who innovates, who follows?

So this week has been all about this, with our starting point as Rogers Diffusion of innovations and his categories of people as ‘innovators’, ‘early adopters’ early majority’ ‘late majority’ and ‘laggards’. Rogers explores why it is that some people take up innovation before others.

I think its fair to sat that we all recognised the general terminology being used and could equate these labels to people we knew, or general personality types. Most of us however struggle when he started putting social or political references to these terms. It may be that back in the 1950s it may have rung true. Innovators may have been those who were more upwardly mobile financially secure and considered more ‘intelligent’. However I am not sure that this rings true in 2011. This may be partly because of the role that social media and open sources have played in making a more open playing field. Certainly where technology is concerned, the newest innovations are no longer the preserve of the ‘upper classes’. Social media developments are a class leveller.

I also think that generational differences also have a part to play. Our generation Y’s are growing up with technology imbedded in everyday lives, yet some of us X’s are still trying to come to grips with basic things like audio conferencing!

We also raised the important point that where we as individuals sit, and this changes dependant upon the circumstance, environment etc, it often not where we might sit within our professional lives. Certainly listening to others experiences shows that the larger the institution/organisation, the harder it is to be a part of driving innovation. I guess this is why the adopter roles are so important.

When thinking about who leads and who follows, we have also been struggling with the difference between innovators and adopters. I think there is often some crossover depending on your viewpoint and the situation. It may be that the innovators created the innovations, or that they are the first people to take it and use it.

“..early adopters and innovators do not differ from each other regarding structural characteristics. However they appear to differ in behavioural characteristics: innovators make more use of external sources of information and they are more involved in the actual development of innovations.”
http://www.inra.fr/esr/publications/cahiers/pdf/diederen.pdf viewed 20.02.2011

I think this also brings us back to our understandings of innovations, and how we use our terminology. It’s interesting to see people refer to themselves or their institutions as laggards or categorise them as way behind. I think that it’s easy to get caught up in the idea that technology may be way more advanced than where we our. The case studies helped us to focus that. To be innovate, the organisation needs to be in a position to be innovative. This is why smaller companies can often manage it better. They have fewer resources and can adapt and change more readily. The bigger the organisation the more layers to get through – and often they don’t. It is not our fault if it takes ten years to adopt  a new idea.  In this case we should draw on the positive small steps of innovation – otherwise we sink into the murky waters of inadequacy. It’s not always about speed as Pettit says.
So what about the chasm? I guess the chasm really is about whether the innovation ‘flies’ with the masses and who are the ones it is being marketed at.

I went on at this point to read Darwin and the Devil. I particularly liked this approach as it picked up many of the themes we have started discussing. Different kinds of innovation effect different groups and should be approached at different time. In my head I see innovation as creating a culture, where there is a cycle that can continue, and it is dependent on the successful integration of innovation, but still allowing for new creativity.

This is why for my criteria for the 4^th Activity were promotion of creativity, sustainability and evaluation. I want to ensure something has that spark of genius and excitement, but that it can be underpinned by sound structure and evaluation. (past or present). Interestingly in this task, many people saw success as important, but probably everyone came at success from a different viewpoint. I am wary of success per se without some underlying systematic approach. What works for one group doesn’t necessarily work for others…and back we go to crossing the chasm!

Case study in innovation - religions in wolverhampton

The ‘Religions in Wolverhampton’ web environment.

University of Wolverhampton
http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/case-studies/tangible/wolverhampton/index_html2

 I have to say I got very confused with this case study, probably because it was the last one I read in the evening.  I am not sure that the case study gave me enough background to the ‘before’ for me to make a proper decision.

The innovation was about developing a website to support student learning, giving access to resources about religions in Wolverhampton prior to visiting local religious communities.
The elearning was a way of preparing the students for this, and also helped the local community in developing interfaith relations. It used general material about religions and web quests and treasure hunts.

 WOLF – Wolverhampton Online Learning Framework (love this acronym!) was already being used to access the course learning material. The website was housed within this platform.Reading the case study suggest that they were in an environment whereby consultation and staff engagement we the norm, and so this was about enhancing the elearning experience for this particular topic. However this meant that developments were slow, due to the time that the department could allocate to new projects. This also meant that there were policies for formatting of resources.  This was an individual initiation rather than a departmental one, and as I could no longer access the link, I think that it may have been a short lived one. Interestingly this case study used Dreamweaver – which was an appropriate software choice, whereby my first case study rejected it – as it wasn’t appropriate.

