Educational institutions are called to adopt Communication and Information Technology (C&IT) to improve accessibility, quality and efficiency, supporting a 'lifelong society' as the Dearing Report recommends (Dearing, 1997). In introducing C&IT into education, one of the key issues to be taken into consideration is the development of C&IT skills and knowledge of staff in all levels, as recognised by the Dearing Report itself and others (Milligan, 1999, Atkins, 1998).

The Virtual Learning Space (VLS) is a project funded by the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC) and it aims to develop C&IT skills of staff at three institutions in the North East of Scotland: The Robert Gordon University (RGU), University of Aberdeen and Aberdeen College. Developing a cross-institution learning community, the VLS will be a space where staff can share best practice, exchange ideas and explore new tools and material. Once populated with experiences, the VLS will act as a knowledge pool for a wide range of online C&IT staff development, addressing the needs identified by projects such as TALISMAN (Alexander, 1999) and SCAITS (Anstey, 2000).

How can this be accomplished? How should be the process of building this learning environment in the most effective way? The VLS team experiences are discussed in this paper.

Design is difficult to define and the activity of designing is seen in different ways by different people. This is true for software design also (Winograd, 1996), and more specifically for the design of educational software, where different approaches flourish. However, there is a tendency to follow the changes taking place in educational research, with a move from behaviourist and cognitive theories towards constructivist approaches. See Table 1.

The Instructional System design approach, mainly based on passive transfer and where cognition is seen as a kind of computation, is criticised for not allowing interactive exploration of the learning experience in a critical and reflective way. It does not consider the complexity and uncertainties of practice (Crook, 1996; Merril, Li et al, 1990; Owen, 1999).

An approach which is learner orientated, based on constructivist and situated theories, encourages the design of virtual learning environments (VLEs), where different tools can be explored by the learner. Of the design models proposed within this approach, participatory design was considered to be one of the most appropriate to the VLS project, as we wanted to design a community space where users would be willing to participate and interact.

It is also argued that the design of a virtual environment could benefit from the experience which architecture and architects have with the design of physical spaces. This was previously suggested by others such as Bridges and Charitos (1996), Cabral-Filho (1996), Kapor (1996), and also by one of the authors elsewhere (Pereira, 2000). Important issues considered when designing real physical environments could also be considered when designing virtual spaces, e.g. Vitruvius' attributes of good architecture: commodity, firmness and delight (Vitruvius, 1960); Lynch's concepts of paths, nodes, boundaries, and landmarks (Lynch, 1960), which are responsible for the 'legibility' of the space; or Hertzberger's discussions on territoriality, form and appropriation, accommodating and stimulating spaces (1991). Attempting to develop these qualities in virtual environments could help users to develop certain familiarity with the virtual spaces and feel safe and more confident when using them.

Based on discussion of the approaches available, it was decided that the design of the VLS should adopt a combination of approaches within the realm of socio-constructivism, combining participative design and activity theory, with an architecturally-informed methodology, based on reflective practice. Architectural design methodology involves reflective processes, where reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action take place. This process was described and discussed by Donald Schön (1985, 1987). A 'reflective process' model to explain Schön's ideas was proposed by Pereira (1999) and is shown in Figure 1. Schön also recommends this same process to other professionals. This process seems ideal for any design process, what suggests its usefulness also when designing virtual learning environments. An attempt to describe a reflective process for the development of the VLS is shown in Figure 5 (Section 2.6), incorporating several evaluative stages.

An initial framework on which to base the development of the project was felt necessary. Based on the work of Pereira (2000), the initial framework comes from the view that successful adoption of C&IT by educational institutions involves the consideration of three interrelated clusters of issues: pedagogical, organisational and technical. See Figure 3.

Figure3: VLS framework - balancing pedagogical, organisational, and technical aspects.

Special consideration was given to users' needs and expectations. They were mainly identified via a literature review, analysis of similar projects, a C&IT skills survey via a questionnaire sent to all staff at RGU, and through focus groups with academic and non-academic staff from the three partner institutions.

