Archive for the ‘Informal learning’ Category

Bremen talks on young refugees’ access to training and labour market – Part One: The event and the Bremen study

February 13th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

In the recent times my blogs on this site have focused almost exclusively on our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. This time I will shift the emphasis to a major issue that we are discussing in the Bremen region: Measures to support the reception and integration of refugees. In particular Bremen is struggling with a large number of unaccompanied young people (under 18 years). Yesterday I attended with several other ITB colleagues a public event that brought into discussion a new study from Bremen, an ongoing model project in Bavaria and several views of stakeholders (from different organisations). In the first post I will give some background information and present insights int the Bremen study. In the second post I will give insights into the model project in Bavaria and highlight some key points of the discussion.

1. The background of the event

One of the specific institutions of the Hanseatic City of Bremen is the Chamber of salaried employees (Arbeitnehmerkammer). This is a public body and all salaried employees in Bremen are also members of the chamber. This is a similar arrangement as is the case with Chambers of Commerce or with Chambers of Craft and Trade (which comprise all the enterprises in their respective domains). Given this co-existence of public representative bodies, they have developed several forms of practical cooperation with different societal issues. Also, they have a tradition to contribute to each others’ events.

From the year 2015  on (when the amount of refugees coming to Bremen grew rapidly) the Arbeitnehmerkammer has taken several initiatives to get information on refugees’ situation, to facilitate cooperation between different support organisations and to promote public discusssion on necessary policy measures. In this context the Arbeitnehmerkammer had initiated with the research institute of the University of Bremen for Work and Economy (Institut für Arbeit und Wirtschaft) a special study on the prospects of young refugees to enter training and labour market in Bremen. This event was called to

  • make public the main results of the study,
  • make comparisons to an ongoing model project in Bavaria and to
  • promote public discussion between  different stakeholders who engage themselves with problems of young refugees.

2. Insights into the study on young refugees in Bremen

In the first part of the event the author of the Bremen study, René Böhme gave a comprehensive overview on the context, design and results of the study. Here I will not try to reflect its richness. Instead, I try to draw attention to some points that were of vital importance for the discussion:

 a) Concerning the amount of refugees arrived in Bremen: Whilst in 2014 the number of refugees was slightly over 2000, in 2015 it was over 10.000. In addition, the number of unaccompanied young refugees was in 2014 ca. 500, whilst in 2015 it was over 2500.

b) Concerning attitudes of employees: In general, employees are ready to receive refugees (given the shortage of skilled workforce) and to make extra efforts to support their training and integration into working life. Yet, they are aware of problems and risks (e.g. of high drop-out rates).

c) Concerning efforts to overcome formal hurdles: Preconditions for flexible and supported entry to training (e.g. via pre-vocational measures) have already been created. Yet, they alone do not guarantee successful completion of training.

d) Concerning parallel support measures and initiatives: At the moment the services and initiatives have been brought into picture in rapid tempo and separately by different actors. Therefore, they appear as uncoordinated patchwork of activities. However, as such they are not merely limited to educational and career guidance but cover also everyday life problems.

In the light of the above the study drew attention to the following needs:

  • to make the formal frameworks more flexible at Federal level,
  • to improve the pre-vocational learning opportunities in vocational school (with linked career guidance and counselling)
  • to improve the cooperation of public authorities, companies and service providers to create a coherent support system for refugee-trainees and -apprentices,
  • to strengthen complementary support  and mentoring networks to support overall integration into society and everyday life.

I think this is enough of the background of the event and of the Bremen study that was presented as a basis for joint situation assessment. In the next post it is appropriate to present the Bavarian model project and some insights into the discussion.

More blogs to come …

 

Workplace Learning Analytics for Facilitation in European Public Employment Services

February 10th, 2016 by Graham Attwell

Along with colleagues from the EmployID project, I’ve submitted  a paper f to the workshop on Learning Analytics for Workplace and Professional Learning (LA for Work) at Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK 2016) in April. Below is the text of teh paper (NB If you are interested, the orgnaisers are still accepting submissions for the workshop.

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we examine issues in introducing Learning Analytics (LA) in the workplace. We describe the aims of the European EmployID research project which aims to use

Image: Educause

technology to facilitate identity transformation and continuing professional development in European Public Employment Services. We describe the pedagogic approach adopted by the project based on social learning in practice, and relate this to the concept of Social Learning Analytics. We outline a series of research questions the project is seeking to explore and explain how these research questions are driving the development of tools for collecting social LA data. At the same time as providing research data, these tools have been developed to provide feedback to participants on their workplace learning.

1. LEARNING ANALYTICS AND WORK BASED LEARNING

Learning Analytics (LA) has been defined as “the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data about learners and their contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs.” [1]. It can assist in informing decisions in education education system, promote personalized learning and enable adaptive pedagogies and practices [2].

However, whilst there has been considerable research and development in LA in the formal school and higher education sectors, much less attention has been paid to the potential of LA for understanding and improving learning in the workplace. There are a number of possible reasons for this.

Universities and schools have tended to harvest existing data drawn from Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and to analyse that data to both predict individual performance and undertake interventions which can for instance reduce drop-out rates. The use of VLEs in the workplace is limited and “collecting traces that learners leave behind” [3] may fail to take cognizance of the multiple modes of formal and informal learning in the workplace and the importance of key indicators such as collaboration. Once more key areas such as collaboration tend to be omitted and in focusing on VLEs, a failure to include all the different modes of learning. Ferguson [4]) says that in LA implementation in formal education: “LA is aligned with clear aims and there are agreed proxies for learning.” Critically, much workplace learning is informal with little agreement of proxies for learning. While Learning Analytics in educational settings very often follow a particular pedagogical design, workplace learning is much more driven by demands of work tasks or intrinsic interests of the learner, by self-directed exploration and social exchange that is tightly connected to processes and the places of work [5].  Learning interactions at the workplace are to a large extent informal and practice based and not embedded into a specific and measurable pedagogical scenario.

Pardo and Siemens [6] point out that “LA is a moral practice and needs to focus on understanding instead of measuring.” In this understanding “learners are central agents and collaborators, learner identity and performance are dynamic variables, learning success and performance is complex and multidimensional, data collection and processing needs to be done with total transparency.” This poses particular issues within the workplace with complex social and work structures, hierarchies and power relations.

Despite these difficulties workplace learners can potentially benefit from being exposed to their own and other’s learning processes and outcomes as this potentially allows for better awareness and tracing of learning, sharing experiences, and scaling informal learning practices [5]. LA can, for instance, allow trainers and L & D professionals to assess the usefulness of learning materials, increase their understanding of the workplace learning environment in order to improve the learning environment and to intervene to advise and assist learners. Perhaps more importantly,  it can assist learners in monitoring and understanding their own activities and interactions and participation in individual and collaborative learning processes and help them in reflecting on their learning.

There have been a number of early attempts to utilise LA in the workplace. Maarten de Laat [7] has developed a system based on Social Network Analysis to show patterns of learning and the impact of informal learning in Communities of Practice for Continuing Professional Development for teachers.

