Pontydysgu – Bridge to Learning

I’m very gratified at the interest in ‘Searching and Lurking and the Zone of Proximal Development’, the book I edited on the use of ICT for learning in Small and Medium Enterprises.

We brought two boxes of the books to Berlin – they have all gone. So if you still would like a copy here is a link to a PDF version.

A quick post from the Online Educa conference in Berlin.

The experiment working with students from Koblenz producing podcasts from the conference is great fun – will report more on it later.

And yesterday I did a stand in key note presentation – Web 2.0, Social Software and Personal Learning Environments. A copy of that will also appear here soon.

And of course we are getting those podcasts out. Here is Sounds of the Bazaar 17 – a special edition on podcasting in education. This is a link to the full edition – if you want to access the individual items in the programme head over to the Bazaar site and listen there.

 

 Sounds of the Bazaar 17 ) - podcasting special: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download (569)

We are delighted so many people at Online Educa Berlin are interested in our work. Sadly, we are running out of hard copies of the publications. We will be trying, over the weekend, to move the publications section of this web site on line – and we will be making downloads of all our publications – and those of our partners, available here

A quick news update. Graham, Jenny and Dirk are at Online Educa Berlin. Pontydysgu is supporting the Bazaar project, developing and promoting Open Content and Open Source in education.

Later today (Thursday) Graham will be talking at the conference about web 2.0, social software and Personal Learning Environments. His slides will be available on the Online Educa site and on this web site.

Tomorrow (Friday) we are hosting a lunchtime round table on open content. Meanwhile if you are in berlin – an would like to talk to us, you can find the Bazaar on stand 16 (opposite the bar.

I started my blog by looking back to the year 2003 and to my discussion paper “I-Europe”. I wanted to have a fresh look at my earlier effort to stimulate discussion on integrative, innovative, intercultural and inclusive developments in voctional education and training (VET). Also, I wanted draw attention to a critical turining point in the development of the European cooperation programmes and in European VET research communities. And I promised to continue the story to present date and ‘back to future’.

Unfortunately I did not find the time to continue the story immediately. Yet, I think it is worth to have a look at the changing preconditions for European cooperation and the related dynamics in European research networks.

European cooperation climates and European added value

In this blog entry I will concentrate on how the views on European cooperation have changed in the transition from the earlier European programmes (mid -90s to 2000) to the current European framework processes and newer programmes.

From my perspective it is important to remind that the earlier European programmes emphasised strongly the principle of ’subsidiarity’. The European cooperation activities in education and training were launched to support the development of national VET systems and related initiatives. The expectations on ‘European added value’ were linked to the perspective that European comparisons, network activities and pilot projects would promote a climate of mutual learning.

In this context there was a willingness to promote knowledge enrichment between parallel projects and complementary programmes. This was especially the case between the Leonardo projects and the special support programme for “targeted socio-economic research’. Moreover, there was a positive climate regarding ‘networking the networks’ with the help of European seminars and joint researcher-initiated portals.

Yet, shortly after the Lisbon summit 2000 the cooperation climate started to change. Gradually the Lisbon goals (”Making Europe the leading innovative reagion by 2010)” were transformed into follow-up agendas (such as “Education and training 2010″) and linked to intergovernmental framework processes (e.g. the Bologna process and the Copenhagen process). Thus, the idea of ‘Europan dimension’ was increasingly derived from the European policy frameworks and policy processes – no longer from the perspective of mutual learning or rom joint knowledge enrichment.

Alongside this development the European cooperation programmes in education and training were brought closer to the European framework processes and related policy priorities. At the same time the European research funding was promoted with an emphasis on ‘high sience’ and ‘critical mass’. In this respect there was less talk of complementary relations between different programmes. Furthermore, there was less interest in research-based knowledge development with the help of seminars, open spaces and thematic portals. Instead, the emphasis was shifted towards technical working groups and follow-up studies that were closely linked to the framework processes.

