LO2: Conduct and analyse research relevant to a chosen business research project.

• P3 Conduct primary and secondary research using appropriate methods for a business research project that consider costs, access and ethical issues.

• P4 Apply appropriate analytical tools to analyse research findings and data.

2.1: Research as a process:

• Research has distinct phases which support a coherent and logical argument. This includes using literature review - secondary research to inform a primary, empirical, study.
• Individual appointments to discuss draft literature review
• Conducting research

2.2: Selecting a sample:

• The importance of gathering data and information (qualitative or quantitative) to support research analysis.
• Selecting sample types and sizes that are relevant to the research.
• Considering sampling approaches and techniques including probability and non-probability sampling.

2.3: Ethics, reliability and validity:

• Research should be conducted ethically. How is this achieved and reported?
• Research should also be reliable (similar results would be achieved from a similar sample) and valid (the research measures what it aimed to measure).

2.4: Analysing data:

• Using data collection tools such as interviews and questionnaires.
• Using analytical techniques such as trend analysis, coding or typologies.

2.5: Primary research / field work - independent research:

• Experiment, Survey, Case study, Action research,
• Grounded theory, Ethnography and Archival research

Example .....LO2: Conduct and analyse research relevant to a chosen business research project.

2.0: Conduct and analyse research

2.1: Planning action research

The purpose of the research is to ascertain to what extent has the ILFEC (Inner London Further Education College), the organisational capabilities to delivery effective Blended Learning Courses. Furthermore, for the rationale of clarification, the following (5 stage) strategy analysis will employ the - model of Grant (1991, pp.1-2) - resource-based theory of competitive advantage:

1. Resources: Identify and classify the ILFEC’s resources. Appraise strengths and weaknesses relative to other colleges identify opportunities for better utilisation of resources.
2. Capabilities: Identify the ILFEC’s capabilities. What can the college do more effectively than its rivals? Identify the resources inputs to each capability, and the complexity of each capability.
3. Competitive advantage: Appraise the rent-generating potential of resources and capabilities in terms of (a) their potential for sustainable competitive advantage, and (b) the appropriateness (the environmental factors that govern an innovator's ability to capture profits generated by an innovation) of their returns. Page 7 of 19 PRP: Research article Author: Mr David Hilton
4. Strategy: Select a strategy that best exploits the ILFEC’s resources and capabilities relative to external opportunities.
5. Resources gap: Identify resource gaps which need to be filled. Invest in replenishing, augmenting and upgrading the ILFEC’s resource base.

Note: The scope of this proposal is limited, in that; the strategy analysis will principally focus on the internal analysis of phenomena (observable occurrence) within the ILFEC and only refer, in passing, to external issues relating to the FE sector and the ILFEC’s competitors.

2.2: Mixed methods proposal

A mixed methods design was adopted - Cresswell (2007) - to conduct the research, because its methodology had the flexibility to accommodate the FE College based environment. In particular, a sequential explanatory design (SED) was used where quantitative data is collected and analysed, followed by qualitative data.

The raison d'être for using the (SED) was that it would provide the designer and audience with a better understanding of the research problem, by converging (or triangulating) both broad numeric trends from quantitative research (student and teacher surveys) and the detail of qualitative research (decision-makers web-log and management policies). Primacy is given to the quantitative data, because a research object gauges what the students and teachers actual perceive - as the blended learning approach - at the ILFEC; the qualitative data will be used primarily to augment quantitative data. The data analysis is connected and integration will occurs at the data interpretation stage and in the discussion. An addition justification, for employing the (SED) is the fact that it is especially beneficial when explaining study findings, particularly when they are unexpected.

2.3: Data collection

The data collection role is tasked with gathering the three key types of resources intimated in – Grant (1991, pp.1-2) – Resourced Based View (RBV) i.e. tangible resource, intangible resource and organisational capability. Therefore, to achieve this aim the data collection has been divided into four design areas: 

(1) Student Survey, 

(2) Teacher Survey, 

(3) Decision-makers (2013) web-log and 

(4) the ILFEC’s currentpolices & strategies relating to Blended Learning were consulted comprehensively by access to the ILFEC Internet and hardcopy downloads.