There is mention in the case study that by using interactive maps and web quests it made exploring the religions more fun, and there was an obvious benefit in improving links with the local community.I liked the fact that this course had a more diverse student demographic, and that with the work they did they also wanted to engage with the local community.

Innovation?
This was obviously innovative to the students engaged with it and it created a more creative learning environment. Because it was not imbedded in the institution it may have suffered from providing any longevity.
However they took a risk, and it worked.
·         right technology for the need
·         increased motivation
·         engagement with community
·         needs to have some long term planning

case study in innovation - learning lab

The Learning Lab staff development initiative
Swansea University

I am really glad I chose this case study as I love it.
This is aimed at upskilling staff in elearning and giving them the opportunity to develop their skills.

IT involves research stages to look at why people were not engaging in elearning and built up a community to allow staff to build confidence in using the tools. (similarly to our Learning lab or practice area on OU). It started as information giving and grew as people wanted to use other tools and has grown into a virtual community.

There was a great emphasis on learning by doing, and a collaborative environment to support each other. It has taken time for staff to build confidence and enthusiasm and progress was slow, with some of the original community needed to allow others to grow. It also has suffered from the perennial problem of most imbedded communities, in that it has attracted spammers.

“A community of Practice is about relationships, sharing, support, sometimes collaborating, openness of opinions and being social. Most importantly its about the people and not the technology.”

Innovation?
This has to be classed as innovative, as it responds to a need, but greater than that, it empowers a workforce. We have already identified a need to ensure that our educators be empowered and open to using technology. This takes into account the development of our educators not just of our learners.
·         Motivating staff motivates learners
·         Allowing time for confidence building
·         Listening to the needs
·         empowerment

Case Study in Innovation - regional medical school

Use of a VLE to deliver a ‘regional’ medical school

Newcastle University


 The Newcastle Learning Support Environment (LSE) was introduced to aid the medical degree programme, specifically around the second phase, where a huge number of students (up  to 1700) are dispersed to a number of regional clinic bases, and it was felt there was a need to have some kind of structured support for resources where there was currently none.

 This case study is amazing in that it was expected that there would be a large amount of resistance to the changes, whereas in fact what happen was a complete transformation of the way the degree ran and how students and staff have engaged in the process. They seem to have found motivation and momentum to keep progressing.

Sensibly there was a gradual introduction of technology, which meant that there was  gradual acceptance. The original format was supporting material, study guides, which then increased to admin functions which in turn meant that the user size grew. Training and support for using the system was given. Resistance was helped by having ‘champions’ who supported and applied pressure where needed. Freedom for development has meant that they have been able to develop and adapt according to the needs.

Students now have 24/7 access to info and support which has supported the individual learning experience and engaged the students more. The ability to track students progress also means that targeted support can be given, making it more personal for the student. This in turn has led to a more motivated staff and student population.

Innovation?
This is innovative in my opinion because of the way they have changed the learning culture adapted to new needs and used the ‘users’ within the process. The technology in itself is not particularly innovative, but they did not use technology as such prior to this and its use has made the approach a massive success.
They really thought through the stages of progression, got the right people involved and trained and responded to growing needs

• gradual progression
• buy in of staff and students
• motivation and enthusiasm

Case studies in innovation: using Moodle for Scottish History

JISC Case Studies

Supporting Scottish History courses via Moodle.

University of Glasgow.

 In this case study, Moodle was used to create a VLE that would help to:

·         make materials more accessible to students as limited library resources (especially primary resources), and  a large of amount of background and extra reading which would not fit into lecture time meant that there was a need to improve student preparation time for seminars

·         improve communications between staff and students

·         reduce printing costs by having materials online

 In this case there was institutional encouragement to use elearning, although it seems that little real support and training was given to those who wanted to use it, they mostly taught themselves.

However, despite this, it seems that most of the course lecturers took responsibility for planning and completing their aspects of the course, whereas previously they have use admin staff to upload information.  This is a really positive aspect to this case study, as they were willing to embrace the changes and the case study mentions the enthusiasm of both staff and students. Unfortunately this also meant that they gave themselves a larger workload, which was a risk they had not planned for, and a subject that we have commented on throughout the forums.