European VET research communities and the search for new cooperation models

Therefore, the Open Meeting of the VETNET network during the ECER 2003 (see my previous blog) took place in the middle of a change in the European cooperation climate. Looking back, it is easy to see that the two initiatives that were presented there (Alan Brown’s initiative to promote networking across national research programmes and my initiative to launch researcher-led knowledge development on the basis of a joint strategy paper) did not pave the way for sustainable cooperation.

On the one hand these initiatives were raising hopes that the national programmes could provide sufficiently strong backing for trans-national cooperation measures (and for related knowledge development). On the other hand these initiatives were based on the expectation that the existing research networks and thematic research communities would be strong enough to create new research agendas and working concepts. In both respects the development after 2003 has been characterised by a low tide in European VET-related research cooperation:

a) The enlargement of European Union had broadened the basis for European cooperation and the previous concepts for comparing countries and country clusters were insufficient.

b) The reforms and policy changes at the national level were becoming less transparent and there was less interest to learn from constant updates.

c) The earlier thematic networks or ‘container networks’ had reached the point of saturation and the individual members were shifting towards new research themes.

d) The efforts to develop web-based infrastructures for European research communities were either suffering from infant diseases (like the REM communication forum or the CEDRA portal) or streamlined into externally controlled services (like the Cedefop ‘virtual communities’).

Indeed, after 2003 it seems that the European framework prcesses and the European cooperation programmes have started to create a mechanism of questioning and answering that feeds itself (see the diverse technical working groups, specific policy-relaed tenders and follow-up studies). Alongside these developments there is less interest on, what European lessons VET researchers have learned from the cooperation experiences that have a longer history than the current European policies.

Of course, the VETNET network of European VET researchers has tried several times to launch a new debate on researchers’ own initiatives (see http://www.vet-research.net):

• at ECER 2004 the VETNET Opening Colloquium debate on “VET PISA” (as an alternative for the current PISA studies in general education),
• at ECER 2005 the workshop on “Communities, networking and web-based support”,
• at ECER 2006 the VETNET Forum on “European Qualification Framework” and
• at ECER 2007 the VETNET Forum on the 10-year history of VETNET activities at the ECER conferences.

However, as the experience has shown, it has been relatively easy to start a common discussion at a conference platform. Yet, it has been very difficult to organise pratical follow-up process that gets proper funding when the ideas are fresh. Therefore, one may ask the question, what is it worth to look back at the old “I-Europe” document and the Sisyphos work that was done to promote European research dialogue at that time. Doesn’t the development in the recent years show that there is no room for such self-initiated debates.

As far as I am concerned, I think this would be a very nearsighted conclusion and a very bad misreading of the history of European VET research. To me, the key issue is not what the present European cooperation climate appears to be (in the light of the policy frameworks). To me there is a reason to go deeper into such developments (in VET and in work-related learning) that are not addressed by intergovernmental agreements, framework processes and programme priorities. Therefore, there may be a reason to have a new look at the “I-Europe” framework from the perspective of ‘going back to future’.

I think this is enough for the moment. In the next posting I will discuss the issue of alternative futures for VET and for VET-related research.

Pekka Kämäräinen

Been meaning to blog about this for some time. Jenny Hughes forwarded me the link today so I have finally got round to it.

Why is the Scottish Chartered Teacher scheme so interesting.

Firstly it recognises that teachers can develop their career without leaving the classroom. In other words it values the activities of being a teacher, rather than in most systems where career advancement is based on becoming a manager.

Secondly it introduces a framework for Continuing Professional Development, based on professional values and personal commitments.

Perhaps most important is the the Chartered Teacher qualification is based largely on reflective learning and self evaluation.

The Standard has four key components:

a. professional values and personal commitments;
b. professional knowledge and understanding;
c. professional and personal attributes;
d. professional action.

The basic assumption is that the Chartered Teacher is characterised by four central professional values and personal commitments:

a. effectiveness in promoting learning in the classroom;
b. critical self-evaluation and development;
c. collaboration and influence;
d. educational and social values.

You can find out more about the Chartered Teacher Scheme on the Scottish Government’s Standard for Chartered Teachers web site.