  

2.4: Pilot research

A student - Gomez (2012) - assisted in developing and running a pilot research project - as part of his prince's trust (1 week placement) programme. The student shadowed my time-table for a week, utilising furnished Blended Learning material to contextualise the questions and developed a set of student survey questions. The pilot research was useful in that it produced a set of questions - which did not directly mention blended learning - whose language and content was based on the needs of the targeted student population. These questions were subsequently expanded upon. The following Blended Learning material was developed for a presentation - I gave on a sharing best practice training day last year - and used as a template to frame questions around the topic.

2.5: Hilton (2011): Schematic: Off-line components

2.6: Hilton (2011): Schematic: On-line components

2.7: Hilton (2011): Schematic: Blended Learning programme

2.8: Execution of action research:

1. Student's Survey (2013_SS) & Student Survey Results (2013_SSR)

2. Teacher's Survey (2013_TS) & Teacher SurveyResults (2013_TSR)

3. Decision-makers’ weblog (2013)

4. The ILFEC current polices & strategies - Ref.: College’s: Staff-Intranet.

2.8.1: Student Survey (2013_SS):

A longitudinal quantitative survey was sent during the (6th - 11th January 2013) to sample population of 121 students who are studying BTEC Level 3 Extended & Ordinary Diploma in Business (Year 1 & 2) – at the ILFEC’s Business & Retail Department. Specifically, each student was individually contacted by an email.

The overall purpose of the survey was to ascertain students' opinions on the following variables of Blended Learning at the ILFEC:

Page 1: Participant’s details: Questions 1-3,

Page 2: Off-line Learning: Questions 4-10,

Page 3: Online Learning: Questions 11-17, and

Page 4: General learning support: Questions 18-25.

This was achieved by sending the survey via the ensuing scheduled messages:

1st Message: General perceptions of teaching at the ILFEC. 79 emails mailed on January 6, 2013 8:51 PM Page 10 of 19 PRP: Research article Author: Mr David Hilton

2nd Message: General perceptions of teaching at the ILFEC. 46 emails mailed on January 8, 2013 11:40 AM

3rd Message: General perceptions of teaching at the ILFEC. 34 emails mailed on January 10, 2013 9:08 PM

2.8.2: Teacher Survey (2013_TS):

A longitudinal quantitative survey was sent (14th - 26th January 2013) to sample population of 128 Teachers from 6 principal teaching areas, across the ILFE's 4 main campuses. Each teacher / lecturer was individually contacted by an email.

The overall purpose of the survey was to ascertain teachers' opinions on the following variables of Blended Learning at the ILFEC:

Page 1: Participant’s details: Questions 1-2,

Page 2: Off-line Learning: Questions 3-9,

Page 3: Online Learning: Questions 10-17, and

Page 4: General learning support: Questions 18-31.

This was achieved by sending the survey via the ensuing scheduled messages:

1st: Blended Learning Survey - Practitioner Researcher Programme, 127 mailed on January 14, 2013 9:17 AM

2nd: Reminder: Please Take My Survey, 100 mailed on January 17, 2013 12:15 PM

3rd: Reminder: Survey - Practitioner Researcher Programme, 82 mailed on January 23, 2013 11:00 AM

Note: Prior to the launch of the survey, a copy of the PRP course guide and an outline of its objectives was sent to all potential recipients, so as, to contextualize the aim of the activity.

3.8.3 Decision-makers’ web-log (2013):

A longitudinal qualitative (survey) - Decision-makers (2013) weblog - was sent during (31st January 2013 – 23rd February 2013) to sample population of 20 decision-makers – associated with aspects of learning at the ILFEC.

The overall purpose of being to provide responses to the following 3 comment areas:

1. Offline Learning,

2. Online Learning and

3. Support Structures.

The Decision-makers weblog (2013) asked the following request for information:

 “As a decision-maker or contributor - in the area of Blended Learning - could you please comment on the current actual developments and medium-to-long-term strategic objectives - for offline components / platforms - at the ILFEC (Inner London Further Education College) i.e. time-lines and actual resources in place to accommodate the college's E-Learning strategy (2009-12) + Innovation & E-learning - Operation plan 2009-2012).