There is a growing interest in the use of MOOCs for professional development and workplace learning. Most (if not all) of the major MOOC platforms have some form of Learning Analytics built in providing both feedback to MOOC designers and to learners about their progress. Given that MOOCs are relatively new and are still rapidly evolving, MOOC developers are keen to use LA as a means of improving MOOC programmes.  Research and development approaches into linking Learning Design with Learning Analytics for developing MOOCs undertaken by Conole [8] and Ferguson [9] amongst others have drawn attention to the importance of pedagogy for LA.

Similarly, there are a number of research and development projects around recommender systems and adaptive learning environments. LA is seen as having strong relations to recommender systems [10], adaptive learning environments and intelligent tutoring systems [11]), and the goals of these research areas. Apart from the idea of using LA for automated customisation and adaptation, feeding back LA results to learners and teachers to foster reflection on learning can support self-regulated learning [12]. In the workplace sphere LA could be used to support the reflective practice of both trainers and learners “taking into account aspects like sentiment, affect, or motivation in LA, for example by exploiting novel multimodal approaches may provide a deeper understanding of learning experiences and the possibility to provide educational interventions in emotionally supportive ways.” [13].

One potential barrier to the use of LA in the workplace is limited data. However, although obviously smaller data sets place limitations on statistical processes, MacNeill [14] stresses the importance of fast data, actionable data, relevant data and smart data, rather than big data. LA, she says, should start from research questions that arise from teaching practice, as opposed to the traditional approach of starting analytics based on already collected and available data. Gasevic, Dawson and Siemens [15]  also draw attention to the importance of information seeking being framed within “robust theoretical models of human behavior” [16]. In the context of workplace learning this implies a focus on individual and collective social practices and to informal learning and facilitation processes rather than formal education. The next section of this paper looks at social learning in Public Employment Services and how this can be linked to an approach to workplace LA.

2. EMPLOYID: ASSISTING IDENTITY TRANSFORMATION THROUGH SOCIAL LEARNING IN EUROPEAN EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

The European EmployID research project aims to support and facilitate the learning process of Public Employment Services (PES) practitioners in their professional identity transformation process. The aims of the project are born out of a recognition that to perform successfully in their job they need to acquire a set of new and transversal skills, develop additional competencies, as well as embed a professional culture of continuous improvement. However, it is unlikely that training programmes will be able to provide sufficient opportunities for all staff in public employment services, particularly in a period of rapid change in the nature and delivery of such services and in a period with intense pressure on public expenditures. Therefore, the EmployID project aims to promote, develop and support the efficient use of technologies to provide advanced coaching, reflection and networking services through social learning. The idea of social learning is that people learn through observing others behaviour, attitudes and outcomes of these behaviours, “Most human behaviour is learned observationally through modelling from observing others, one forms an idea of how new behaviours are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action” [17]. Facilitation is seen as playing a key role in structuring learning and identity transformation activities and to support networking in personal networks, teams and organisational networks, as well as cross-organisational dialogue.

Social Learning initiatives developed jointly between the EmployID project and PES organisations include the use of MOOCs, access to Labour Market information, the development of a platform to support the emergence of communities of practice and tools to support reflection in practice.

Alongside such a pedagogic approach to social learning based on practice the project is developing a strategy and tools based on Social Learning Analytics. Ferguson and Buckingham Shun [18] say that Social Learning Analytics (SLA) can be usefully thought of as a subset of learning analytics approaches. SLA focuses on how learners build knowledge together in their cultural and social settings. In the context of online social learning, it takes into account both formal and informal educational environments, including networks and communities. “As groups engage in joint activities, their success is related to a combination of individual knowledge and skills, environment, use of tools, and ability to work together. Understanding learning in these settings requires us to pay attention to group processes of knowledge construction – how sets of people learn together using tools in different settings. The focus must be not only on learners, but also on their tools and contexts.”

Viewing learning analytics from a social perspective highlights types of analytic that can be employed to make sense of learner activity in a social setting. They go on to introduce five categories of analytic whose foci are driven by the implications of the changes in which we are using social technology for learning [18]. These include social network analysis focusing on interpersonal relations in social platforms, discourse analytics predicated on the use of language as a tool for knowledge negotiation and construction, content analytics particularly looking at user-generated content and disposition analytics saying intrinsic motivation to learn is a defining feature of online social media, and lies at the heart of engaged learning, and innovation.

The approach to Social Learning Analytics links to the core aims of the EmployID project to support and facilitate the learning process of PES practitioners in their professional identity development by the efficient use of technologies to provide social learning including advanced coaching, reflection, networking and learning support services. The project focuses on technological developments that make facilitation services for professional identity transformation cost-effective and sustainable by empowering individuals and organisations to engage in transformative practices, using a variety of learning and facilitation processes.

3. LEARNING ANALYTICS AND EMPLOYID – WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO FIND OUT?

Clearly there are close links between the development of Learning Analytics and our approach to evaluation within EmployID. In order to design evaluation activities the project has developed a number of overarching research questions around professional development and identity transformations with Public Employment Services. One of these research questions is focused on LA: Which forms of workplace learning analytics can we apply in PES and how do they impact the learner? How can learning analytics contribute to evaluate learning interventions? Other focus on the learning environment and the use of tools for reflection, coaching and creativity as well as the role of the wider environment in facilitating professional identity transformation. A third focus is how practitioners manage better their own learning and gain the necessary skills (e.g. self-directed learning skills, career adaptability skills, transversal skills etc.) to support identity transformation processes as well as facilitating the learning of others linking individual, community and organizational learning.

These research questions also provide a high level framework for the development of Learning Analytics, embedded within the project activities and tools. And indeed much of the data collected for evaluation purposes also can inform Learning Analytics and vice versa. However, whilst the main aim of the evaluation work is measure the impact of the EmployID project and for providing useful formative feedback for development of the project’s tools and overarching blended learning approach, the Learning Analytics focus is understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs.

4. FROM A THEORETICAL APPROACH TO DEVELOPING TOOLS FOR LA IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

Whilst the more practical work is in an initial phase, linked to the roll out of tools and platforms to support learning, a number of tools are under development and will be tested in 2016. Since this work is placed in the particular working environment of public administration, the initial contextual exploration led to a series of design considerations for the suggested LA approaches presented below. The access to fast, actionable, relevant and smart data is most importantly regulated by strict data protection and privacy aspects, that are crucial and clearly play a critical role in any workplace LA. As mentioned above power relations and hierarchies come into play and the full transparency to be aspired with LA might either be hindered by existing structures or raise expectations that are not covered by existing organisations structures and process. If efficient learning at the workplace becomes transparent and visible through intelligent LA, what does this mean with regard to career development and promotion? Who has access to the data, how are they linked to existing appraisal systems or is it perceived as sufficient to use the analytics for individual reflection only? For the following LA tools a trade-off needs to be negotiated and their practicality in workplace setting can only be assessed when fully implemented. Clear rules about who has access to the insight gained from LA have to be defined. The current approach in EmployID is thus to focus on the individual learner as the main recipient of LA.   

