Two surveys were carried out by IATL during the academic year 2020/21 to evaluate the learning experience of students in the blended setting of Term 1 and the online setting of Term 2.

In Term 1, IATL modules were delivered using blended learning, consisting of a combination of pre-recorded (asynchronous) lectures, online formative learning through either Moodle, Teams or Padlet, online group work, Moodle forums and physical face-to-face (f2f) small group sessions as permitted by social distancing requirements. However, in Term 2, all of IATL’s teaching moved online due to covid-related restrictions. Consequently, the Term 2 survey was aimed at evaluating the student learning experience from an online teaching and learning perspective with a view to gauging what was working well and what areas required further improvement. The findings of the Term 2 survey were then compared with the experience of the students taking IATL modules in Term 1 to identify any improvements, recurrent themes, or longer-term trends.

Theme	Survey Question	Term 2 % positive*	Term 1% positive*
Communication	Module registration experience	95	93
	Changes in the course or teaching have been communicated effectively	95	91
Teaching and Learning	Learning experience using Teams to engage with synchronous sessions	90	88
	Learning experience using Teams to engage with groupwork	70	81
Connection	Connected to students on the module and IATL teaching staff	81	81
Support	Academic support received from IATL this term	97	86

*Positive Responses: 1) Very Good and Good 2) Strongly Agree and Agree 3) Extremely connected and Somewhat connected

1. Student Online Learning Experience - Key findings

Analysis of the survey data from the two surveys highlighted some key findings, which can be grouped under three themes:

a) Group Work

Respondents overwhelmingly valued the online groupwork (seminar) sessions. A number of key reasons were cited for this with students commenting that the online groupwork provided them with an opportunity to share their thoughts, engage with the teaching material in more depth, enhance their understanding of the subject area and consolidate their learning. Well-organised sessions, with a clear and simple structure that facilitated student engagement, were particularly well-regarded by students. Whereas those with poor student participation and engagement (for example, low attendance at seminar sessions, cameras switched off and zero contribution to discussions) had an adverse effect on the student experience.

Quantitative data showed that in Term 2 students viewed their experience of using Teams, specifically for groupwork, less positively than in Term 1, with the qualitative feedback indicating that this could be attributed to lack of variety, with students referring to ‘overuse of Teams’. Some students (who identified themselves in their survey comments as mature students) expressed concern that the participation of group members was not sufficiently monitored and consequently no action was taken to remedy poor attendance/engagement. There does appear to be some correlation with students who used technologies other than Teams (Padlet, OneNote, Miro) with these students enjoying their groupwork more. This may have been partly due to the novelty factor, however, a number of students referred to the functionality of Padlet and Miro as being more conducive to collaborative working.

From a broader point of view, some of the reduction in student satisfaction of Teams for groupwork may be attributed to the move to a fully online learning environment. IATL used blended learning in Term 1 and students were therefore able to have some (albeit limited) on-campus sessions. This, together with the fact that Teams was such an integral part of online learning for students in all their Term 2 modules, may have resulted in over-exposure.

b) Use of Online Tools and Technologies

Both the qualitative and qualitative data from the survey show that students became more prepared and confident in using online learning technologies. Covid restrictions resulted in all of IATL’s teaching moving online for Term 2 with IATL module tutors using a range of different learning technologies to supplement Moodle and Teams. The survey provided a good opportunity to gauge how these were being received by the students. There was a lot of enthusiasm for the use of new, and, more innovative, learning technologies. Students taking Term 1 modules, where Padlet and Vevox were used, were very enthusiastic about these platforms in their feedback. In Term 2, Miro emerged as a favourite and was positively commented in the written feedback.

The survey feedback indicated that in Term 2 students felt much more confident about using online learning tools and technologies. In terms of devices, an overwhelming majority of respondents indicated that were using a laptop (supplemented by other mobile devices) to access course materials and group sessions. Only a small minority were using a desktop/personal computer.

Overall, the survey shows that students began to feel more comfortable engaging with online learning. IATL was praised for providing a good online learning experience and environment. Respondents felt that IATL adapted well to the online situation and ‘made the best of a tricky situation’. However, there were multiple references in the qualitative feedback to face-to-face learning being the ‘best case scenario’. This was summed up in the words of one respondent who, when asked what could be improved, commented ‘other than preferring to meet face-to-face, nothing could be better in my opinion’.

c) Learning Communities

Although students were not asked directly about the extent to which they felt a part of a learning community, closer scrutiny of the qualitative data yields some interesting insights. Working on the basis that a learning community is more than attending a common set of (online) classes but also about deepening students’ understanding of the subject, building relationships and facilitating learning outside the formal teaching environment, some useful feedback was gleaned.

A number of respondents commented that rotating the membership of seminar groups, provided them with the opportunity to meet and engage with a much wider range of module participants than if they had remained in the same group for all their sessions. The use of breakout rooms within online lecture sessions was considered beneficial in allowing them to ‘share stories’ and feel part of the wider module cohort. Allocating students to informal groups that could meet on a voluntary and student-led basis outside of formal teaching sessions was another helpful mechanism used within some IATL modules to enhance the students’ sense of community.

Well-planned and structured teaching sessions that provided opportunities for preparatory work ahead of the formal session, had tasks that challenged participants to think critically about the subject and that facilitated active engagement by all, appeared to be valued by students as more productive and enjoyable. Respondents commented that the sessions had left them ‘feeling inspired ‘and had captured the ‘wonder and curiosity in me for an academic module’ - sentiments indicative of a deep learning experience.

2. Areas of Good Practice Identified by Students

In addition to some of the positive aspects already highlighted above, respondents identified specific practices within their module/s, which enhanced their online learning experience. They particularly liked:

• Questions being sent out in advance of the group sessions as this helped direct the conversation.
• Timely publication of teaching materials, allowing them to plan their workload and reduce stress.
• Regular feedback and timely responses to queries from staff.
• Seminar formats that enable more open conversations.
• Interactive sessions that increased their interest and engagement.
• IATL’s supportive and helpful staff and module leaders.
• Group sessions structured in a way that required all participants to engage and have their cameras on.

3. Areas for Improvement Identified by Students

The followings areas for improvement were identified by the students:

• Publish material for groupwork well in advance to give students enough time to work on it before their synchronous discussion sessions.
• Create more opportunities online for students to interact with the module leader informally, to replicate the opportunities for informal interaction that students would normally have after in-person seminars.
• Identify ways to increase student participation and engagement in online groupwork sessions.
• Provide opportunities for module participants to interact with a wider range of their peers (e.g by regularly changing the composition of seminar groups and having more round table style sessions).
• Release all Moodle-based module information at the outset rather than drip-feeding it to students on a weekly or ad-hoc basis, particularly the breakdown of weekly study topics and module assessment information.
• More regular one-to-one meetings for module tutors to check in on student progress would be helpful.
• Be clearer about the expectation for online seminars (e.g. is attendance compulsory, how will it be monitored, are students required to have their cameras on, what happens when participation in smaller groups declines to a point where only a few are able to join).

4. Concluding Remarks

The findings of the survey indicate that, overall, the IATL student experience of online teaching during Term 2 was a positive one. Over 70% rated the academic support that they received as very good, over 80% felt connected to other staff and students on their module and over 90% considered that changes to teaching had been communicated to them effectively.