20 feb 2003j. frick1 nettlær, nettbasert læring i rogaland fra lokalt orientert forskning til...

20 Feb 2003 J. Frick 1

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

NettLæR, Nettbasert Læring i Rogaland

Fra lokalt orientert forskning til Europeisk forskning.

1 amanuensis, Dr Jan Frick



The NettLaeR project NettLaeR (Net based learning in Rogaland) was

a research project running in Rogaland County in Norway 1999-2003 partly funded by the Norwegian Research Council.

It involved many partners and courses. • The NettLaeR covers levels from 10th grade secondary

school to PhD students.

• The role of many partners changed during the project



Partners in NettLæRResearch

–Stavanger University College/ Høgskolen i Stavanger, Rogaland Research Institute, Telenor Research Institute

Manufacturing Companies–TESA: collaboration network of 14 companies

Vocational Schools–RKK: collaboration network of 32 schools

ICT companies–InfoNett: collaboration network of 12 companies

Maintenance companies–Centre for maintenance and asset management: collaboration network of 30 companies

Petroleum and Marine–Stavanger Offshore and Maritime Forum: collaboration network of 40 companies

Hotel–Norwegian Hotel Management School: Hotel and restaurant network



1. Blended learning

By “blended learning” we define a mixed use of technology based methods and traditional classroom.

The use of technology/ ICT in courses must be adapted depending on:

– 1) The subject and content of the course,

– 2) The participants' and the teachers' knowledge/ ability/ capability and interests for using ICT, and

– 3) The available technology for the teachers and the participants.



Pedagogic method

2. Frequent dialogue or follow-up– Motivation is an issue for many students. A person regarded as an

authority by the learner should check the progress as often as possible, preferable once a week.

3. Active learners or action learning– There is a change when going from traditional classroom to e-

learning. • Traditional Focus : the teacher set the progress and coordinate all

activities.• E-learning Focus: the learner determine when and where the learning

takes place, and thus generates an individual progress.

– This change move much of the responsibility from the teacher to the learner.



Organizing

4. Use of Learning Management Systems (LMS)– Learning Management Systems have a short development cycle where

new functionality and new systems becomes available often.• Such systems are a collection of content and communication functionality

together with management tools.

– Simple and stable access provides confidence and improves learning process.

5. Groups– The use of groups may have good impact on learning.

• The tutored groups may provide the individual with confidence and a social context both promoting the progress.

– The creation of groups may also have a good function if the group can function as a common first- help for its members.



Content 6. Animation

– We find no evidence that increased use of animations and special made effects increases learning as such.

• There are exceptions : a mass – marked product, • And: creating a game-like learning environment

7. Sequence of content– Several Learning Management Systems have structures that make the

learner follow a “path” through the content and tasks. – Having a more or less obligatory path to follow seems to be an advantage

for employees long away from the schooling system.

8. Content– Many people think that all content should be provided within the

elearning system. – Our experience is that there is no reason to move a book to web pages

without other reasons such as a need for upgrade.



Volume and money

9. Number of participants– Many suggest that the number of participants in

elearning is limited to about 20 persons. • Our experience is that this is the case in a standardized set up.

• Higher numbers is possible but more demanding

10. Where is the money– For a similar number of learners, the cost involved in using a kind of

elearning is similar or higher than with traditional classroom.

– For companies elearning provide higher flexibility in delivery and integrate with daily activities much better. It also reduces need for travel and accommodation, which in many known cases has been more than 80% of cost.



NextLeap NoE: site of partnersDelivered April 24th 03. Symbol for a

partner organization

““Technology Technology enhanced enhanced personalized, personalized, mixed mode mixed mode learning”learning”

20 Feb 2003 J. Frick 10


“NextLeap: Technology enhanced learning communities for individualized lifelong learning”

Participants with coordinator first Names

1 Stavanger University College, N, Jan Frick

2 Rogaland Research Institute, N, Christian Quale

3 Rogaland Training and Competence Centre, N, OIe Imsland,

4 Twente University, NL, Piet Kommers

5 5. University of Ioannina, E, Dimitrios Fotiadis,

6 Aalborg University, DK, Frank Gertsen,

7 Poznan University of Economics, PL, Witold Abramowicz,

8 University of Bergen, No, Sølvi Lillejord

9 Trento University , I, Gianni Jacucci,

10 Kaunas Technical University, LT, Danguole Rutkauskiene

11 University of Barcelona, ES, Antonio Bartolomé,

12 Porvoo International Services PINT Oy, Fi, Janne Pennanen13 Riga Technical University, LV, Ilmars Slaidins

14 Stratclyde University, UK, William J Ion,

15 Ostrava University, Cs, Lenka Landryova

16Associazione EGO-CREANET Telematic Network/ LRE-University of Florence, I, Giuseppe Fortunati

17 Bit-Media, A, Clemens Widhalm

18 Norsk Regnesentral, No, Gjertrud W. Kamstrup

19 Budapest University of Technology and Economy, H, Zarka Denes

20 University of Erfurt, D, Helmut Niegemann

21 University of Leuven, B, Jan Elen,

22 Center for Scientific Visualization, Slovenia, Tomaz Amon

23 Royal Institute of technology, S, Göran Karlsson

24 Helia- Helsinki Business Polytechnic, FI, Antti Kauppi

25 University of Cyprus, Cp, Costas P. Constantinou

26 Open University, NL, Paul Kirchner

27 IT-Solutions as, N Erik Aadland

28 Baltec University Consortium in Science and Technology, S Ulf Henrikson

29 InfoNett (Collaboration network for 10 ICT companies), N Jan Frick

30 LogicDIS S.A. , E Manolis Chrysostalis

31 Cyprus Computer Using Educators Group, Cp Alexia Sevastidou

32 e-Trent srl, I Filippo Bonella

20 Feb 2003 J. Frick 11


Other projects/ activitiesOther projects/ activities

RKK: 11000 participants, 1400 teachers, 4 employees. Boxer: ”Coursekeeper” Jærtek: ” RealDOK for kartlegging og dokumentasjon av realkompetanse”

HiS og RKK: IKT for lærere ”Norge Rundt”, øk adm utdanninger på Nett Projects

– RedMeis Leonardo, 2000-03• Relocation and Development of Model for Education , Industry and Society in

Collaboration. Norway, Greece, Spain, Latvia

– R3L: ”Competence Centres and Information and Communication Technologies as Tools of Learning Regions", is a project under "European Nets of Learning Regions"(R3L-

Initiative). – InterReg: "Continuing education in the practical use of ICT for teachers " to Finland,

Estonia,Latvia,Lithuania and Kaliningrad in Russia. – InterReg: ”Regional Strategies & Solutions to enhance ICT access & use for SMEs”, North Sea

Region

20 feb 2003j. frick1 nettlær, nettbasert læring i rogaland fra lokalt orientert forskning til...

Documents