Seeking for learning evaluation (SEELE)

Dates: November 2007 – October 2008

Coordinator: Instituto Pólitécnico de Viana do Castelo

Funded by The EU Leonardo da Vinci programme

The first project meeting took place in Pontypridd on the 13th and 14th December, 2007

We still have a substantial backlog of material to be published on this site. And we have a backlog of paper publications to go out. It will all sort out in time. But for the moment I am just trying to get things out in any way I can. So I have attached a PDF (1.1MB) version of a Guide to the Evaluation of e-Learning to this post.

This guide has been produced as a report on the work of the Models and Instruments for the evaluation of e-learning
and ICT supported learning (E-VAL) project. The project took place between 2002 and 2005 and was sponsored by the European Commission Leonardo da Vinci programme. The project was coordinated by Pontydysgu.

The following text is taken from the introduction to the guide.

The development of e-learning products and the provision of e-learning opportunities is one of the most rapidly expanding
areas of education and training.

Whether this is through an intranet, the internet, multimedia, interactive TV or computer based training, the growth of e-learning is accelerating. However, what is known about these innovative approaches to training has been limited by the shortage of scientifically credible evaluation. Is e-learning effective? In what contexts? For what groups of learners? How do different learners respond? Are there marked differences between different ICT platforms? Does the socio-cultural environment make a difference? Considering the costs of implementing ICT based training, is there a positive return on investment? What are the perceptions of VET professionals? What problems has it created for them?

E-learning is also one of the areas that attracts the most research and development funding. If this investment is to be maximised, it is imperative that we generate robust models for the evaluation of e-learning and tools which are flexible in use but consistent in results.

“Although recent attention has increased e-learning evaluation, the current research base for evaluating e-learning is inadequate … Due to the initial cost of implementing e-learning programs, it is important to conduct evaluation
studies.”
(American Society for Training and Development, 2001).

The Capitalisation report on the Leonardo da Vinci 1 programme, one of the biggest sponsors of innovative e-learning projects in European VET, also identified the lack of systematic evaluation as being the major weakness in e-learning projects.

However, whilst some have been desperately seeking answers to the question ‘What works and what doesn’t work?’ and looking for ways of improving the quality of e-learning, the response by a large sector of the community of e-learning developers and practitioners has been a growing preoccupation with software and platforms. There has been only limited
attention to pedagogy and learning. The development of models and tools for the evaluation of e-learning can help in improving the quality of e-learning and in informing and shaping future development in policy and practice.

The guide contains eleven sections:

1. Introduction – why do we need new models and tools for the evaluation of e-learning
2. Evaluating e-learning – what does the literature tell us?
3. A Framework for the evaluation of e-learning
4. Models and theories of evaluation
5. Models and tools for the evaluation of e-learning – an overview
6. The SPEAK Model and Tool
7. Tool for the evaluation of the effectiveness of e-learning programmes in small- and medium sized
   enterprises (SMEs)
8. Models and tools for evaluation of e-learning in higher vocational education
9. Policy model and tool
10. A management oriented approach to the evaluation of e-learning
11. Individual learning model and tool

You can download the guide here: eval3

A Guide to the Evaluation of e-Learning (PDF- 1.1Mb)

e-Learning 2.0 and Quality (40 minute video)

ICT and learning in Small and Medium Enterprises (wiki pages)

Creative Commons changed its pictogram for Attribution and adjusted the pictogram for Noncommercial to European needs, so Bazaar has been updating their Bazaar Pins set too! See also: Show that you Share.

For those who are not familiar with these pins: to stimulate the sharing and reuse of content, the Bazaar project supports Creative Commons and came up with the idea to wear pins to Show that we Share to conferences, seminars, our Show-me days and every other (non-)Bazaar event. Pinning the ones we find important on our rugsacks and jackets makes showing that we share an everyday thing. And we wear them proudly.

The old set has now really become a collectors item. The new set will be available at the Bazaar Stand at the Online Educa in Berlin, Germany, next week (November 28-30, 2007).

Every attendee to the free Bazaar Conference on December 14 2007 in Utrecht, the Netherlands, will receive their own Bazaar Pins set, to Show that they Share. For more information on the Bazaar conference, see: Networks, Communities & Learning: Show that you Share!.

We hope to see you there, we hope to see you wear.