Acciones e información generada por el uso de Códigos QR

Data analysis of the interviews and surveys yielded interesting findings in relation to the challenges and concerns part time mature students have regarding timetabling, academic writing, their colleges’ website and online learning tools.

Several individuals highlighted the issue that the timetabling, specifically the exam timetable, is somewhat haphazard and ill prepared. Cross (1981) states that these difficulties with timetabling of classes represent valid examples of an institutional barrier. Part-time mature students lead highly complex lives with a multitude of responsibilities and, therefore, the importance of timetabling is paramount. One of the biggest issues relating to timetabling was how late it was provided to students. This is of significant concern when we consider that research shows that part-time mature learners require timetables well in advance to make the necessary domestic and employment arrangements (Dodgson and Bolam, 2002). These arrangements, as previously considered, include the issue of childcare. It is important to reflect on this issue as research suggests that when developing course timetables for part-time mature learners, institutes should have childcare responsibilities in mind (Burton et al., 2011), however, it should be noted that altering timetables might inadvertently have a reverse effect. For example, Saar et al. (2014) identify that attending classes at the weekend or in the evening may create further childcare problems or issues with transport.

117

Two of the biggest concerns students had related to academic writing and their colleges virtual learning environment (VLE) and course management system. Some students, for example, had advanced from level 6 to level 7 and expressed the opinion that this was a considerable leap, especially with what was expected from them with their assignments. They explained that the concerns related to both academic writing and the VLE could be reduced if an introductory and orientation module was available, both at the start of semesters and also throughout the academic year. This finding consolidates Cahill’s (2014) findings, where she argues that it is pertinent that programmes of education focus courses around adult learning principles and address various learning life cycles. This acknowledgement of andragogical aspects of learning, the author believes, will go some way towards allaying these real fears and concerns.

When asked, students had no issue with the methods of course delivery. They appreciated that lectures occurred at the most opportune time for the part-time mature learner although some students did comment that some classes were at times that they could not attend. Research has shown that this time management issue is a key area that higher educational institutes need to consider. Hoyt and Allred (2008) suggest that these issues could be addressed by offering flexible course schedules with a selection of modules that support working part-time mature students, including both night and weekend classes as well as online courses. As seen by Saar et al. (2014), this may result in further drawbacks. One needs to consider, whilst the introduction of modularisation into many higher education courses has enabled greater flexibility and responsiveness to student’s needs, this itself has introduced new concerns. It is argued that modularisation has resulted in courses being so heavily timetabled that students’ opportunity for independent and self-directed learning is significantly curtailed (National Strategy for Higher Education, 2011). Nonetheless, within this study, the majority of students enjoyed the classroom experience and interactions with fellow learners. Attending college permitted them to access the library and engage with lecturers and peers. Although the majority of respondents were confident in the use of computers and Information Technology, they felt that the best way of delivery was in class lectures. This finding is in contrast to Cahill (2014) who suggests that mature (adult) learners prefer blended learning or virtual education. The author argues that this disparity may be due to the fact that the participants’ prior exposure to education may have almost exclusively been delivered utilising a ‘chalk and talk’ approach. We all become institutionalised across our years of education and it is incumbent on institutes to challenge this possible institutionalisation and lead students to the realisation that blended learning can result in a more autonomous and sophisticated learner. Whilst it can be argued that blended learning allows students to continue working and

118

meet family responsibilities, the author argues that it can lead to student isolation and a lacklustre approach to learning. Although one would imagine that the use of distant learning would result in a reduction of institutional barriers, research shows the opposite (Saar et al., 2014). The research surrounding this concept appears to be somewhat inconclusive. In a Scandinavian study, Hovdhauhen (2011) established that change to course structures and delivery has no effect on dropout rates. Based on the data from this study, the author suggests that a balance needs to be achieved to best serve adult learners within IoT sector and recommends further research into this area. To facilitate this research, the sector must embrace pioneering teaching methodologies, allow them to run and then analyse their outcomes. Being conservative and cautious in approach is commendable, providing it speaks to students’ needs, however, if meeting students’ needs requires us to be daring and original in approach, it is incumbent on the HE to live up to that and excel, especially as some institutes push forward to become a technological university.