4.1 Self-assessment questionnaire

The project has developed a self-assessment questionnaire as an instrument to collect data from EmployID interventions in different PES organisations to support reflection on personal development. It contains a core set of questions for cross-case evaluation and LA on a project level as well as intervention-specific questions that can be selected to fit the context. The self-assessment approach should provide evidence for the impact of EmployID interventions whilst addressing the EmployID research questions, e.g. the effectiveness of a learning environment in the specific workplace context. Questions are related to professional identity transformation, including individual, emotional, relational and practical development. For the individual learner the questionnaire aims to foster their self-reflection process. It supports them in observing their ‘distance travelled’ in key aspects of their professional identity development. Whilst using EmployID platforms and tools, participants will be invited to fill in the questionnaire upon registration and then at periodic intervals. Questions and ways of presenting the questionnaire questions are adapted to the respective tool or platform, such as social learning programmes, reflective community, or peer coaching.

The individual results and distance travelled over the different time points will be visualised and presented to individual participants in the form of development curves based on summary categories to stimulate self-reflection on learning. These development curves show the individual learners’ changes in their attitudes and behaviour related to learning and adaptation  in the job, the facilitation of colleagues and clients, as well as the personal development related to reflexivity, stress management and emotional awareness.

4.2 Learning Analytics and Reflective Communities

The EmployID project is launching a platform to support the development of a Reflective in the Slovenian PES in February, 2016. The platform is based on the WordPress Content Management System and the project has developed a number of plug ins to support social learning analytics and reflection analytics. The data from these plugins can serve as the basis for a dashboard for learners providing visualisations of different metrics

4.2.1 Network Maps

This plugin visualizes user interactions in social networks including individual contacts, activities, and topics. The data is visualised through a series of maps and is localised through different offices within the PES. The interface shows how interaction with other users has changed during the last 30 days. This way users can visually “see” how often they interact with others and possibly find other users with whom they wish to interact.

The view can be filtered by different job roles and is designed to help users find topics they may be interested in.

4.2.2 Karma Points

The Karma Points plugin allows users to give each other ‘Karma points’ and ‘reputation points’. It is based both on rankings of posts and of authors. Karma points are temporary and expire after a week but are also refreshed each week. This way users can only donate karma points to a few selected posts in each week. The user who receives a karma point gets the point added to her permanent reputation points.

4.2.3 Reflection Analytics

The Reflection Analytics plugin collects platform usage data and shows it in an actionable way to users. The purpose of this is to show people information in order to let them reflect about their behaviour in the platform and then possibly to give them enough information to show them how they could learn more effectively. The plugin will use a number of different charts, each wrapped in a widget in order to retain customizability.

One chart being considered would visualise the role of the user’s interaction in the current month in terms of how many posts she wrote, how many topics she commented on and how many topics she read compared to the average of the group.  This way, users can easily identify whether they are writing a similar number of topics as their colleagues. It shows change over time and provides suggestions for new activities. However, we also recognise that comparisons with group averages can be demotivating for some people.

4.3 Content Coding and Analysis

The analysis of comments and content shared within the EmployID tools can provide data addressing a number of the research questions outlined above.

A first trial of content coding used to analyse inputs into a pilot MOOC held in early 2015 using the FutureLearn platform resulted in rich insights about aspects of identity transformation and learning from and with others. The codes for this analysis were created inductively based on [19] and then analysed according to success factors for identity transformation. Given that identity transformation in PES organisations is a new field of research we expect new categories to evolve over time.

In addition to the inductive coding the EmployID project will apply deductive analysis to investigate the reflection in content of the Reflective Community Platform following a fixed coding scheme for reflection [20].

Similar to the coding approach applied for reflective actions we are currently working on a new coding scheme for learning facilitation in EmployID. Based on existing models of facilitation (e.g. [21]) and facilitation requirements identified within the PES organisations, a fixed scheme for coding will be developed and applied the first time for the analysis of content shared in the Reflective Community platform.

An important future aspect of content coding is going one step further and exploring innovative methodological approaches, trialing with a machine learning approach based on (semi-) automatic detection of reflection and facilitation in text. This semi-automatic content analysis is a prerequisite for reflecting analysis back to learners as part of learning analytics, as it allows the analysis of large amounts of shared content, in different languages and not only ex-post, but continually in real time.

4.4 Dynamic Social Network Analysis

Conceptual work being currently undertaken aims to bring together Social Network Analysis and Content Analysis in an evolving environment in order to analyze the changing nature and discontinuities in a knowledge development and usage over time. Such a perspective would not only enable a greater understanding of knowledge development and maturing within communities of practice and other collaborative learning teams, but would allow further development and improvements to the (online) working and learning environment.

The methodology is based on various Machine Learning approaches including content analysis, classification and clustering [22], and statistical modelling of graphs and networks with a main focus on sequential and temporal non-stationary environments [23].

To illustrate changes of nature and discontinuities at the level of social network connectivity and content of communications in a knowledge maturing process “based on the assumption that learning is an inherently social and collaborative activity in which individual learning processes are interdependent and dynamically interlinked with each other: the output of one learning process is input to the next. If we have a look at this phenomenon from a distance, we can observe a knowledge flow across different interlinked individual learning processes. Knowledge becomes less contextualized, more explicitly linked, easier to communicate, in short: it matures.” [24]

5. NEXT STEPS

In this paper we have examined current approaches to Learning Analytics and have considered some of the issues in developing approaches to LA for workplace learning, notably that learning interactions at the workplace are to a large extent informal and practice based and not embedded into a specific and measurable pedagogical scenario. Despite that, we foresee considerable benefits through developing Workplace Learning Analytics in terms of better awareness and tracing of learning, sharing experiences, and scaling informal learning practices.

We have outlined a pedagogic approach to learning in European Public Employment Services based on social learning and have outlined a parallel approach to LA based on Social Learning Analytics. We have described a number of different tools for workplace Learning Analytics aiming at providing data to assist answering a series of research questions developed through the EmployID project. At the same time as providing research data, these tools have been developed to provide feedback to participants on their workplace learning.

The tools are at various stages of development. In the next phase of development, during 2016, we will implement and evaluate the use of these tools, whilst continuing to develop our conceptual approach to Workplace Learning Analytics.

One essential part of this conceptual approach is that supporting learning of individuals with learning analytics is not just as designers of learning solutions how to present dashboards, visualizations and other forms of data representation. The biggest challenge of workplace learning analytics (but also learning analytics in general) is to support learners in making sense of the data analysis:

  1. What does an indicator or a visualization tell about how to improve learning?
  2. What are the limitations of such indicators?
  3. How can we move more towards evidence-based interventions

And this is not just a individual task; it requires collaborative reflection and learning processes. The knowledge of how to use learning analytics results for improving learning also needs to evolve through a knowledge maturing process. This corresponds to Argyris & Schön’s double loop learning [25]. Otherwise, if learning analytics is perceived as a top-down approach pushed towards the learner, it will suffer from the same problems as performance management. These pre-defined indicators (through their selection, computation, and visualization) implement a certain preconception which is not evaluated on a continuous basis by those involved in the process. Misinterpretations and a misled confidence in numbers can disempower learners and lead to an overall rejection of analytics-driven approaches.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

EmployID – “Scalable & cost-effective facilitation of professional identity transformation in public employment services” – is a research project supported by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Program (project no. 619619).

