e-learning for innovation

e-Learning for Innovation

Executive Summary

HELIOS YEARLY REPORT 2007

European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting



�

Authors: StefaniaAceto,ClaudioDelrio,ClaudioDondi,ThomasFischer,NikitasKastis,RolandKlein, WalterKugemann,FabioNascimbeni,MargaritaPerezGarcia,NirinaRabemiafaraand AndrásSzûcs

Editors: StefaniaAceto,ClaudioDelrioandClaudioDondi

Research Coordination: ClaudioDondi

Project Officer at the European Commission: MarujaGutiérrezDíaz

Project Officers at the Executive Agency: ElenaCoelloandBrianHolmes

Publisher: MENONNetworkEEIG,20AvenuedesArts,B-1000Brussels, Phone:+3226393030,Fax:+3226443583, E-Mail:[email protected],Web:http://www.menon.org

MENON Board of Directors: NikitasKastis,LambrakisFoundation,Greece;WalterKugemann,FIM-NewLearning,Germany; ClaudioDondi,SCIENTER,Italy;TapioKoskinen,TKKDipoli,Finland;JoeCullen,TheTavistock Institute,UnitedKingdomandAndrásSzûcs,CentreforLearningInnovationandAdultLearning, BudapestUniversityofTechnologyandEconomics,Hungary

AnelectronicversionofthisdocumentcanbeobtainedattheHELIOSwebsite:http://www.education-observatories.net/helios

�SBN:2-930429-13-5

EAN:9782930429137

Copyright©bytheMENONNetworkEEIG,2007

e-Learning for �nnovation Executive Summary



TheHELIOS(HorizontalE-LearningIntegratedObservationSystem)projecthasbeenco-fundedbytheEuropeanCommission,DGEducationandCultureundertheeLearningProgramme–TransversalActions.

The content of this document reflects the view of the HELIOS project partners. Neither the European Commission nor the project partnersoranypersonactingonbehalfoftheCommissionisresponsiblefortheusethatmightbemadeoftheinformationinthisdocument.

Firstpublishedin2007bytheMENONNetworkEEIG

�SBN:2-930429-13-5

EAN:9782930429137


Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedinanyretrievalsystemortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,electronic,mechanical,photocopying,recordingorotherwise,withoutpriorwrittenpermissionofthecopyrightholderfor which application should be addressed in the first instance to the publishers. No liability shall be attached to the author, the copyrightholderorthepublisherforlossanddamageofanynaturesufferedasaresultofrelianceonthereproductionofanyofthecontentsofthispublicationoranyerrorsoromissionsinitscontents.

DesignbyBrigitteGall,FIM-NewLearningTitleIllustrationbyIreneAmici,SCIENTERTitlePhotosbydigitalstockandpixel

PrintedinGermanybySchnelldruckSüd,Nürnberg

ManufacturecoordinatedinGermanybyThomasFischer,FIM-NewLearning


European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting��


Evolving e-Learning

Acknowledgements

The Executive Summary of the HELIOS Yearly Report 2007 ‘e-Learning for Innovation’ presents the final results of the HELIOS Project (HorizontalE-Learning IntegratedObservationSystem)co-fundedby theEuropeanCommission,DGEducationandCultureintheframeworkoftheeLearningProgramme.

ThemembersoftheHELIOSConsortiumwouldliketothankallorganisations,institutionsandexpertswhohavecontributedtothepublicationofthisreport.

Inparticular,wewouldliketothanktheEuropeanCommission,DGEducationandCultureforhavingtheHELIOSobservatoryandforecastingactivitiesmadepossible.

Finally,weexpressourgratitudetotheHELIOSAdvisoryBoard1 andallEducation&Trainingande-Learningexpertswhohavecontributedtoouractivities.