The focus groups were particularly important, as they represented an opportunity to have direct contact with future users of the VLS. During these focus groups, participants were asked to discuss their needs in terms of C&IT staff development and also their expectations towards the VLS in small groups and in plenary. An electronic tool, named Delphi tool, was especially developed to be used as one of the last activities of the meeting. Using the Delphi tool participants could submit their opinions on what would motivate their participation in a learning environment as the VLS and rate their own and others' opinions online and immediately see the results. This was used not just to collect their feedback, but also to show them an example of how C&IT could be used. The needs identification stage is explained in more detail elsewhere (see Harris at al., 2000), but the main findings are highlighted in Table 2.

As previously mentioned we attempted to use an architecturally informed methodology for the design of the VLS, which combines participatory design with reflective practice and spatial issues. Therefore, having identified the users' needs, it was thought that the following should be defined:

the main activities which would take place within the VLS;

the actors who will be involved in these activities;

the objects of these activities;

the actions which should be taken to promote these activities;

the qualities of the VLS space which would favour these actions

the functionality which should be developed to promote these activities.

The VLS team, composed of four people, is quite multidisciplinary with backgrounds ranging from architecture, education, physiology and psychology to information studies and computer science. This is important to provide a rich discussion environment. Brainstorming sessions were organised, where the whole team discussed the findings and went through defining the points cited above. We started discussing the most cited issue, which is the need for a supportive and collaborative community. Through this discussion we identified the need to think about actions which should be taken outside the VLS as well. Therefore, we decided to add this item to our discussion. Tables were used to organise the issues in different ways and to facilitate and register the results of our discussions. They were:

• General tables for analysis of activities according to the identified needs. See Table 3 for an example.

• Tables of activities according to each actor. See Table 4 for an example.

• Tables of 'action' or 'content' which we ideally would have in the VLS, together with its qualities. These are shown in Table 5.

• Tables of desirable qualities of the VLS, showing the functionality and main features of the space, as shown in Table 6.

Several web tools and learning environments have been analysed during the development of the project. This analysis has been done by combining our own framework with different evaluation studies, which focus on features, technical aspects and costs (such as the Landonline Review http://www.ctt.bc.ca/landonline/reviews.html) and more theoretical approaches that incorporate pedagogical and also some organisational issues (Britain & Liber, 1999). The material generated by these evaluations will be added to the VLS resources.

None of the VLEs examined in the studies previously described had all of the qualities thought to be necessary for an effective VLS for C&IT staff development. It was therefore decided to attempt to combine features from different tools into an environment that would provide a flexible basis for further development. Studies have started on the implementation of a version of RGU's Virtual Campus. This has the advantage of providing the project team with easy access to the developers of this environment, and could also facilitate the continuity of the VLS beyond the lifetime of the project. The emphasis should, however, be on developing the VLS via a continuous process of evaluation, which involves the participation of users from the three partner institutions.

The main objective of the VLS is to develop a supportive learning community, where people will learn from each other, sharing ideas and resources. Therefore, based on the previously cited findings, we thought that the use of a metaphor which relates to a physical community would be the most appropriate. This would also help users to recognise the spaces and connect their functionality with the functions of the real spaces. Therefore, users would easily understand and use the learning environment. It was then decided that we should have a main entrance and two main environments where users could interact with each other and with resources; and a third space which would be a reflective space for users to gather and organise information, and keep their own data. The main structure was then developed as it is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 - VLS structure.

A good navigation system is essential as it is cited by one of the authors elsewhere:

With this in mind, the VLS interface was organised around three frames:

• The first frame, located at the top of the screen does not change, when the user navigates around. It contained four icones that compose the main menu and give access to the four main areas of the VLS, together with access to general tools which could be needed at any time. This general tools are: help, notepad, search, sitemap and 'contact us'.