The original scanning of primary sources took time, but I think this would be recuperated in the long term. However the cost of printing was deferred to students instead of the faculty.

Benefits included better grades, more valued, engaged and research led learning environment for both staff and students. Although some lecture attendance had declined because lecture notes available in advance, however the quality of the lecture increased with more interactivity between students and lecturers.

Concerns included the accessibility of students, which is a problem I think we will continue to encounter and the extra demands on staff time.

Innovation?

What I like about this case study is that the lecturers are the ones who really took on board the project and made it work. It’s innovation is in taking the course materials and making then more readily accessible for students. If this had been available to me during my undergraduate study, I would have found this engaging and useful, as often I did not prepare myself as it meant trawling to the library and trying to find the resources for myself.

 In a course like history a lot of individual research is needed to prepare for seminars, and making it easier for students to access primary material is very important. What it has done is made the learning a richer experience for the students and staff, which leads to that excitement. A simple solution but effective.

 To note:

·         willingness of faculty to take on new technology

·         accessibility to students (good and bad – those without technology at a disadvantage)

·         elearning required more staff time

e-learning a distinct discipline

To what extent should we think of elearning as a distinct discipline with a need for its own concepts and vocabulary?

As I have gone through the different definitions, and contemplated them in my own experience and within the framework of a technological environment my opinions have grown and changed. I came from a point of view that elearning is just another approach. I asked the question of why we find it difficult to reproduce learning online when our face to face is so good. I realise that the intricacies that we learn as face to face teachers needs a lot more design and framework if it is to be produced in an online world. I can make a cup of tea, but if I want to get a computer to do it, there are many variables, more parts and a lot of testing to get it right.

The same I think is true of elearning. Therefore I do think that although we can approach it with the same desire within the learning, more structure, design and fine tuning is needed.
Does it needs it’s own vocabulary – maybe not, but it does need a distinct discipline that is different from face to face learning because of the technology involved. Often the educators and technologists, as Deneka pointed out, do not meet and have different agendas.


Do you think the formal–informal divide is more or less evident in elearning than in more traditional forms of learning?

There have been some really good discussions about this on the forums. I think that learners perceive elearning to be less formal because it does not have the physical constraints of face to face learning. As both Ulrike and Sharon pointed out, we perceive the informality because there is more freedom. I also think that our perceptions may come from a learned experience of snobbery, in that education has to be in a certain format through a certain environment, and also a fear from people who find it difficult to embrace technology.


Did you find any of the concepts difficult to place on the grid provided? If so, why was this?
I found that some of the concepts overlapped each other  and also belonged at different places on the grid dependent on the context that I was thinking of it.


Can you think of two different axes for such a grid that might also help categorise elearning concepts?
Individual and collaborative learning.

e-learning concepts homework

Does elearning constitute a separate area of study, or sub-discipline, within education or should we simply consider it part of general education and educational technology study?

I think we have already started to consider this as a group through our discussion on innovation in elearning. Does a new discipline create a new set of terms or concepts, or have they redefined old terms and concepts within the context of technology?
For me, I think that they have been redefined; this is why I may have struggled with the first task to complete. I am fortuitous in that the learning environment in which I come from thinks and acts creatively, and so I have used these terms without necessarily using them in the concept of elearning. However are there some concepts that are better aligned with face to face and others with elearning? I think that this depends on your experience and environment.


 Blended learning (concept)
The mixing of different learning environments, which has come to mean part technology enhanced, part face to face.
Learning environments can be about the process by which we learn - learning on the job, through experience and interaction with what one is doing, self directed, collaborative, individual, but equally about the physical environment in which we learn – classroom, lecture, computer, personal, virtual, managed. When I was school, I went to lessons, and for my homework I would have to go away and investigate things, which would often involve going to the library. Surely this is a blended learning experience?
In my organisation we use the term ‘blended’ to ensure that the methods being used are varied and allow for different kinds of learning taking place – whether instructional, discovery or collaborative. We use video clips and online demonstration well within face-to-face learning, case studies or self study. However we don’t use ‘elearning’ as it is understood well with face-to-face methods. We seem to think of it as a standalone experience, rather than a blended one.


