliography

Core Definition

This term is not defined, but describes a cluster of related roles focused on supporting the use of techonlogy for educational purposes, primarily in Higher Education. The Association for Learning Technology (ALT) has defined learning technologists

as "people who are actively involved in managing, researching, supporting or enabling learning with the use of learning technology". They define learning technology as "the broad range of communication, information and related technologies that can be used to support learning, teaching, and assessment."

Explanatory Context

The Dearing Report raised awareness of what it described as ‘new professionals’ working in Higher Education: people whose roles are hybrid, marginal and yet central to institutional processes of change. Learning Technologists are one such group of new professionals. Their prevalence in UK Higher Education was studied by Beetham et al (2001) who made a case for recognising both this role as well as hybrids (such as disciplinary academics who undertook learning technology work). A small amount of research work has since been undertaken to document the practices of this group, and in 2004, the Association for Learning Technology commissioned a project that led to the development of an accreditation scheme for learning technologists at all levels: CMALT

Related Terms and Concepts

Earlier writing (e.g. ) describes "Educational Technologists" in a way that is closely related to the use of the term "Learning Technologist" today. The group is usually understood to be distinct from, but related to, Instructional Designers (who might be more concerned with materials production than support).

Key Research Reports

A research focus on new professionals can be traced back to Gornall (1998), although comparable professional roles are described as early as 1976 (by Lawless and Kirkwood). The first (and only) major study of their prevalence was that undertaken by Beetham ''et al'' (2001). This identified:

• A likely 7,500 specialist staff (4,500 in central units, 3,000 or possibly more elsewhere), and
• Around 8,000 academic staff actively working to embed learning technology into educational processes;
• 11 distinct roles, although it was noted that most individuals undertook combinations of these, leading to three clusters being identified:

New specialists, who were typically young and on fixed-term externally-funded contracts;

Educational developers who happened to have a focus on technology use; and

Academics and established professionals who had incorporated an interest in this area in their own professional identities.

58 separate activities involved in the coordination, development, use and support of learning technologies, of which participants on average saw about 20 as 'core' to their role and a further 20 as peripheral. Ten of these were central for the majority of respondents, the leading one being, 'keeping abreast of current developments in learning technologies' and the rest being educational, developmental, interpersonal/communicative or strategic, but not technical.

Synthesis of Research Findings

The literature about this group remains sparse. The role clearly exists (and has done so for some decades), focuses on supporting the educational uses of technology, is relatively prevalent within UK Higher Education, was marginal and is being encouraged by the [http://www.alt.ac.uk|Association for Learning Technology] to adopt a more professional status through CMALT. Some detail has been provided about the practices that this group perform (e.g. Oliver, 2002), such a collaborative process of scaffolded professional development, that often starts with technical support but ends by raising educational questions that may lead to the re-design of the curriculum.

Literature Review

Only one review has been identified in this area - a project report by Oliver ''et al ''(2004) prepared as part of the  Association for Learning Technology commissioned project to develop CMALT. This outlined the history of the role, pointed to comparable activities in sectors outside Higher Education and similar roles in countries such as America and Australia, and reviewed a number of schemes in existence at the time that might serve as points of reference in the development of CMALT.

Policy Implications

Although the situation in 2001 saw Learning Technologists as widespread but insecure, anecdotally, such roles now seem to be more secure, often being linked to recurrent funding. However, no systematic comparison with the 2001 survey has been undertaken which might substantiate this. If this group is to be developed, then policy-based support for their role (either institutionally or nationally) is important, as is further work to build evidence about their prevalence, practices and impact.

Implications for Stakeholder Groups

Institutions may wish to refer to the existing research-based descriptions of practice when drawing up new roles in this area; they may also want to consider whether the CMALT

qualification is useful as a benchmark for professional development or appointments.

Practical Applications

Individuals may find value in referring to CMALT

or to the research-based case studies when planning or reflecting on their own activities.

Events

The M25 Learning Technologists network, a subscription-based group, held a meeting on May 9th, 2008, to discuss the future of learning technologists.

Bibliography

Beetham, H., Jones, S. and Gornall, L. (2001) Career Development of Learning Technology Staff: Scoping Study Final Report. JISC Committee for Awareness, Liaison and Training Programme. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/publications/cdssfinalreport.aspx

Conole, G. (2004) The Role Of Learning Technology Practitioners And Researchers In Understanding Networked Learning. Proceedings of Networked Learning, 2004: Lancaster. http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2004/proceedings/symposia/symposium1/conole.htm

Gornall, L (1999) ‘New professionals’: change and occupational roles in higher education. Perspectives, 3 (2), 44-49. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a713848007~db=all~order=page

Lawless, C. & Kirkwood, A. (1976) Training the Educational Technologist. British Journal of Educational Technology, 1 (7), 54-60.

Lisewski, B. and Joyce, P. (2003) Examining the five-stage e-moderating model: designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession. ALT-J, 11 (1), 55-66. http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/uwp/altj/2003/00000011/00000001/art00006

Oliver, M. (2002) What do Learning Technologists Do?] Innovations in Education and Training International, 39 (4), 245-252. http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a713768910~db=all~order=page

Oliver, M. (2003) Are learning technologists a community of practice? In Cook, J. & McConnell, D. (Eds), ALT-C 2003 Research Proceedings, 259-272. Association for Learning Technology: Sheffield.

Oliver, M., Sharpe, R., Duggleby, J., Jennings, D. and Kay, D. (2004) Accrediting learning technologists: a review of the literature, schemes and programmes. ALT accreditation project report no. 1. http://www.ucl.ac.uk/calt/alt-accreditation/Initial_review.doc