“In particular, has the college appropriate policies to promote greater use of the offline components / platforms stated in the schematic above? Also, are they any developments that will provide classroom, which are more suitable to a Blended Learning approach to teaching?

“In particular, are there plans to employ a greater proportion of online classes in the future? For example, utilising, LMS (learning management system), such as, Moodle 2.0. Also, are there strategies being put-in-to-place, which moves collaborative lessons away from an email-centric approach to ones which encompass, assorted methodologies? Lastly, does the college intend to encourage a wider use of online teaching instruments i.e. mobile / multi-platform and social learning environment tools?

“In particular, is the college going to supply an accessible ILT (Information Learning Technology) strategy that incorporates clear policies on: Blended learning and specifically learning support, training and reward mechanisms?

 “The survey uncovered a communication gap between the users (students & teachers) / content supplier (teachers) and policy-makers. Consequently, is the college going improve communications between decision-makers and users and also offer more learning support (or other) career roles in the future?”

This was achieved by sending the web-log via the ensuing scheduled messages:

1st: Web-log (blog) survey on Blended Learning at the ILFEC, 20 mailed on 31 January 2013 20:22

2nd: Support to the final phase of the research - Oxford University - on Blended Learning at the ILFEC, 23 mailed on 11 February 2013 11:33

3rd: Research on Blended learning at the ILFEC + Attachment, 20 mailed on 15 February 2013 08:02

2.8.4: The ILFEC’s current polices & strategies relating to Blended Learning:

• Chief Inspector’s Annual report 2010/11
• E-learning Strategy (2009-12)
• Learner First Observation Policy
• Advanced Teacher Programme
• Professional Development Programmes
• Business Systems Development Group
• Skills for Life Strategy (2012-2015)
• Learning Plus: Employability and Skills pathway

-------------------------------------------------

LO3: Communicate the outcomes of a research project to identied stakeholder

P5: Communicate research outcomes in an appropriate manner for the intended audience.

3.1: Stakeholders:

• Who are they? 
• Why would they be interested in the research outcomes?
• What communication method do they expect?

3.2: Communicating research outcomes:

• Consideration of different methods of communicating outcomes (e.g. written word, spoken word) and the medium (e.g. report, online, presentation).
• The method and medium will be influenced by the research and its intended audience.

3.3: Convincing arguments:

• No matter what the method/medium, all research should be convincing and presented logically where the assumption is that the audience has little or no knowledge of the research process.
• The importance of developing evaluative conclusions

Example ....... LO3: Communicate the outcomes of a research project to identied stakeholder

3.0: Results and analysis

The results and analysis of this article completes the intervention activity by reflecting upon the impact and responses the evidence gathered in the action research in forms us about Blended learning Practice (BLP) at the ILFEC.

3.1: Impact on practice.

The impact of the intervention on practice fell into three categories:

• The activity increased general awareness of the issues and praxis surrounding (BLP); operating as a catalyst for additional investigation and Continuous Personal Development (CPD).

• The research findings indicated the reality of the level of (BLP) in current use at the ILFEC as opposed to a general perception.

• The intervention illuminated the polarisation of (BLP) focus between different stakeholders i.e. end-users, deliverers and policy-makers at the ILFEC. 

The following analysis of the qualitative (feedback) and quantitative (surveys) data indicates the areas which went well and those that will assist the ILFEC policy-maker and deliverers to accommodate the (BLP)'s strengths and weakness for future practice:

3.1.1: Part 1: Introduction to surveys

Most students’ - initial reaction to the survey - was that teaching at the ILFEC was effective.