Mobile learning
Related to distance and elearning, but focuses on learning through mobile devices (portable).
I think this is where technology really helps the process. Of course trainers and teachers have often been the mobile ‘devices’ that have gone out to facilitate learning. However developments in technology make it easier to reach farther and quicker to more remote places. Developments in mobile phone technology mean that people can access information quicker and in more places than ever before. After all, how many people on this course are studying while in other countries, on boats or in military bases?
(This is linked with just in time learning – where knowledge can be more instantaneous)


Virtual communities
A virtual community is a social network of individuals who interact through specific media, potentially crossing geographical and political boundaries in order to pursue mutual interests or goals. One of the most pervasive types of virtual community includes social networking services, which consist of various online communities.
This element of course necessitates that some form of online activity in involved. However, as highlighted in the course notes, is this any different to the collaborative learning that takes place in cafes or during lunch or break times?
We have many unofficial forums or communities that exist within our organisation, all of which seek to provide support and development to others. They are quite well self-regulated; however they do have the potential of disseminating information that may be incorrect. Here I think we have potential to engage with people in a different way.
(Linked with collaboration as it is generally about people sharing knowledge)


Collaborative learning
Collaborative learning is a situation in which two or more people learn or attempt to learn something together. More specifically, collaborative learning is based on the model that knowledge can be created within a population where members actively interact by sharing experiences and take on asymmetry roles.
This happens formally (as we are doing) and informally through virtual communities as well as real communities now. The resurgence if book clubs or knitting groups shows that group work is still just as  important as the individual.


Flexible learning
Flexible Learning is a set of educational philosophies and systems, concerned with providing learners with increased choice, convenience, and personalisation to suit the learner. In particular, flexible learning provides learners with choices about where, when, and how learning occurs.
One of the core principles of our Adult Training Scheme is that it is flexible – that the learner learns in a way they want to. This is often easier said than done, as some things lend themselves more readily to this principle and more time and money needs to be spent to ensure there are many routes that follow the same learning outcome. It also relies on resources being available, so will tend to favour an elearning environment, although we always advise for as many opportunities for face to face to take place to ensure maximum ‘hit rate’.
(Linked with personalisation, as this is about being learner centric.)


Work-based learning
Programs for both secondary and post-secondary students which provide opportunities to achieve employment-related competencies in the workplace. Work-based learning is often undertaken in conjunction with classroom or related learning, and may take the form of work placements, work experience, workplace mentoring, instruction in general workplace competencies, and broad instruction in all aspects of industry.
Awards like Apprenticeships and NVQs have been around for a long time now. Even within our organisation it is recognised that many of the skills will be augmented or learnt through doing the role.
Here elearning could be useful depending on the setting, as it means that learners can engage with content in the right context.
(increasingly linked with just in time learning, whereby people gain the knowledge when they need it – mobile devises help with this)


Personalisation

Personalization involves using technology to accommodate the differences between individuals. Once confined mainly to the Web, it is increasingly becoming a factor in education, health care (i.e. personalized medicine), television, and in both "business to business" and "business to consumer" settings.

Is it easier to personalise learning within an online framework. It takes time to create an individually tailored plan, although we try and do this to some extent by creating a personal learning plan that the learner writes with support of the line manager and training support. This links with the flexible elements as it is about being learner centric. In my opinion it also reflect a mature learning environment.

 Just-in-time learning

Just-in-time learning systems deliver training to workers when and where they need it. Rather than sitting through hours of traditional classroom training, users can tap into Web-based tutorials, interactive CD-ROMs and other tools to zero in on just the information they need to solve problems, perform specific tasks or quickly update their skills
 The best example of this for me is Windows tutorials. I have sat through many excel workshops, but never remember it as I don’t need to use it. I need the information at the point at which it is useful.
Increasingly technology helps us to do this as learners have the power to find the information for them. (Depending on where they are, they may also use mobile devices!). However in many ways it could be related to more informal work based learning, where people learn at the most appropriate point, by experience. Mobile applications can now show you how to change a plug to military bridge building (I have seen this one!)


 Peer assessment
Essentially it involves students providing feedback to other students on the quality of their work.
 e-assessment
In its broadest sense, e-assessment is the use of information technology for any assessment-related activity. This definition embraces a wide range of student activity ranging from the use of a word processor to on-screen testing. Due to its obvious similarity to e-learning, the term e-assessment is becoming widely used as a generic term to describe the use of computers within the assessment process. Specific types of e-assessment include computerized adaptive testing and computerized classification testing.
 Learning objects
A learning object is "a collection of content items, practice items, and assessment items that are combined based on a single learning objective

innovation continued

As the first week comes to an end, where does that leave my thought on innovation at this stage?