REFERENCES

[1] SoLAR(2011).Open Learning Analytics: An Integrated & Modularized Platform. WhitePaper.Society for Learning Analytics Research. Retrieved from http://solaresearch.org/OpenLearningAnalytics.pdf

[2] Johnson, L. Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. (2014). NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium

[3] Duval E. (2012) Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining, Erik Duval’s Weblog, 30 January 2012,  https://erikduval.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/learning-analytics-and-educational-data-mining/

[4] Ferguson, R. (2012) Learning analytics: drivers, developments and challenges. In: International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 2012, pp. 304-317.

[5] Ley T. Lindstaedt S., Klamma R. and Wild S. (2015) Learning Analytics for Workplace and Professional Learning, http://learning-layers.eu/laforwork/

[6] Pardo A. and Siemens G. (2014) Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics in British Journal of Educational Technology Volume 45, Issue 3, pages 438–450, May 2014

[7] de Laat M. & Schreurs (2013) Visualizing Informal Professional Development Networks: Building a Case for Learning Analytics in the Workplace, In American Bahavioral Scientist http://abs.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/03/11/0002764213479364.abstract

[8] Conole G. (2014) The implciations of open practice, presentation, Slideshare, http://www.slideshare.net/GrainneConole/conole-hea-seminar

[9] Ferguson (2015) Learning Design and Learning Analytics, Presentation, Slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/R3beccaF/learning-design-and-learning-analytics-50180031

[10] Adomavicius, G. and Tuzhilin, A. (2005) Toward the Next Generation of Recommender Systems: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art and Possible Extensions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17, 734-749. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2005.99

[11] Brusilovsky, P. and Peylo, C. (2003) Adaptive and intelligent Web-based educational systems. In P. Brusilovsky and C. Peylo (eds.), International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 13 (2-4), Special Issue on Adaptive and Intelligent Web-based Educational Systems, 159-172.

[12] Zimmerman B. J, (2002) Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview, in Theory into Practice, Volume: 41 Issue: 2 Pages: 64-70

[13] Bahreini K, Nadolski & Westera W. (2014) Towards multimodal emotion recognition in e-learning environments, Interactive Learning environments, Routledge, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10494820.2014.908927

[14] MacNeill, S. (2015) The sound of learning analytics, presentation, Slideshare, http://www.slideshare.net/sheilamac/the-sound-of-learning-analytics

[15] Gašević, D., Dawson, S., Siemens, G. (2015) Let’s not forget: Learning Analytics are about learning. TechTrends

[16] Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55 (3), pp 249-70

[17] Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

[18] Buckingham Shum, S., & Ferguson, R. (2012). Social Learning Analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (3), 3–26

[19] Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2). Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0002204

[20] Prilla M, Nolte A, Blunk O, et al (2015) Analyzing Collaborative Reflection Support: A Content Analysis Approach. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW 2015).   

[21] Hyland, N., Grant, J. M., Craig, A. C., Hudon, M., & Nethery, C. (2012). Exploring Facilitation Stages and Facilitator Actions in an Online/Blended Community of Practice of Elementary Teachers: Reflections on Practice (ROP) Anne Rodrigue Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario. Copyright© 2012 Shirley Van Nuland and Jim Greenlaw, 71.   

[22] Yeung, K. Y. and Ruzzo W.L. (2000). An empirical study on principal component analysis for clustering gene expression data. Technical report, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington.http://bio.cs.washington.edu/supplements/kayee/pca.pdf

[23] Mc Culloh, I. and Carley, K. M. (2008). Social Network Change Detection. Institute for Software Research. School of Computer Science. Carnegie Mellon University. Pittsburgh, PA 15213. CMU-CS-08116.

http://www.casos.cs.cmu.edu/publications/papers/CMU-CS-08-116.pdf

[24] R. Maier, A. Schmidt. Characterizing Knowledge Maturing: A Conceptual Process Model for Integrating E-Learning and Knowledge Management In: Gronau, Norbert (eds.): 4th Conference Professional Knowledge Management – Experiences and Visions (WM ’07), Potsdam, GITO, 2007, pp. 325-334.

http://knowledge-maturing.com/concept/knowledge-maturing-phase-model

[25] Argyris, C./ Schön, D. (1978): Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading.

Confer – Three steps to consensus

February 9th, 2016 by Graham Attwell

I have written a number of post about the Learning Toolbox mobile app being developed through the Learning Layers project and of course Pekka Kamareinen has documented the development of the project in some detail on this site.

But Learning Toolbox is just one of a number of applications developed by the project and being rolled out for evaluation this spring. One which in my view holds some promise is Confer. Confer is a collaborative workflow tool, being launched under the banner of  “Confer – Three steps to consensus”. Confer provides online collaboration spaces for working groups that can be used both synchronously as well as asynchronously and supports groups in working collaboratively on a task or project; helping to keep the work focused and flowing, recording the discussions and reasoning along the way and producing a final summary output that can become the first draft of a report or recommendations.

Confer is based on research work in computer supported work and learning – for instance by Hämäläinen & Häkkinen, who say “the production of descriptive and surface-level knowledge, the difficulty in creating explanation-seeking questions, the reaching of mutual understanding among participants, and uneven participation are some of the main challenges that exist in computer-supported collaborative learning settings.”

Confer supports and scaffolds groups in working through a collaborative meaning making and decision process.

It first asks “What do we need?” by clearly describing the problem at hand including what, where, when and for whom? The second stage is to explore “What do we know?” through a brainstorming process identifying issues and collecting together relevant knowledge, resources, ideas and experience.

The third stage is decision making – “What should we do?” –  developing and describing options/solutions that will address the problem and identified issues. The end point is to agree on a recommendation.Whilst it may all sound simple in real life these processes are challenging especially with distributed groups who may only meet together face to face at limited intervals. Our research suggests that in reality one person is left alone to write up the results, thus both diminishing group expertise and often failing to develop shared meanings.

The pilot implementations of Confer start next week. But if you would be interested in trialling Confer please email me. You can find out more by visiting the Confer Zone.

LL Consortium meeting in Innsbruck – Part Three: Presenting exploitation initiatives

February 8th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its consortium meeting in Innsbruck.  In the previous posts I discussed firstly the ‘warm-up’ event with  Austrian clusters/ networks and secondly our project meeting and its general results. In this post I will discuss the results of the exploitation sessions (presentations and bilateral talks).

1. The setup of the exploitation sessions

As I had indicated in the previous post, we had firstly a general introduction to the exploitation model that served as a reference model. We also agreed to work towards a jointly agreed ‘exploitation manifesto’ that helps us to settle the IPR issues. With this preparation the partners were invited to present their exploitation plans and/or intentions. A major part of the session was dedicated to the presentations of partners (or groups of partners), altogether 15. Then, on the next day we had a special session for bilateral or trilateral ‘matchmaking talks’ (on the basis of expressions of interests indicated during the first session).