1 TheHELIOSAdvisoryBoardconsistedof:eLearningIndustryGroup(eLIG),Brussels,Belgium;EuroPACE,Heverlee,Belgium;EuropeanExperts’NetworkforEducationandTechnology(EENet),Marl,Germany;EuropeanInstituteforE-Learning(EIfEL),Champlost,France;EuropeanSchoolnet(EUN),Brussels,Belgium;Eurostat,Luxembourg,Luxembourg;Eurydice,Brussels,Belgium;InternationalAssociationfortheEvaluationofEducationalAchievement(IEA),Amsterdam,TheNetherlands;InstituteforProspectiveTechnologicalStudies(IPTS),Seville,Spain;OrganisationforEconomicCo-operationandDevelopment(OECD),Paris,France;EuropeanStudents’Union(esu),Brussels,Belgium


��



�V


I. Introduction

TheExecutiveSummaryof theHELIOSYearlyReport2007 ‘e-Learning for Innovation’presents the resultsof theHELIOSProject(HorizontalE-LearningIntegratedObservationSystem)runbytheMENONNetworkanditspartnerswiththesupportoftheEuropeanCommissionandthecontributionofEuropeanEducationandTrainingande-Learningexperts/institutionsintheperiod2005-2007.

The title ‘e-Learning and Innovation’ exemplifies the main concept around which this report has been developed and the position of the HELIOS consortium towards the understanding and analysis of e-Learning, to be intended as a means tosupportinnovation-inaLifelongLearningperspective-atpolitical,organisational,economic,socialandinstitutionallevelintheKnowledgeSociety.

Originallyconceivedasanactionaimedatthebuildingofasystematicobservationandforesightingplatformone-LearningatEUandnationallevel,HELIOShasevolved(withoutgivinguptheoriginalaim,butgettingdeeperunderstandingintheprocess)intoa broader action promoting societal innovation by stimulating and coordinating a collective reflection (still going on at European level)onhowtheevolutionoflearningcanactuallycontributetotransformingandimprovingoursociety.

ThetwomainoriginalcomponentsoftheHELIOSactioni.e.:. Researchaimedatinvestigatingonthecurrentstateofdevelopmentandfutureperspectivesofe-LearninginEuropeand

one-LearningcontributiontotheachievementofEUpolicyobjectivesforgrowthandinnovation.. Networking and observatory building aimed at actively involving European experts in the field of e-Learning in the HELIOS

actionandatfostering–inthemedium/longterm–thefederationofnationalandsectoral‘observatories’underthecommonHELIOSframework,

havethereforebeenenrichedwithathirdcomponent:. Promotion of innovation aimed at acting transversally on policy/decision making and on the practitioners’ level so to

sensitisethesestakeholdersontheneedtoopenupthee-Learningthemeinthedirectionof‘innovationinLifelongLearningprocessesandsystems’withinandoutsidetheclassicbordersofeducationandtrainingsystems.

WhatHELIOShaslearntfromitsactivityofobservatorybuildingisthatthe e-Learning observatory shall adopt a new vision of �CT for learning:thate-Learning,althoughremainingamaininstrumenttosupportinnovation,hasnottobeunderstoodasan aim or a ’subject of study’ itself, but rather a field of dialogue and articulation among the many communities that use ICT for learningpurposesandfollowdifferent–butrelated-innovationpaths.TheconceptsandideasaboveareoutlinedareexpandedintheHELIOSYearlyReport2007,whichisarticulatedasfollows:. Chapter2–e-Learning Contribution to European Policy ObjectivespresentsthemainoutcomesoftheHELIOSthematic

analysisontheextenttowhiche-Learningcontributesto:increasingaccesstolearning,improvingemployability,fosteringpersonaldevelopmentandcitizenship,supportinginternationalisationandinnovationofEducationandTrainingsystems,fosteringorganisationalchange.

. Chapter3–e-Learning for �nnovationpresentsthestateofdevelopmentofe-LearninginEuropethroughtheanalysisofthe evolving ‘e-Learning territories’, the concept introduced in the HELIOS Yearly Report 2006 to define the combinations ofdifferentaims,methods,learningpatrimoniesandvalueorientationthat-betterthantraditionaleducationandtrainingsectors-mayhelptounderstandthedifferentspeedanddifferentevolutionpathsofICTforlearning.

. Chapter4–Foresight on e-Learning Developments - �n and around the 2.0 (R-) Evolutionprovidesaninsightonthemost significant expected trends in e-Learning developments for the years to come.

. Chapter5–�n the AgendapresentstheconcludingremarksresultingfromtheHELIOSstudyone-LearningdevelopmentsinEuropein2006/2007.

. Chapter 6 – Building the European Observatory presents the main conclusions and recommendations in view of aEuropeanObservatoryone-Learningforinnovation.