• The second frame, located on the left hand side, changes when the user is in different 'spaces' or 'modes' of the VLS. It contained menus which are specific to each main space.

• The third frame is the one where the content is presented and the main actions take place. This changes all the time. See Figure 5 or http://itlearningspace-scot.ac.uk.

In order to improve the 'legibility' of the space, the main areas within the VLS had names which referred to real spaces and their icons contain photographs of real spaces as well. The activities taking place in these four main spaces were:

• Gateway: is the main entrance to the VLS and contains general information, registration, access to the main spaces and general tools.

• Community: is where people get together to exchange ideas and experiences. It is also where events like workshops take place.

• Discovery Centre: is where resources for developing C&IT skills can be found, including courses, useful links, references, a bookshop and where users can find the resources for the workshops held on the VLS.

• My Place: is the user's private area where s/he can create and edit their profile, choose preferences, keep an address book, personal resources, notes and discussions.

Coherent with the reflective practice basis, the project proposes an ongoing evaluation, where users' needs and use of the space will be constantly evaluated and provide feedback for the development of the VLS. See the development plan (Figure 6). The initial implementation was again evaluated via an international online workshop which took place on the VLS and via focus groups with staff from the three partner institutions.

The VLS project team worked together with the Online Tutoring Skills Project (OTiS) team, supporting and hosting the OTiS e-Workshop in May 2000. This was an international online workshop where experiences of online tutoring were exchanged. The OTiS project aims to establish a process, guidelines and knowledge pool of resources for online tutoring, therefore sharing some of the aims of the VLS.

The e-workshop was then used as a pilot test for the initial implementation of the VLS, providing also an opportunity to generate resources and disseminate the space. After the international e-workshop an email questionnaire was sent to all participants. Post-workshop evaluative chats were also organised, combined with the generation of online discussion groups for evaluation of the VLS, within its own space.

Focus groups with academic and non-academic staff from the three institutions were organised. An update on developments of the VLS was presented and participants had the opportunity to use the environment and evaluate it via the discussion rooms. An evaluation of the qualities of the VLS also took place via the use of the Delphi tool. Their feedback was also discussed in groups and in plenary.

Findings from the VLS-OTiS workshop evaluation questionnaire, focus-groups feedback, VLS-OTiS workshop chats & discussion rooms were qualitatively and quantitatively analysed, generating useful material.

Most of the feedback was positive and participants said they had experienced learning and enjoyed using the environment. There was also useful criticism and suggestions for improvement and new tools to be added. These were organised in the following issues: content, interface & navigation, organisation, resources, security, technical issues, tools & features.

These findings are being used as a basis for the redesign of the VLS, which is currently taking place. We plan to have the space ready to be launched at the beginning of November 2000.

Figure 6: VLS development plan

Within the integrative framework attention to population and dissemination of the VLS is very important.

Population takes place regarding resources and participants. According to the users' feedback from the focus groups specifying which kind of material they would like to have available on the VLS, the team have been compiling resources. These resources have been organised in categories, so they can be easily archived and accessed via searching or browsing. The resources obtained via the e-Workshop, composed by case studies, recorded chats, discussions and suggestions of related bibliography and URLs are being revised and processed at the present and shall constitute an important part of the VLS collection.

The strategy to attract participants and disseminate the space has been in effect since the first series of focus groups, being reinforced by the second series. The OTiS e-workshop also helped to populate the VLS with participants, giving it a more international flavour, and collaborating for its dissemination.

Other forms of dissemination and population have been arranged via meetings with staff developers and trainers to discuss how the VLS could best help them and how best to integrate with existing developments.

Other forms of dissemination are participation in conferences and workshops, publication of articles in institutions' internal newsletters, the VLS mailing list, the VLS web site, the VLS Newsletter, and project reports. We are also planning to produce promotional material for distribution in the three institutions and elsewhere.

Several possibilities for the continuity of the VLS are under study and will be further developed from December 2000. The present ideas are based on the need for institutional integration and on the need to encourage the community of users to appropriate this Virtual Learning Space.