2. Contributions of the Construction sector partners

2a) The presentation of ITB/Pont (Bremen) & Bau-ABC teams highlighted firstly some key questions for the LL project and then a further challenge for follow-up activities. It also gave an overview on tools and services developed so far. Based on this background the presentation drew then attention to two kinds of emerging R&D projects:

  • The DigiProB project as a spin-off from LL in the context of Continuing Vocational Training (CVT). The technical challenge is to reuse/repurpose an integrative toolset to support Personal Learning Environments of CVT participants. The social challenge is to support individual learners (who are learning alongside work) with the aim to demonstrate with work-related projects that they have acquired higher (managerial) qualifications in construction sector.
  • The “Bauen 4.0″ has been selected as a recognised cluster initiative and is invited to submit specific project proposals. One of the initiatives discussed in the cluster meetings is a project for incorporating know-how on Building Information Modelling (BIM) to the CVT schemes for advanced construction craftsmen in carpentry and woodwork (Holzbau). Here we see a chance to make use of LL tools.

Alongside these examples we presented two cases in which the integrative toolset Learning Toolbox can be brought into collaboration and exchanges with third party software/services (who were affiliated with construction sector stakeholders).

  • Pontydysgu had been contacted by Construction Excellence Wales, Construction Industry Training Board and a consortium of four FE colleges with interests in the Learning Toolbox. In particular there was an interest to link the LTB with the e-learning environment that had been developed by the FE colleges for construction sector apprentices.
  • Bau-ABC had been contacted by a new company that continues the prior work of a company that had been producing handbooks for well-builders. The new company focuses on developing mobile apps and digital contents. This company will launch its products during February 2016 and is already making contacts with key players in domain-specific education and training.

 2b) The presentation of Bau-ABC: The Bau-ABC team had prepared a separate presentation in which they brought forward their interests in further development and promotion of LTB. In this respect the presentation summarised the immediate benefits for individual users (urgencies for developers), the benefits for Bau-ABC as training provider and multiplier and the prospects for cooperation between Bau-ABC and the developers of LTB and related LL tools and services. In this way Bau-ABC outlined the working perspectives with which it positions itself on the “Exploitation map” to be drawn later.

3. The bilateral talks

After the presentation session our requests for bilateral talks with other presenters (with eventual topics to be discussed) were collected. Then a similar ‘world café’ session was organised as in the warm-up event. We had four tables for rotation but this time no fixed ‘table hosts’. Instead, we were rotating with uneven opportunities for the talks. In some sessions we participated as wider groups, in some sessions as individuals. At some point we were interrupted by fire alarm and the whole building was evacuated to an outdoor meeting point. (The fire was put out promptly, the fire brigade just needed to check the situation and that the smoke was properly ventilated. Yet, this all took that much time that we couldn’t properly complete the session.)

At this point it is not necessary to report on all bilateral talks in which I/we were involved. Some of them focused on very specific questions and very particular interests. Some were talks on emerging ideas for future projects that need further conversations. In addition – due to the interruption – we didn’t have a chance for some talks that we had on our list. Therefore, it have prepared a list of topics for further talks to be continued at a later date:

  • ‘Cross-sectoral’ talks on the uses of LTB (and other LL tools) taking into account prior work with nurse education and nurse education networks in Germany and England.
  • ‘Cross-institutional’ talks on the use of LTB and other LL tools/services to support problem-, project- and practice-based learning in vocational education and training (VET) and/or Vocational Higher Education (notably in Germany, Estonia and Austria).
  • ‘Cross-curricular’ talks on the use of LTB and other LL tools in the activities of vocational teacher education/ training the trainers (notably in Germany and in Austria, e.g. the partners of the pre-event).
  • ‘Sustainability’ talks with LTB developers on their new organisational initiative and the role of R&D initiatives.
  • ‘Scalability’ talks on the experience with the ‘Theme Room’ training in Bau-ABC to adapt the approach for multiplier activities. (These talks will be based  on the involvement of the initial contributors and other interested parties).

I think this is enough of these sessions. Due to our tight schedules we couldn’t be present in the final sessions of the meeting. But we are sure that there results will be discussed in several follow-up meetings. Given, that we are entering an intensive period of fieldwork, we need to keep the exploitation issues on our agendas.

More blogs to come …

 

LL Consortium meeting in Innsbruck – Part Two: Working forward in the meeting

February 7th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its consortium meeting in Innsbruck.  In the previous post I discussed the ‘warm-up’ event that the hosts organised with representatives of Austrian clusters and networks. In this post I discuss the work in the meeting and the general results. In the final post I will discuss the  results of exploitation sessions (from the perspective of construction pilot).

In a similar way as I did when reporting on the preparation, I will try to capture the main thematic blocks and the essentials of the conversations and conclusions:

1) Overview of the current phase of the project – working perspective: In his opening presentation the scientific coordinator Tobias Ley (TLU) restated the approach to present the results of the final year in one single package – with the emphasis to support the exploitation activities. This approach was reconfirmed by the partners.

2) Further development of the DevOps-Use model: Ralf Klamma (RWTH) presented an updated picture on the DevOps-Use model and how it has been introduced into the LL project. As the newest development he reported on the Community Application Editor (CAE) as a further support for dialogue between users and developers. Here again, the plan to produce a conceptually based overview on design-based research and design patterns in the LL project was restated.

3) Production of ‘training materials’ and dissemination materials: Pablo Franzolini (CIMNE) gave a brief presentation on this topic. He drew attention to the work that had already started with the healthcare pilot and the tools/combinations of tools that are used. Currently, this work has resulted in a relatively wide set of “Frequently Asked Questions” videos with short duration. Whilst this work was appreciated, we concluded that there is a need to coordinate the efforts to produce such materials and more content-related promotion videos. A working group was set up to prepare a proposal for producing “Layers OER” materials (and to address the orientation to OER in the follow-up phase).

4) Documentation of project achievements with “scorecards”: TLU had prepared a short workshop session to test the draft ‘scorecards’ by filling them with exemplary project activities. In the first phase we described the situation before the LL project, the intervention of the LL project and (inasmuch as it was possible) the situation after the intervention. In the second phase we used coloured cards to specify different aspects of the impact. This exercise helped us to get a common understanding on the kinds of activities to be reported and on the kind of impact to be stated. (TLU will follow this up.)

 5) Deployment of LTB and related evaluation measures: In a set of group sessions we had the chance to discuss the technical development of LTB and plan the deployment and evaluation measures.

5a) Technical development of LTB: The developers had presented a working document that highlighted the following points: a) addressing the stacks to groups of users, b) creating a  stack file system (SFS), c) content creation and sharing with the help of SFS, d) enabling bottom-up communication via chat channel. The users reported on improvements that are needed in the navigation and in the instructions. In this conversation we reached an agree of the necessary measures to be taken by the end of February.