This was based upon 81% response to the survey i.e. 35% (1st Year students) and 65% (2nd Year students) – all Business cohort tutor groups have been fairly represented. Conversely, of the 128 teachers contacted for the survey - 40% (52 recipients) responded over the two weeks stated collection period. The relevant profile sizes of the campus were accurately represented with:  Campus (C) delivering 26 responses, Campus (D) furnishing 12 responses, and Campus (A) & (B) each supplying 6 responses respectively.

Notwithstanding, only 10% of the various decision-makers contacted responded over the three weeks collection period i.e. senior management, middle-management, trainers and specialist in the field of BLP. Ref.: Student Survey Results (2013_SSR), Teacher Survey Results (2013_TSR)

3.1.2: Part 2: Off-line components of surveys

The student survey findings for offline learning demonstrated that “Turn-It-In (UK) Grade-Mark” feedback gained the majority vote of 86% and “Learning on the job” was the preferred workplace learning style. Moreover, books, Learning-logs and Work-books were utilised more than any other reading & writing device. Also, tutoring (78%) was the method of choice for learning support and preferred classroom learning styles gravitated between: presentations, lectures and discussion groups. In summary, students at the ILFEC exhibited a good appreciation of offline learning approaches. Notwithstanding, the survey did uncovered that students were very conservative in their choice of learner support i.e. focused in one area. Most students had a general idea of what offline learning meant. However, the division on the college’s ability to provide appropriate classroom to meet the student’s needs was split 68:32 at meeting their needs. 

The off-line teachers' survey results demonstrated convergences with the student survey for the majority of questions in this area. Notwithstanding, the survey did uncover that teachers were very conservative in their choice of workplace teaching style i.e. invariable choosing the same selection out of seven options. Most teachers had a general idea of what offline learning meant. However, the division on the college’s ability to provide appropriate classroom to meet the student’s needs was split 50:50. Teachers at the ILFEC exhibited flexible offline learning approaches.

Lastly, the decision-maker's findings suggested that the upcoming focus of the ILFEC is likely to be on on-line activity and policy. Moreover, it was expressed that it is crucial that the college combine this with new approaches to off-line activity by revamping the entire curriculum. Institutional educational policies were seen as not clearly understood, but the feedback suggested that there are a number of experiments underway connected with blended learning. Also, there are pockets of innovation with peer learning, co-created mutual learning and situated out of classroom learning. It was general conveyed that there is not sufficient drive to develop off-line components. Ref.: Student Survey Results (2013_SSR) Teacher Survey Results (2013_TSR)

3.1.3: Part 3: On-line components of surveys

The students’ online survey finding established that “Web 2.0” was the preferred e-learning style utilised by their teachers and “Websites” learning technology was their teachers 1st choice as a learning tool. Furthermore, “Email” was deemed the collaboration method (91%) most used by their teachers. In summary, students made over 62 suggests as to what type of new online teaching instruments should be employed at the ILFEC; however, no strong candidate emerged from the survey - laptops and better internet connection being the most popular selections. Notwithstanding, the division on how many classes should be Online was split 81:8 in favour of being Online. Conversely, most students sampled, expressed the view that the ILFEC was successful at implementing online learning. 

The online teachers' survey results triangulated with students for most of questions in this area -with teachers making over 24 suggests as to what type of new online teaching instruments should be employed at the ILFEC. However, 92% of teachers surveyed indicated that they had not been supported by a learning management system, such as, Moodle 2.0. Also, the results uncovered that teaching focused too much on using Email rather than the other 7 options employed for collaborative learning. The division on how many classes should be Online was split 87:13 in favour being Online; most teacher spolled, expressing the view that the ILFEC was not, at present, very successful at implementing online learning.