Taking into consideration the need for C&IT staff development in educational institutions, this paper presents the process of designing a virtual learning space where this development can take place. The importance of the design process it advocates resides on its reflective characteristics based on the users' participation in a collaborative and reflective process.

The participative and reflective methodology adopted for the design of the VLS is based on a constructivist approach and considers architectural issues of spatial use. It incorporates the analysis of activities within the virtual space and of the qualities this space has to have to allow and encourage its most efficient and enjoyable use. Evaluative stages are incorporated into the process and become part of the environment itself.

We argue, that in adopting such a design process, developers and users are more apt to come to a more effective and efficient product, whose ownership is shared.

Alexander, W. (1999) TALISMAN C&IT Review. http://www.talisman.hw.ac.uk/CITreview

Anstey, P. (2000) C&IT Skills: Developing staff C&IT capability in Higher Education. SCAITS JCALT Final Report. http://www.uea.ac.uk/csed/scaits/

Atkins (1998) An Evaluation of the Computers in Teaching Initiative and the Teaching and Learning Technology Support Network. (HEFCE Report 98/47): http://www.niss.ac.uk/education/hefce/pub98/98_47.html

Bridges, A. and D. Charitos (1996). "On architectural design in virtual environments". Creativity and Cognition' 96: 184-191.

Cabral-Filho, J. S. (1996). Formal games and interactive design: computers as formal devices for informal interaction between clients and architects. Ph.D thesis. Sheffield, University of Sheffield.

Britain, S. and Liber, O. (1999) A Pedagogical Framework for the Evaluation of Virtual Learning Environments. Bangor, University of Wales: http://www.jtap.ac.uk

Crook, C. (1996) Computers and the collaborative experience of learning. London, Routledge.

Dearing, R. and The National Commission for Investigation in Higher Education (1997) Higher Education in the learning society. http://www.ex.ac.uk/dearing.html

Harris, R., Pereira, M.A. & Davidson, D. (2000). 'Identifying the qualities needed for a virtual learning space in communication and information technology skills'. Proceedings of the 2000 International Networked Learning Conference jointly organised by Lancaster University and the University of Sheffield. Lancaster, April 17^th-19^th 2000.

Hertzberger, H. (1991. Lessons for students in architecture. Rotterdam, Uitgeverij 010.

Hilgard, E.R. and Atkinson, R.C. (1967) Introduction to psychology. New York: arcourt, Brace & World. 4th ed.

Kapor, M. (1996) "A software design manifesto". In Winograd, T., Bennett, J., De Young, L. and Hartfield, B. (eds) Bringing design to software. Reading, MA: ACM Press, pp. 1-9.

Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T. Press.

Merril, M.D., Li, Z. et al. (1990) "Second generation instructional design". Education Technology 30(2): 7-14.

Milligan, C. (1998) The role of VLEs in on-line delivery of staff development. JTAP Report 573. http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/jtap-573.

Owen, M. (1999) Paradigms for curriculum design: The design of reflective, situated, collaborative professional development supported by virtual learning environments. Bangor, School of Education, University of Wales.

Pereira, M.A. (2000) ArchCAL: a conceptual basis for the application of information technology into learning and teaching technical subjects in architectural education. Ph.D Thesis. Sheffield, University of Sheffield.

Pereira, M.A. (1999) 'My reflective practice as research', Teaching in Higher Education, Vol 4, No.3.

Tomes, N. and Higgison, C.A. (1998) TALISMAN Training Needs Analysis. A Report for The Scottish Higher Education Funding Council. http://www.talisman.hw.ac.uk/

Vitruvius (1960). The ten books on architecture. New York, Dover Publications.

Winograd, T., Bennett, J., De Young, L., Hartfield, B. (eds) (1996) Bringing design to software. Reading, MA: ACM Press.

This document was added to the Education-line database on 19 December 2000