The forum has been an extremely useful place for us in exploring the concept of innovation. It is clear that many agree that the use of technology in itself is not innovative, but that the way it could be use to support a wider learning design is what it important.

Mark Nichols (2003) asserts this as a hypothesis in his work Theory for Learning
(http://home.tiscali.nl/schopmanlanden.nl/Papers/LearningTheory.html viewed 10.02.2011)
"The choice of elearning tools should reflect rather than determine the pedagogy of a course; how technology is used is more important than which technology is used.”


It has struck me time and again through the discussions, that it is often not about what we think as innovative that is important, but what the end users, the learners think is innovative. By using existing technology, creating an experience that is exciting and new for the learners, we could hit upon an innovation. It seems that in many people’s experience, elearning is not about creating an interesting experience for the learner, but often about adopting new technology for the sake of it, to meet standards in business or to be reflective of the moment in education.

Colin King: “Is there a danger that we get caught up in analysing and tinkering with the packaging too much and get deflected from the intended message in the content?”

I viewed innovation as being about the cutting edge technology before this process, but now truly believe that its how we use the everyday technology to create new learning environments that is innovative. We also have to remember that there are some learning environments that we cannot recreate in the online world. And we need to remember that often the barriers are about teachers and trainers not wanting to adapt their ways, or seeing things from a generational perspective.
 
Sarah Dawson “I find that online learning is often billed as being more flexible to fit in with peoples busy schedules and such like, but this also often makes it quite static, for example it will be an electronic version of the syllabus that people can read in there own time, but in terms of teaching it is very limited in terms of what it can offer.

In my experience this idea of people living busy hectic lives is a key driver in much of what we do in developing our training in the Scout Association. We are trying to engage with volunteers who already give up their time. How can we get them to engage with learning the essential things they need to?


Over the last two years learners have asked to have more engagement with learning online. However the learning we already provide suffers from the ‘bells and whistles’ effects that Colin spoke about. We don’t do anything to support the learning, and think drag and drop or simple quizes represent ways in which to test the individuals understanding of what they have learnt. Is it any wonder that Training Managers feel uncomfortable with understanding this, as the learning is not in their control? Do volunteers want to do learning online because they feel it is a better method for them, allowing to explore concepts, or because it’s quicker? We are lucky in that training consists not just of learning for us, but like NVQ we ask for validation, for evidence that the learner has put this knowledge into practice in the role that they are doing.


Sylvia Moessinger mentioned the need for learners to take responsibility for their learning.
“A typical sentence is 'Why don't you give us the answer', showing their reluctance to apply a deeper approach, because that would require to engage with the learning material.”

I hear this a lot, and it is interesting that in an association that has been learning by doing for 100 years, a culture has developed whereby people want to be ‘told the answer’. Is this because our demographics are changing, or because our methods of engaging are no longer exciting enough?


As I mentioned in my forum post, I think that we excel in being innovative and exciting when delivering learning in the traditional face to face methods. Which makes it more frustrating, when trying to recreate this online. We are however entering a period of change, with new lead volunteers who have a better understanding of how learning drives business, and recognise the need for vision and creativity to drive the future. I hope that  as my understanding of innovation grows within this module, that I can take that and change the way those I report to understand this too.

What is innovation - does learning or technology drive it.

Before starting on my research around the subject, I asked myself, and my techie partner what true innovation in learning was. We immediately hit the dilemma - is it about the technology or the learning itself? It was a heated debate (as it often is , as we both like to play devil's advocate and we both like to be right!). I believed it was doing an old thing in a new way, maybe supported by technology. He felt that technology can be the driver and the impetus towards innovation.
I also realised that I came to this argument free from the constraints of institutional education, as the training I am involved in is more informal learning. It has a purpose and principles , but is not constrained in the way that learning within education establishments might be. I have no knowledge of teaching practices at all, so it will be interesting to see what my fellow course mates say.

I have always believed that technology supports those processes, but I guess that new technology and innovations in technology can lead to innovations in learning  and work hand in hand. But is this an enhancement of the process rather than innovation? I have had systematic planning drummed into me, (we are all best friends with NAOMIE) and know that often people get carried away by the method, before thinking about the aims and objectives. By the way, the techie thought that Sesame Street was the best learning innovation from his childhood.

