Pontydysgu – Bridge to Learning

Pretty active debate on the Capetown Declaration on Open Educational Resources.going on through the Unesco OER list server.

And it has featured one or two good side lines.

This contribution from Francis Muguet is brilliant:

“Another example of the deficiency of the English language has been the suppression of the thou/you distinction as the result of a deep puritan psychosis that has been implemented in the language, and that English mono-speakers are carrying unknowingly until now.

It appears that if English wants to fulfill its role of a worldwide communication language, it must accept to be enriched with words in relations to concepts it is unable to render properly and concisely.

The fact that a native English speaker would have to make an intellectual effort to understand the word libre (although libre seems an understandable adjective corresponding to liberty… ) is not an obstacle, in fact this would be a good thing.

A statement in this Capetown declaration concerning Linguistic Diversity (and the right for everyone to be able to get a basic education in his/her mother tongue) would have been welcome.

No posts for a while as have been constantly traveling. Since I am now on my way to Utrecht for the final conference of the Bazaar project on Open educational Resources then it seems pertinent to comment once more on the debate over the Capetown Declaration on Open Content. Despite the declaration being drafted in a restricted community – and official comment being similarly restricted – it is heartening to see that an open discussion has emerged through the blogosphere and within the open content com,unity. That the community is able to organise such a debate is very encouraging and a sign of the increasingly mature nature of the community.

Stephen Downes – in an email to the UNesco list server on OERs, says:

“I understand the purpose of the use of the word ‘libre’, as the words ‘open’ and ‘free’ have certainly been appropriated by those who see learning content as something ‘given’ and not ‘created’ or ‘used’. And one wonders what the supporters of commercial reproduction of open educational content would say were such reproduction required to retain the format and structure of the original – no proprietary technology, no encoding or access restrictions, no DRM. What would they say were they required to make available genuinely free and ‘libre’ content in whatever marketplace they offered their commercial version of such content.

I understand the concerns about the use of the word ‘libre’ as being unfamiliar and foreign to some people. Perhaps we could offer a translation. Perhaps we could call such content ‘liberty’ content. Alternatively, I would also support a move to reclaim the word ‘open’ from those who now interpret it to mean ‘produced’ and ‘commercial’ and ‘closed’. I have always referred to the concept simply as ‘free learning’.”

Stephen’s contribution reflects the findings of the Bazaar project. Firstly, it is not just a matter of ensuring a Creative Commons license is attached to resources – although awareness of such licenses is of course important. OERS have to be available in a form which renders them usable for learning. Part of that learning may involve changing those resources. Formats do matter.

Even more critical is support for the processes of learning. There are many great resources openly available on the internet and an increasing number of free social software applications which can potentially support learning.

But there remain many barriers to their effective use for learning. One of the issues we have focused on in the Bazaar project is data ownership. Yes, Facebook is a great application for peer and shared learning. But Facebook denies users access to their own data.

Equally organisation and institutional cultures of teaching and learning inhibit sharing and reuse.

In the Bazaar project we have spent some considerable efforts in looking at the potential of Personal Learning Environments. I suspect our reviewers from the Commission find this strange. Why should a project on Open Educational Resource be concerned about PLEs. The reason is because we share Stephen’s vision of I want and visualize and aspire toward a system of “society and learning where each person is able to rise to his or her fullest potential without social or financial encumberance, where they may express themselves fully and without reservation through art, writing, athletics, invention, or even through their avocations or lifestyle……..This to me is a society where knowledge and learning are public goods, freely created and shared, not hoarded or withheld in order to extract wealth or influence.”

We see Personal Learning Environments as an important development in enabling such a vision – allowing learners to create and allowing sharing of knowledge and ideas as well as artefacts.

Before I got involved in all this ICT supported learning stuff, I spent a lot of time working on qualifications for the initial and continuing education of teachers and trainers – mainly in vocational education and training. Last year I was pursuaded to launch another project on this subject – this time about the training of trainers. The project is called TTPlus. And I am very glad that I did.

One of the benefits of coming back to a subject after a break of several years is that it allows you to review how your ideas have changed. Whereas in the past I had focused on formal courses and qualifications, and formal job descriptions, now I was more interested in informal learning and in how learning and professional development related to practice. TTPlus is a European project and has a great group of partners from Germany, Greece, Portugal, the Netherlands and Austria.

