MODELING AN INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH TO DEVELOPING TECHNOLOGY ENABLED LEARNING: CLOSING THE GAP BETWEEN RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
Although technology uptake for teaching and learning in universities has been considerable, technology enabled learning (TEL) research has had limited impact on implementation decisions and policy around teaching and learning (Angelo, 1993; Breen, Lindsay, Jenkins, & Smith, 2001). While a considerable body of TEL research exists, its influence is still limited (Price, Kirkwood, & Richardson, 2015). More often there is not an institutional approach to technological implementation and this can lead to fragmentation and a ‘disintegrated’ student experience (Kirkwood & Price, 2016). Typically teachers’ VLE learning designs either reflect how they were taught or attempt to replicating face-to-face teaching (Englund, Olofsson, & Price, 2016). Thus VLE learning designs lack research input and institutional contextualization: they are often transmissive in style with limited opportunities for active learning (van der Sluis & May, 2015). To make the best use of technology we need to go beyond opinion and gut instinct and adopt a scholarly and evidence-informed approach to TEL (Kirkwood & Price, 2013).
This paper presents our approach to closing the gap between research and practice. We illustrate our model that uses research to underpin how we have shaped a whole institutional roll out of our new VLE. The model is built around our learning design principles based on current research in the field, institutional priorities and current university educational policies. It addresses how to lever institutional change through the new VLE and how this innovation is a catalyst for changing the pedagogical paradigm. Our experience shows that by adopting such an approach we are able to positively impact on institutional teaching practices and influence policy to support innovative VLE pedagogy.
 Angelo, T. A. (1993). A Teacher’s Dozen: fourteen general research-based principles for improving higher learning in our classrooms. American Association for Higher Learning Bulletin, 45(6), 3–13.
 Breen, R., Lindsay, R., Jenkins, A., & Smith, P. (2001). The Role of Information and Communication Technologies in a University Learning Environment. Studies in Higher Education, 26(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070123233
 Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2016). Teaching with technology in higher education: understanding conceptual change and development in practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1171300
 Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Missing: evidence of a scholarly approach to teaching and learning with technology in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.773419
 Kirkwood, A. T., & Price, L. (2016). Technology Enabled Learning: Handbook. BC Canada: Commonwealth of Learning.
 Price, L., Kirkwood, A. T., & Richardson, J. T. E. (2015). Mind the gap: the chasm between research and practice in teaching and learning with technology. In J. Case & J. Huisman (Eds.), Researching Higher Education: International Perspectives on Theory, Policy and Practice (pp. 227–245).
 van der Sluis, Hendrik & May, Steve (2015). Tag to track? Analytics to measure the impact of educational policies. Brookes e-Journal of Learning and Teaching, 7(2)