5b) Deployment and evaluation measures: Based on these conclusions we could reach agreements on the introduction of LTB for training purposes and on a synchronised start of evaluation measures. We identified primary pilot groups from the trades of carpenters and well-builders and agreed on a timeline for kick-off workshop (with tool introduction and focus group), interim workshop and concluding workshop. We also agreed on the accompanying communication and feedback. (The detailed results were summarised by the powerpoints of the UIBK colleagues).

6) The exploitation measures: During the first afternoon we had a general introduction to the exploitation model (see my earlier blog on the preparation of this meeting). We also got an explanation, what role a jointly prepared and agreed ‘exploitation manifesto’ can play as a working agreement. We also were briefed of the IPR issues to be clarified. With this preparation the partners were invited to present their exploitation plans and/or intentions. During these presentations we were asked to list our wishes to have bilateral talks (persons, topics). On the second day a special time slot was reserved for these talks. (During this session there was a fire alarm and all people were evacuated outside. As we were well prepared, we could continue our bilateral talks there as well.)

I stop my reporting on the meeting here because I (and my colleagues from ITB and Bau-ABC) couldn’t attend on the last day. Thus, I have missed the wrap-up of the exploitation sessions and the discussion on the exploitation manifesto. We will have an opportunity to catch up very soon. Therefore, in the final post of this series I will focus on the exploitation plans/initiatives of the construction sector partners.

More blogs to come …

 

 

 

LL Consortium meeting in Innsbruck – Part One: Event with Austrian clusters

February 7th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its consortium meeting in Innsbruck. Before the project meeting the hosts from UIBK had arranged a special event to present LL tools for guests from Austrian clusters and networks. In this first post I will focus on this ‘warm-up’ event. In the subsequent posts I will discuss the general results of the meeting and the specific results of exploitation sessions (from the perspective of construction pilot).

The event and the setup

As indicated above, the hosts from UIBK had prepared a stakeholder event to present the LL toolsets and services (work in progress). The participants represented Standortagentur Tirol (a Tyrolean cluster organisation, Ausbilderforum Tirol (a Tyrolean forum of trainers in vocational education and training (VET)) and vocational teacher education programs from Pädagogische Hochschule Tirol and University of Innsbruck (Wirtschaftspädagogik). The meeting room was arranged as four round tables and the event was organised as a ‘world café’. Firstly Ronald Maier gave a brief introduction into the LL project and into the tools/toolsets to be presented. In each table the participants got a 10-15 minutes presentation to one LL tool/toolset.  Then the groups switched clockwise and got another presentation. In this way the following tools/toolsets were presented: “Bits and Pieces” (by Sebastian Dennerlein), “Learning Toolbox” (by Gilbert Peffer), “Living Documents” (by Christina Sarigianni) and “AchSo!” (by Markus Manhart).

The Learning Toolbox table

For me and the colleagues from Bau-ABC (Melanie Campbell and Kerstin Engraf) it was a natural choice to join Gilbert in presenting the Learning Toolbox (LTB). In these presentations we could give an overview of the LTB as a mobile framework and as an integrative toolset. We were happy to present fresh insights into the mobile app, into the tilestore and into the contexts of deployment in Bau-ABC. From the participants we got questions regarding the use of LTB in training and in work processes as well as use of LTB in a personal learning environment.We were happy to discuss the development so far and the potentials that we see in the LTB (but made the point that phase of deployment is yet to come). Our counterparts were happy with this information and expressed their interest to learn more in the coming times. At the same time Ludger Deitmer completed the whole round of topic tables and got an update on all tools/toolsets as they stand now.

The event did not last too long (approximately 90 minutes) and the time was effectively used in the groups. As was deeply engaged in talks in our table, I only have a vague idea on the discussions in parallel tables. Yet, my impression is that we altogether could give informative and interesting presentations. The participants were clearly interested and congratulated the project for a good event. We could happily recommend the organisers of the next consortium meeting to prepare a similar ‘warm-up’ event as well.

More blogs to come …

Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 4: Working with the LL exploitation model

January 22nd, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

In my three previous blogs I wrote a series of reports on the ‘start of the year 2016′ meetings in with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. In the first post I reported on the meetings of the ‘local’ LL teams of ITB, Pont, and Bau-ABC (in Bremen and Rostrup). In the third post summarised a video conference that discussed a set of themes for our next consortium meeting in Innsbruck (2.2.-5.2.2016). In this fourth post I report on the video conference of the ITB team with our LL colleagues Gilbert Peffer and Raymond Elferink on the Exploitation model for the LL project.

In my previous blog I had already given the following characterisation of the work of Gilbert and Raymond with this model:

“… Gilbert Peffer and Raymond Elferink have organised bilateral or trilateral conversations with LL partners to create a comprehensive model of exploitation activities.  The aim is to compress the pictures given by different exploitation stories and to create more transparency between different initiatives. In this way different partners can find their roles and possibilities in a joint group picture. And with the help of this model the partners can trace the changes from current project partnership to future partnerships (in follow-up projects) or future business relations (in commercial exploitation activities).”

Below I have copied the current draft of the Exploitation model:

Exploitation Model.v2.2

In our discussion in the video conference and after it we started a process of sensemaking, how to fit our exploitation initiatives into this landscape and how to grasp the zones of possible activities that we had not yet thought of. Here I try to interpret different areas of the exploitation model from this perspective:

a) The (peripheral) support area

Two fields in the model can be characterised as a (peripheral) support area for emerging follow-up activities with different intensity of support measures:

a1) “The Learning Layers Association” can be seen as a light-weight form to continue the cooperation across project consortium as an interest group that promotes the tools and ideas of the LL project in new contexts. For this purpose the interest group cam organise joint search conferences or workshops with new potential application partners. (Here the contacts of the LL partners at OEB with the UNHCR might serve as a clue for looking partners for such search conferences.)

a2) “The Learning Layers Cooperative” can be seen as a more committed service alliance – grouping of LL partners that are ready to support new initiatives with technical advice and facilitation in project creation. (Such cooperation has already been practiced between different partners to give shape for spin-off projects.)

b) The Research & Development area

The importance of this area is obvious, since we need to continue with R&D projects to develop the products and services of the LL project to more mature stage. Here we need to have a more differentiated look at the R&D agendas to pursue. Without going into details of specific initiatives it is worth taking into consideration the following type of R&D activities:

b1) Comprehensive follow-up projects (Horizon 2020 etc) that focus on further development of integrative toolsets for/with specific application partners – engaging different kinds of expertise from the LL project but linking it to new contexts.

b2) Specific R&D projects (e.g. within cluster initiatives) that link the further development of LL tools and similar toolsets to technical innovation programs.

Here the model emphasises that the R&D area needs to involve the application partners and the commercial partners as well (in order to take the products and services further).

c) The commercial exploitation area

We have already become aware of the fact that software development in research context may have different working patterns/perspectives than software development as customer service. This is reflected in the ‘commercial exploitation area’ by differentiating between three kinds of organisational entities:

c1) New enterprises (social/commercial) that dedicate themselves on further development of LL tools, software and services as their core business.

c2) Existing partners (private/public organisations) that continue working on the basis of their business models or institutional frameworks.