Rich and Holtman seem to suggest that using technology enhances the learning experience, and allows for a more holistic approach.  Twenty years have gone by since this study and one wonders if the same barriers to engaging with technology still stand? Although the Generation Y may be techno savvy, and using technology in their everyday lives, it's the Boomers and X'ers that are the teachers and trainers, and I think there may still be some resistance in the embrace. Often this can be due to changing an organisational culture. I certainly see this a lot with the Scout Association. Trainers are training the things they like themselves - not the things that inspire others.

It also struck me when reading this, when does innovation become part of  the everyday? When is technology new to its audience? What is technologically innovative to a group of software designers maybe completely alien to another demographic. I know that we still have members who don't own computers, and others who use facebook as an everyday means of communication.

Luck and Laurence highlighted some key points, some of which I have already questioned. Did the technology make a difference or did having the technology facilitate the use of different methods?  It sounds like the session were  met positively because they were different - they used a different methodology and different people to engage with the students. This is something that I have heard a lot recently. Can we get trainers from another County to come and deliver? New faces seem to be equated with better experiences. Having someone you don't see every day can have more of an impact. I think people would love it if there was a guest speaker from  Headquarters once a month.
The article highlighted that different experiences can be exciting in themselves.

It also highlight a problem encountered by many - that technology needs the support behind it, to ensure it works to it's best advantage.  Often technology can be high risk and disruptive, but does the excitement of using of using it overcome the downfalls. I think it depends on the individual.

I was left with the question - do we shape the development and innovation of technology in learning through our needs, and thus make it better and easier to use?

Where does innovation begin for me

So the question is, how did I get here? I have been working in the training department of the Scout Association for nearly three years now. Learning for us is not just about the need to know, but about personal development. Scouting has been learning by doing for over a hundred years. Over the past few years we have found that many trainers are stuck in a rut. They either fit in the category of fantastic or dire. So upskilling trainers is a priority. However more than that, volunteers want different methods to engage in. Every year the research from those who have completed their learning tells us that they want to have more online support available.

We know that people have less time, need more focussed learning packages that they tap into outside of the traditional course setting. One of the principles of the training scheme is having more than one method for completing the learning, which we fall short of in many instances. I have traditional shied away from technology, proclaiming myself to 'hate it'. However the realisation has slowly dawned on me recently that I don't hate technology at all, but that I get frustrated with the fact that we don't use it to our advantage. That said I think that I made up my mind to tackle the beast.  And of course to do that, I need to immerse myself into the online world more.

The 'elearning'  we provide our volunteers tends to be off the shelf, bespoke packages. They do the job, but personally I don't find them inspiring.  The biggest barrier is the amount of time we spend getting whichever company wins the tender to understand the association. And then of course, in five years time, the information is out of date again.

I want to start a revolution. I have already starting sowing the seeds. I want people to think differently about how we view training across the association. At a headquarters level there is no training budget. We bid for projects as they come along. This means that often we create resources that are online and free to the user. My goal is to get a budget - £1 for every adult member. With over a 100,000 adults......

Over the last 2 years I have been engaging with research and keeping up to date with the theory behind learning technology. However often what I see isn't new or innovative, and often I don't get a real chance to engage in this form of learning, so have no way to really assess the impact. I am hoping that this course gives me a chance to explore further. I want to question what innovation is, and whether it really supports learning. Even in traditional training methods, I often experience the method taking over the objectives, so to me innovations are to take those objectives and deliver them in a new way. For me at the moment, innovation is about taking all the raw materials and using it in a creative and useful way, allowing learners of different styles to engage with what they are learning in new and positive ways.

The start of a new world

So, as I am new to OU and learning online, and in fact haven't been involved in any kind of formal learning for 15 years this is all quite daunting.

So I have decided to use my blog as a way to talk about all of these things, so that I can start to chart the comments I make and get my brain in gear!

I started on Saturday trying to familiarise myself with the site and doing introductions. Working at the weekend is both a blessing and a curse. It does mean that for the next few weeks I am off on a Monday and Tuesday and so can spend some concentrated time on this.
It seems that many of the people also doing H807 have been involved in other modules. This is both exciting and daunting. It means that I have to engage my brain quickly and process the information that some people already have.

I have decided to approach the task in the broadest sense. As I need to learn about even the simple things the quiz asks, I need to adapt quickly