We all trust each other – and instead of the usual project meetings devoted to too much reporting of activity undertaken and much to much administration we have been able to get into the methodology and content of our project.

If you want to find out more go the the project web site.

One of the outcomes of the project is a Framework for Continuing Professional Development. The challenge for me is how to relate such a framework to practice and how to make a framework genuinely open, rather than merely a progression ladder through formal learning.

Below is my first attempt at such a document – written together with Philipp Grollman and Eileen Luebcke. You can also download the full document which explains the outcomes of our case studies into the practice of trainers.

We are still working on the Framework and on how such a Framework might be implemeted but I would be very happy for comments on the draft from any readers.

The basis for the Open Framework for Continuing Professional Development for Trainers in Europe is that the Framework must address all those concerned with training and learning. This includes trainers – both full and part time – but also employers and enterprises, sector organisations, trade unions, regulatory bodies, regional economic bodies, examination and certification organisations and local, regional national and European governmental organisations.

The Framework is designed to be inclusive and flexible. It is designed to support trainers and organisations in developing, promoting and facilitating opportunities for professional development. It is based on voluntary commitment to both implementing the Framework and monitoring progress towards that implementation.

1. Recognition of the importance of trainers in facilitating learning and the role of learning for individual competence development and organisational development

The Framework for the Continuing Professional Development of trainers is based on the recognition of the importance of training for the development of individual competencies and lifelong learning for individual employees and organisational development within enterprises.

2. Recognition of different modes of learning

The Framework recognises the different ways in which people learn and develop competence. This may include participation in formal full or part time training, externally or in the workplace, but it also includes informal on the job learning and self study. The Framework recognises that trainers may have a role in supporting all these different forms of learning.

3. Recognition of role different people play in training and learning

The Framework recognises that many different people play a role in supporting learning. These include full and prat time trainers but also those who support others in learning as part of their job for instance through he induction of new staff. They may also include those responsible for the design and development of computer supported learning or those who facilitate professional networking.

4. Development of Competencies

The Framework recognises the broad range of competencies required of trainers. These include:

• subject or occupational competences
• didactic competences
• organisational competences
• Interpersonal competences

Opportunities for professional development should allow trainers to develop all of these competences.

5. Importance of opportunities for initial and continuing professional development

The Framework recognises the importance of both initial and continuing professional development for the effectiveness and quality of training. The Framework is based on an individual commitment by trainers to their own professional development, a commitment by enterprises to providing opportunities and supporting professional development and a commitment by other organisations to supporting and recognising that professional development.

6. Importance of opportunities of opportunities to practice

The framework recognises the importance of opportunities to practice. It commits organisations to providing varied opportunities for practice as part of professional development.

7. Importance of networking

The Framework recognises the importance of networking – within companies, between companies and in broader Communities of Practice as a means to professional development. It commits organisations to facilitating participation within networks and communities for trainers.

8. Partnerships

The Framework recognises the importance of partnership in recognising professional development and in providing opportunities of that development to take place. such partnerships may include employers and enterprises, sector organisations, trade unions, regulatory bodies, regional economic bodies, examination and certification organisations and local, regional national and European governmental organisations.

9. Reflection

The Framework recognises the importance of reflection on practice as a key element in professional development. Thus it advocates the prevision of opportunities for reflection through peer review and mentoring and though the promotion of activities and tools for recording reflection including diaries and (e)-portfolios.

10. Role of formal qualifications

The Framework recognises that although many trainers have no formal qualification in training and may not wish to acquire such a qualification but for others the achievement of a formal qualification may play a role in their learning and may offer them opportunities for professional advancement. Thus commitment to the Framework includes the development and recognition of relevant and flexible qualifications, forms of assessment and evaluation which recognise practice and access to such qualifications.

11. Development of tools and platforms

The Framework recognises the importance of appropriate tools and platforms for networking between trainers, for the exchange of experiences and practice and for monitoring opportunities for professional development. The Framework will promote the development and use of such tools and platforms.

12. Promotion of the Framework

For such a Framework to be effective, it will require widespread dissemination, promotion and adoption. Framework signatories will be committed to such activities.

13. Research and monitoring

Research has an important role to play in supporting the development and implementation of a Framework for professional development. This includes research into the context, role and competences of trainers, monitoring of progress in implementing professional development opportunities and critically, providing example of effective and innovative practice. The Framework will support and disseminate such research.

