•
•
•
•
challenges with trying to embed such practices in institutional systems. Promoting Web 2.0 approaches challenges traditional forms of assessment and current validation mechanisms. We address these questions in relation to existing evidence regarding drivers for adoption in higher education at international and institutional levels. Teachers and learners; teaching versus learning. There is now a significant body of research on learner experiences and their use of technologies. What is evident is that learners and teachers are not homogeneous. In addition, there is a gap between the expectations/promise of the use of technologies and the actual experiences and uses. The digital divide is still evident; within the student body, but also between tutors and learners. As we noted earlier, the expansive learning domain challenges traditional teaching practices, yet evidence also suggests that expert guidance is required (JISC, 2009; Ipsos Mori, 2008; OECD, 2009) and that a more explicit, learning design based approach to the creation of courses is needed. This raises a set of fundamental questions. What are the implications of shifting from the notion of teacher as instructor to teacher as facilitator? What are the barriers for low levels of experimentation? What institutional infrastructures and support mechanisms will be required to shift to greater use of technology? More importantly, what are the ways in which new technologies can enhance the process of research into teaching and as result, teaching methodologies and strategies? Skills, media, information and networked literacies. New literacies are needed to make sense of and to participate with these new technologies. Yet, despite widespread agreement about the impotrance of digital literacies, integration of training programmes in the field of higher education remains scant. While academic tutors need to ensure technical proficiency, reflection on approaches to teaching and learning, e‐ pedagogy (learning with and/or through technology) is also paramount. Multi‐ located/fragmented content and the potential for multiple pathways through content have an impact on how educational interventions are designed. And although such multiplicity offers increased choice in an educational context, this also has the potential to lead to confusion. How familiar are learners and education practitioners with the tools of editing and blending digital material? What are the novel perceptions of creativity and originality? What is the scale of the responsibilities that the nuances of literacy brings to educators? Is there a representation of the wider literacies in institutions and in the projects they pursue? The need for a better connection between research, policy and practice. There is now a significant body of research exploring technologies and how they can be used to support all aspects of Higher Education practice – learning and teaching, research, and administration. E‐science and e‐social science research is giving fascinating insights into exploitation of large, distributed research datasets and more recently into the use of cloud computing. Openness is becoming a trend, both in terms of the production and sharing of educational materials, as well as making research publications (and even research data) freely available. However, as Conole (forthcoming) has argued, this research is neither feeding properly into policies on the use of technology, nor is it impacting on actual teaching practice. The challenges of trying to change embedded practice and culture. Despite increasing evidence on the benefits of Web 2.0 in supporting constructivist and situative learning approaches, as this report reviews, the challenge of translating this 42