Lastly, the decision-maker's findings suggested that there are plans to use a greater amount of on-line activity and there are some very appropriate new technologies being used that can help support this. For example, experiments with the use of Google resources such as collaborative docs and sites, G+ social communities and G+ video hangouts. On the technology front things look promising, but it was felt that the off-line components and teaching-learning were where the real challenge resides. Ref.: Student Survey Results (2013_SSR)  Teacher Survey Results (2013_TSR)

3.1.4: Part 4: Support components of surveys

The students’ survey "support" findings established that over 74% of those polled felt that their tutors were helpful and the teachers were trained in the most up-to-date teaching methods. Also, most students were positive regarding the effectiveness of non-business teaching i.e. maths and English and felt that the college asked their advice on potential changes on the way they were taught. For example, students indicated that –when enrolling -college staff did not effectively make them aware of the teaching approaches use at the ILFEC. Moreover, when questioned regarding their experience at ILFEC, the majority of the student specified that they were no more than moderately satisfied. Conversely, the teaches’ survey findings - for learning support - established that most of those polled felt that their direct support contacts were helpful and obtaining resources from the library system was unproblematic. Also, a preponderance of teachers promoted maths & English in their everyday lessons and believed that students were effectively made aware of teaching approaches during enrolment at the ILFEC. For example, teachers expressed the view that the college was unsuccessfully in its implementation of Blended (Offline & Online) Learning. This sentiment was reinforced by > 96% of teachers’ opinion, that the college was too dependent on volunteers promoting ILT (Information Learning Technology) based development and strengthened further by the survey’s poor score on how adequately were staff trained in the most up-to-date teaching methods.

The teachers’ survey also indicated that the ILFEC's current appraisal system did not effectively aid the enhancement of new teaching approaches -with > 89% believing that college did not effectively remunerate a culture which develops ILT. In addition, more than 84% thought that the college had not put in place effective actions to promote ILT strategies; for example, the ILFEC accessible plagiarism software, such as, Turn-It-In (UK) were utilised by only > 1/3 of the teaching staff. Over 70% over those polled felt that the college did not ask their advice on potential changes on the way did their job and that there were insufficient in-house career opportunities which developed ILT. However, a 50:50 teacher ratio, felt that Blended Learning Courses could generate additional revenue streams for the college and they would be interested in being involved in a broader research project in this area. Lastly, the decision-maker's findings suggested that developments relating to Learning Centre Systems have enabled a single sign-on for Athens protected online resources. This means that if learners use the student portal to visit Athens protected resources, & the college has rights to the resource, then the learner sees no barrier on route to displaying the resource on screen. Athens protected resources typically are purchased e-books, archived Newspapers & Journals & other specialist subject resources. The survey suggested that the problem to promoting the online half of blended learning problematic i.e. getting the right teaching staff aware of the available resources, bearing in mind that the range of resources is increasing all the time. Also, the findings indicated that the college is working on the post 2012 ILT strategy at the moment; and that most of the decision-makers would like to see enhanced communications between teachers’ et al and more learning support roles. Ref.: Student Survey Results(2013_SSR) Teacher Survey Results (2013_TSR)

3.2:Reflection on what research could have been done differently.

The research has achieved its objectives in that the results do indicate that the college resources (human, physical and technological) are mainly split into opposing camps of off-line based and Information Learning Technology (ILT) based. This is preventing the growth of Blended Learning capabilities and the associated organisational competitive advantage. In retrospective, the research may have benefited from ascertaining potential future of the ILFEC core competencies -by extrapolating from the existing ILFEC policies and strategies. However, the communication barriers cited in all the surveys have largely prevented this activity. Ref.: ILFEC (2012) staff survey

LO 4: Reflect on the application of research methodologies

P6: Reflect on the effectiveness of research methods applied for meeting objectives of the business research project.

P7: Consider alternative research methodologies and lessons learnt in view of the outcomes.

4.1: Reflection for learning and practice:

• Difference between reflecting on performance and evaluating a research project.
• The former considers the research process; the latter considers the quality of the research argument and use of evidence.
• Reflection on the merits, limitations and potential pitfalls of the chosen methods.

4.2: The cycle of reflection:

• To include reflection in action and reflection on action.
• Considering how to use reflection to inform future behaviour and future considerations.

4.3: Reflective writing:

• Avoiding generalisation and focusing on personal development and the research journey in a critical and objective way.