Here the model suggests that if new entreprises emerge, preferential ‘giving back’ partnership relations  should be agreed in the founding processes. (Also, new enterprises need advisory boards.)

c3) Third party organisations (SMEs, training providers, service providers, cluster organisations) need to be involved with appropriate partnership agreements.

Altogether, the model was shaped with an idea of an “Entrepreneurial symbiosis’. I am looking forward to our next phase of working with this model in our project consortium meeting in Innsbruck.

More blogs to come …

Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 3: Preparation of the consortium meeting in Innsbruck

January 20th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

In my two previous blogs I started a series of reports on the ‘start of the year 2016′ meetings in with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. In the first post I reported on the meeting of the LL teams of ITB and Pont, and in the second post on our working meeting in Bau-ABC. In this third post I give an account on the video conference in which the Work Package Leaders of the LL project discussed the preparation of our next consortium meeting in Innsbruck (2.2.-5.2.2016).

Below I try follow the reconstruct the discussion based on the recording of the meeting (in which I could not participate). I try to put an emphasis on the thematic blocks (and on the specific accents) that were set for the preparation of future activities. I do not try to give a comprehensive report but rather limit myself to the points that we should take up in the construction pilot team.

1) The integrated deliverable of the LL project of the Year 4

The idea of a single integrated deliverable was already discussed at the end of the Y3 Review meeting and it was agreed with great enthusiasm in the consortium. For our further work it is of importance that this deliverable is interpreted as the “Layers package of exploitables” (a comprehensive package of useful objects/resources to support exploitation of results). Now this idea is taking shape in different thematic blocks (see below).

2) Documentation of the impact of project with “Layers scorecards”

Tobias Ley had already in December presented a practical solution for documenting impact with the help of ‘scorecards’ that can be used in different field activities. The basic card has three main fields for describing a) the situation before the LL project, b) the contribution of the LL project and c) the situation after the project. In addition, the card has smaller fields for specifying different aspects of the impact. During the final year the project can collect booklets of scorecards within different activities and highlight ‘evidence of the month’. (See https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vXuqBBjr9PX1RxUkpmZUt5Zkk/view .) This tool will be developed further in the Innsbruck meeting.

3) Collection of ‘training materials’ to support the roll-out of LL tools

Pablo Franzolini and Kai Pata presented the idea, how to include the component of ‘training materials’ into the deliverables. Already during the Y3 Pablo has supported the healthcare pilot team in preparing video material for webinars (with special emphasis on filming from different angles and making the presentations more lively). Whilst the use of webinars and videos have so far been rather tool-centered, the idea is now to shift the emphasis from single tools to combined use of tools in order to meet context-specific needs. (In this respect the demonstrations in the Y3 Review meeting were rehearsals for such materials.) As was mentioned in the discussion, we need to consider, when and how we can produce such material for different pilot sectors and spin-off initiatives.

4) Bringing together different evaluation agendas

The discussion on the evaluation activities – led by Ronald Maier and Stefan Thalmann – was inspired by the key question: “How to document changes  in the patterns of learning in the context of work in the pilot sectors (including the role of web tools/apps and mobile technologies?” It became evident that the more conceptual and context-oriented inquiries need to be supported by technical data collection (whenever it is possible) and these aspects need to linked to each other. In a similar way positive and negative findings regarding changes vs. obstacles to changes need to be discussed from the perspective of promoting innovations and marketing products and services.

5) Further discussion on the Dev-Ops model, Design patterns and Design-based research

One of the recommendations of the Y3 Review meeting was to enrich the Dev-Ops model with more elements of user engagement (that were presented in the sectoral reports). As a partial response to this, the meeting discussed the plan to prepare a comprehensive presentation on the Dev-Ops model, on Design patterns and on the LL approach(es) to Design-based research. It was agreed that the Confer Tool should be used to support this work. This work will be led by Ralf Klamma and John Cook.

6) Integrative group picture of parallel (mutually coordinated) exploitation initiatives

Already from the beginning of the year Gilbert Peffer and Raymond Elferink have organised bilateral or trilateral conversations with LL partners to create a comprehensive model of exploitation activities.  The aim is to compress the pictures given by different exploitation stories and to create more transparency between different initiatives. In this way different partners can find their roles and possibilities in a joint group picture. And with the help of this model the partners can trace the changes from current project partnership to future partnerships (in follow-up projects) or future business relations (in commercial exploitation activities). Alongside this work the clarification of IPR issues will be continued as a sub-theme of defining these partnership or business relations.

I think this as much as I can report on this meeting. At the moment we (the ITB-team) are preparing ourselves for the bilateral/trilateral exploitation talks with Gilbert (and Raymond). We are looking forward to this useful milestone in the set of the ‘start-of-the-year meetings’.

More blogs to come …

Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 2: Catching up with the fieldwork in Bau-ABC

January 20th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

In my previous blog I started a series of reports on the ‘start of the year 2016′ meetings in with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. The first post reported on the first meeting of the local LL teams of ITB and Pont in Bremen. This second post reports on our first working visit to Bau-ABC to discuss the current tasks in our fieldwork. From ITB Ludger Deitmer and I participated, from Bau-ABC Melanie Campbell and Kerstin Engraf. (A more detailed report on this meeting is available (in German) in the Learning Layers Google Drive document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lgL4hCjkaRZnrY17E0swQcvxWqR7XvrkmaK2fnUhh_s.)

Firstly we took up some issues that were already discussed in the ITB-Pont meeting, in particular the situation in the development of Learning Toolbox and the timeline for pilot testing and evaluation. Our conclusion was that it is crucial to get the interactive communication channel and the group functionality (in addition to some other improvements) for the pilot version to be tested from March on. The active period for pilot testing in Bau-ABC will be from March to the end of May. The optimal period for evaluation measures will be the end of May and beginning of June. This year the summer holiday will start in the middle of June and and by 24th of July.

Secondly we noted the situation with the new projects and in the preparation of new proposals. Considering the new project on continuing vocational training (CVT) we discussed the need of some bridging measures already in the context of the ongoing LL project (see the next point on User Survey). Concerning the cluster-initiative “Bauen 4.0″ we noted that colleagues from Bau-ABC cannot attend in the first meeting (on the coming Friday) but ITB will be represented and discuss some joint project ideas that were agreed earlier. We also agreed to cooperate with the preparation of a proposal for Horizon 2020, Topic “Technologies for Learning and Skills”. As a specific possibility for Bau-ABC we discussed the funding program of the German Ministry of Education (BMBF) to support digitisation of intermediate training centres. We agreed to get back to this once Bau-ABC has internally agreed on its priorities (in the light of two alternative funding priorities).

Thirdly, we discussed the continuation of the User Survey (on mobile technologies and web apps/tools as support for learning). In this context the Bau-ABC colleagues emphasised the urgency to collect data from the participants of the continuing vocational training (CVT) schemes that are present in Bau-ABC during the January and February months. We checked the questionnaire that had been developed last year and agreed to use it (with one minor amendment). We also agreed that it is useful to start again a User Survey with apprentices when they come in March.