14. Implementation

It is recognised that the Framework cannot be imposed by regulatory or legislative means. Instead the Framework is based on voluntary adoption. Such adoption involves a commitment to implementation of the framework, whilst recognising flexibility in the different ways this may be undertaken, to transparency in the measures undertaken and in monitoring, reviewing and reporting on progress in implementation.

15. Governance and further development of the Framework

As an Open Framework, no single organisation can own or govern the Framework. However, it is proposed that appropriate bodies at European, national, regional and sector levels should undertake to co-ordinate the adoption and further development of the Framework. We will propose further ideas on how this might be undertaken.
TTPlus_Framework

Projects are central to the development of new ideas and applications for learning and technology. Projects allow us the space to try out new ideas and the time and opportunity to explore and share those ideas. At least in theory. In truth we spend too much time chasing money, in matching our ideas to what policy makers and funders want and in filling in endless report forms. But, it goes with the territory.One thing I think we are woefully weak at it making the results of our projects available. Yes, we have our conference papers. and we have the project web sites, complete with partner logos and PDF downloads of reports. But far too seldom is the work presented in a way that the ideas are accessible or is there an engaging narrative of what we did and what we found out and how it might be used by others.Pontydysgu are not brilliant at this. But we have been thinking about the issue. One thing we decided to do was to present a brief overview of all the different projects we are engaged in, together with links to project web sites and resources.

That section is now live on our web site, althoigh there is still some data to add. And at some time, I will try to turn some of the less transparent project descriptions, lifted from project applications and web sites, into some more convincing texts.We have also been looking at how to use multimedia to present our ideas – through podcasts and videos and slideshows. More recently we have been developing comics. Adrian Puscuta, our intern student form Bucharest has shown a real aptitude for this work. The first two of his Comic Books – ‘Searching, Lurking and the Zone of Proximal Development’ and ‘Personal Learning Environments – What they are and what they might be useful for’ are now on line in the Multimedia/Comics section of the site.I’d be interested in what you think. I like Comic books because of the power of the pictures and text together to construct a narrative. When I make a presentation I try to tell a story – the Comic Books are the nearest way I have found of telling those stories in an asynchronous media.

Teachers’ Aids on Creating Content for Learning Environments, TACCLE

Co-ordinators: Het Gemeenschapsonderwijs (Belgium)

Start date: November 2007

End date: October 2009

MOSEP Web site: http://www.mosep.org/

MOSEP wiki: http://wiki.mosep.org/Mosep/

MOSEP study: http://www.mosep.org/study

MOSEP video: Click here

Title: More Esteem with your e-Portfolio, MOSEP

Co-ordinator: Salzburg Research

Start Date: August 2006

End Date: July 2008

Funded by the European Commission Leonardo da Vinci programme

Neat photo from On-line Educa – thanks to Peter Himsel who took the picture and thanks to Online Educa and to Peter for releasing under a Creative Commons attribution license.

It seems strange to me but I am still finding people who don’t know about next weeks Bazaar event – Show that you Share taking place in Utrecht on Friday 14 December. It is free and there are still places left. If you would like to come just email me or Raymond Elferink. Full details can be found on the Bazaar Web site.

And if you need more details to be convinced here is the draft programme.

The conference is based on five main themes:

• Hey Dude, Where’s my Data? On data security, privacy and sustainability
• Social Software, Tools and Content Creation
• OERs and the Culture of Sharing
• Interoperability and Metadata and OERs
• PLEs, ePortfolio’s and Informal Learning

We were also concerned that the event would be participatory with spaces for participants to present key ideas and work in progress.

Our proposal for the structure of the meeting is as follows:

9:30 Coffee and Registration
10:00 Session 1: Introduction to themes – Graham Attwell, Raymond Elferink, George Bekiaridis and Ineke Lam
11:00 Session 2: Workshops and round tables -

Each session will last 30 minutes with participants rotating between different round table / workshops

12:30 Lunch break (lunch will be provided for participants)

13:30 Session 3: workshops and round tables

Each session will last 30 minutes with participants rotating between different round table / workshops

15:00 Session 4: Open Space – conference participants present their ideas – posters / 5 minute presentations

15:30 Drawing it together – what have we learnt – where do we go next

16:00 Drinks