Example ...... LO4:

4.0: Discussion and conclusion

4.1 Discussion or analysis between colleagues or peers

The discussion and analysis between colleagues and peers during this research have centred how a new blended learning focus paradigm could accommodate some of the teaching, learning and assessment requirements outlined in the chief Inspector’s Annual report 2010/11. Moreover, whether the - forthcoming replacement for the - E-learning Strategy (2009-12) will outline specific time-lines and resources allocation.

Most colleagues’ analysis of the ILFEC’s: Learner First Observation Policy believes that it will settle down into a productive enhancement of quality. However, the “Advanced Teacher Programme” - unpinning training in this area-is under threat due to the limitations of the remuneration package attached to the scheme i.e. at present the college is finding it difficult to entice the right candidates to the posts.

My peers feel that professional development programmes, such as, a Learning Management System (LMS) - Moodle (2) - pilot project are too reliant on the goodwill of staff –in that, colleagues have to volunteer their free time to get it up and running. Notwithstanding, the IT develop course –although not widely attended –are making a positive contribution toward merging offline and online teaching practice.

The Business Systems Development Group is seen as a mystery to most colleagues; but the Skills for Life Strategy (2012-2015) and Learning Plus: Employability and Skills pathway are deemed as good potential candidates for blended learning approach; in particular, benefiting from (BLA) capacity for economies of both scope and scale i.e. units can be bolted onto other courses.

4.2: Relating research to broader educational issues 

The decision by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) to re-classify FE college sector –as no longer being a part of central government-means that FE colleges will have more freedoms as independent bodies to implement (BLA) programmes due to reduced bureaucracy.

The Secretary of State (Peter Lauener) announced on 5thJuly 2012 that for 2013/14 a new funding system will be introduced to support the raising of the participation age and the introduction of study programmes for young people. Key points relating to the use of Blended Learning approach (BLA) include:

• A standard rate of funding for each student weighted for necessary course costs, retention and with additional funding for those at a disadvantage all adjusted for area costs;

• Success rates removed from the formula free up institutions so that they can deliver innovative and flexible programmes of study, including non-qualification bearing activities such as work experience

• Simpler data and audit systems required to feed the formula.

Notwithstanding, significant on-going budgetary constraints are pointing FE colleges towards (BLA), which offer (learning objects) + (personalised pedagogies) combined with the benefits of economies of scope and scale. As stated at the start of this report, the FE sector faces the challenge - presented to them by Ofsted (2012) - of reversing falling UK productivity, by increasing their organisational emphasis on teaching, learning and assessment. The achievement of minimum levels of performance can be assisted by (BLA) programmes that encourage flexibility, mobility and diversity of delivery.

4.3: Resultant future learning/ professional development needs. 

Reproduced by permission of ILF (Institute for Learning) - January 2009.IFL (2009) stated that: "The Institute for Learning (IfL) dual professional CPD model has evolved over the past years and it serves the needs of our members: teachers and trainers across the further education and skills sector. 

There are three key elements that make it such a good fit: 

• Dual professionalism fits the particular experience of teachers and trainers in the FE and skills sector where the individual further develops their vocational or subject expertise, and excellent teaching and training.

• Professional values developed by and for members underpin the philosophy of professional development and the code of professional practice.

• Professional practice and research to identify and ground effective CPD for FE and skills practitioners.

"Currently, one of the major drivers of change at the ILFEC is the role of "Advance Teachers". The purpose of this role is to help to move forward innovation in teaching and learning at the college by equipping and empowering teaching colleagues through mentoring, dissemination of good practice, delivering training and being involved in other projects with the context of the College’s ‘Excellence through Learner First’ strategy.

A resultant future professional development need -identified in this research - is to cultivate a group of highly professional teachers who also have the due capacity to cascade learning technology down to teachers from traditional offline learning environments. The IFL’s model provides the blue-print for this development, which would ultimately provide the ILFEC with the core competencies required to generate the USPs required to out-perform its competitors. 

Also it would expedite the process of change at the ILFEC i.e. (BLA) Early Adopters, Diffusion and Later Adopters – as outlined in Rogers (1962, p.14) S-curve of diffusion.

Analysis tools

Analytical tools to analyse research findings and data.

Force field analysis

Gap analysis