Fourthly, we discussed the continuation of the training campaign based on “Theme Rooms”. In general, this had been viewed positively, but continuity would have been needed to sustain the learning gains. However, due to the heavy workload provided by the CVT schemes, it was not possible to start immediately in January. Therefore, we concluded that we should also carry out a mini-survey on the use of digital media and web tools/apps among Bau-ABC trainers (Lehrwerkmeister). Based on the results we could then see the need for some ‘refreshing the basic skills’ sessions. These should take place in February before starting a new full cycle of Theme Rooms in March. When preparing the next cycle of Theme Rooms we should also introduce Learning Toolbox (LTB) to the Bau-ABC trainers who are engaged as tutors of the Theme Rooms.

In addition we discussed an interesting new initiative to develop mobile apps and web resources for construction sector – in particular for the well-builders (Brunnenbauer). This topic merits a blog of its own a little later (once the start-of-the-year meetings have been reported). Finally, we discussed shortly our preparation for the LL project consortium meeting. On this topic we got new information from the video conference of the  Work Package Leaders of the LL project (that took place when we were having our meeting).

I guess this is enough on this meeting. The next challenge is to summarise the results of the WP Leaders’ video conference (and to draw conclusions for the construction pilot).

More blogs to come …

 

Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 1: Catching up with ITB/Pont team

January 20th, 2016 by Pekka Kamarainen

This year I had a longer winter break, so I have started my working year with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project in the middle of January. As a consequence, my first working days have been filled with catch-up meetings in the local and regional contexts and as video-conferences at the level of our European project. I try to sum up the results, challenges and impressions with a series of blogs. In the first one I give a brief report on the first meeting of our local LL team involving colleagues from ITB and Pontydysgu. (A more detailed report is available in the Learning Layers Google Drive document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lgL4hCjkaRZnrY17E0swQcvxWqR7XvrkmaK2fnUhh_s.)

In our first joint meeting of this year we started with a situation assessment on the piloting with the Learning Toolbox (LTB). My colleagues had taken some time to test the latest version and discovered several points that needed improvement. They had reported them with Trello cards and with an e-mail to the LTB developers – which were well received as precise feedback that is being taken up. On the whole, we are happy that both Android and iOS versions are available. Yet, the fundamental challenge is to introduce interactive communication channels and group functionality. These are the key requirements of the users in training centres and construction companies. Since our main application partner Bau-ABC is now hosting short-term continuing vocational training (CVT) schemes in January and February, there is some time before the apprentices will return, Yet, we (the developers and we as the facilitators) need to get ready to start active piloting in March. We were happy to note that we have a German version of LTB Manual (thanks to Jaanika Hirv from TLU) and an English translation (thanks to Martina Lübbing from Pont). Yet, we need to do more work with training to support the roll-out. (For this purpose we had scheduled a working meeting with Bau-ABC for the next day, see my next blog).

Our second major point was the situation assessment, where we stand with the acquisition of follow-up projects to Learning Layers. Here, several things had happened by the end of the year and were in process in the beginning of the year. Firstly, the pending final assessment on the Learning Layers follow-up project in CVT (support for work-related training and learning of general construction site managers – Geprüfte Polier) is being prepared. Also, the estimated start time has been announced (provided that the assessment is positive). Secondly, the recently approved cluster initiative “Bauen 4.0″ (Construction 4.0) has been approved and the consortium (involving among others Bau-ABC and ITB) has been invited to submit a set of mutually linked project proposals that focus on digital transformation in construction sector (including consequences for training). Thirdly, we have started the preparation of a project proposal for Horizon 2020, Topic “Technologies for Learning and Skills” (taking into account the work of the ITB-project Kompetenzwerkst@tt and of Learning Layers). In addition to this, we (ITB) have been invited as partners to some other proposals that may have a role in the follow-up of the LL project.

In addition to this we discussed about participation in forthcoming conferences and (related) publication plans. Both of these topics will be taken up more systematically in our next meeting.

I think this is enough of our first meeting. On the next day we had a working meeting with Bau-ABC.

More blogs to come …

 

  • Search Pontydysgu.org

    Sounds of the Bazaar LIVE from the OEB 2015

    We will broadcast from Berlin on the 3rd and the 4th of December. Both times it will start at 11.00 CET and will go on for about 45 minutes.

    Go here to listen to the radio stream: SoB Online EDUCA 2015 LIVE Radio.

    Or go to our new stream webpage: Sounds of the Bazaar Radio Stream Page

    News Bites

    Teachers and overtime

    According to the TES teachers in the UK “are more likely to work unpaid overtime than staff in any other industry, with some working almost 13 extra hours per week, according to research.

    A study of official figures from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) found that 61.4 per cent of primary school teachers worked unpaid overtime in 2014, equating to 12.9 additional hours a week.

    Among secondary teachers, 57.5 per cent worked unpaid overtime, with an average of 12.5 extra hours.

    Across all education staff, including teachers, teaching assistants, playground staff, cleaners and caretakers, 37.6 per cent worked unpaid overtime – a figure higher than that for any other sector.”


    The future of English Further Education

    The UK Parliament Public Accounts Committee has warned  the declining financial health of many FE colleges has “potentially serious consequences for learners and local economies”.

    It finds funding and oversight bodies have been slow to address emerging financial and educational risks, with current oversight arrangements leading to confusion over who should intervene and when.

    The Report says the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills and the Skills Funding Agency “are not doing enough to help colleges address risks at an early stage”.


    Skills in Europe

    Cedefop is launching a new SKILLS PANORAMA website, online on 1 December at 11.00 (CET).

    Skills Panorama, they say,  turns labour market data and information into useful, accurate and timely intelligence that helps policy-makers decide on skills and jobs in Europe.

    The new website will provide with a more comprehensive and user-friendly central access point for information and intelligence on skill needs in occupations and sectors across Europe. You can register for the launch at Register now at http://skillspanorama.cedefop.europa.eu/launch/.


    Talking about ‘European’ MOOCs

    The European EMMA project is launching a  webinar series. The first is on Tuesday 17 November 2015 from 14:00 – 15:00 CET.

    They say: “In this first webinar we will explore new trends in European MOOCs. Rosanna de Rosa, from UNINA, will present the philosophy and challenges behind the EMMA EU project and MOOC platform developed with the idea of accommodating diversity through multilingualism. Darco Jansen, from EADTU (European Association of Distance Teaching Universities), will talk about Europe’s response to MOOC opportunities. His presentation will highlight the main difference with the U.S. and discuss the consequences for didactical and pedagogical approaches regarding the different contexts.


    Other Pontydysgu Spaces

    • Pontydysgu on the Web

      pbwiki
      Our Wikispace for teaching and learning
      Sounds of the Bazaar Radio LIVE
      Join our Sounds of the Bazaar Facebook goup. Just click on the logo above.

      We will be at Online Educa Berlin 2015. See the info above. The stream URL to play in your application is Stream URL or go to our new stream webpage here SoB Stream Page.

  • Twitter

  • Sounds of the Bazaar AudioBoo

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Meta

  • Upcoming Events

      There are no events.
  • Categories