’

�



2

�European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting

II. e-Learning Contribution to European Policy Objectives: the HELIOS Thematic Analysis

Theaimof theHELIOS thematicanalysis is to investigateon theextent towhiche-Learning is contributing toachieve thefollowingsetofpolicypriorities:1. Accesstolearning;2. Employability;3. Personaldevelopmentandcitizenship;4. InternationalisationofEducationandTraining;5. Organisationalchange;6. InnovationofEducationandTrainingsystems.

Theanalysisone-LearningcontributiontoenhanceAccess to Learningledtothefollowingconclusions:. Thereisawidespreadbeliefthattechnologyhasresultedingreateropportunitiesforaccessinglearningingeneral.Butto

date the beneficial effects on excluded groups have yet to be fully achieved, although there is optimism that in time this will improve.

. Increasedaccesstolearningisfoundedmainlyonaspectssuchasqualityofcoursecontentanddelivery(viabettertrainedteachers).InterestinglytheroleofICT-eitherintermsofbettersoftwarepackagesorICTequipment-wasjudgedtobelessimportant.

. Grouplearning(includingwhenusingICTasacommunicationdevice)isstillconsideredtobemoreeffectivethanindividuale-Learninginimprovinglearningopportunities.

. e-Learningstillhassomewaytogotoovercomepersonalsupportbarriersandimprovethequalityofbothcoursecontentandevaluation.

. e-Learningper se cannot be the ‘one size fits all solution’, and is definitively not enough in promoting access to learning if notassociatedtoaclearvision,strategyandaninclusivepolicy.

. It is fundamental to be realistic about sustainability of projects: short term summative evaluation driven by economicsustainabilityargumentshaskilledandmaycontinue tokill innovative initiativesaimedat increasing learningaccessbythosewholearntheleastandneedthetimeandattentiontobecomeLifelongLearners.Manymoree-Learningactivitiesshouldbeorientedat‘makinglearningattractive’,particularlytowardsthosewhoarenotusedtolearn.

. Relevantstakeholdersandendusersshouldbeconsultednotonlyinthepilotingphasebutalsointhedesignofe-Learningexperiencesinordertounderstandexpectationsandconcernsbeforeitistoolatetochangethesystems.

Themainoutcomesoftheanalysisone-LearningcontributiontoenhanceEmployabilitycanbesummarisedasfollows:. e-Learningisconsideredveryeffectiveinitselfforprovidingskillsespeciallyforthosealreadyatwork,butlesssoforthose

enteringthelabourmarketandthoseatriskofsocialexclusion.However,ROIofe-Learningwithregardstoemployabilityoutcomesshouldbefurtherinvestigated.

. e-Learningiscurrentlythoughttobemostsuitablefortrainingpeopleinbasicandtechnicalskillsandlesssuitableforsoft/transversalskills.

. Significant potential is foreseen for e-Learning to support the presentation of learning achievements (e-Portfolio).

. Concentratingresearchandpracticeeffortson‘qualitye-Learning’islikelytoimprovee-Learningsolutionsand,ultimately,enhancetheemployabilityofe-Learners.

� European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting

. Theeffectsofe-Learningonemployabilitycanbemultipliedife-Learningisstrategically integratedintheHRpolicyofacompany,orinastrategicapproachofatrainingbodydealingwiththeunemployed.

. Valuingsuccessfulinformalandnon-formallearningexperiences,whichtookplacethroughe-Learning,especiallythosewhohave managed to reach groups at risk of social exclusion, could enable those who took part, to find a better job.

Themainmessagesemergingfromtheanalysisoftherelationshipbetweene-Learning,Citizenship and Personal Developmentarepresentedbelow:. Thereisastrongbeliefthate-Learning-ifassociatedtothebroadeningoflearningcontextandlearners’communities-has

apositiveimpactinincreasingtoleranceandacceptanceforgroupsatriskofsocialexclusion.. Individualautonomyandfreedominlearningisviewedasthemainadvantageofe-Learningintermsofenhancingpersonal

development.. e-LearningcancontributetoamoreactiveformofcitizenshipandLifelongLearninge.g.byreconcilingworkandfamily

life.. Anoverarchingrecommendationforpolicyandpracticeis‘neverneglectthehumanfactorwithine-Learning’.Thismeans

concentratinginvestment,researchandpracticesontwopriorityareas:thepersonalisationofe-Learningsolutionsandthe‘humanisation’ofe-Learning,embodiedbysuchdevelopmentsasthediffusionofgame-basedelements,newpossibilitiesforlearners’interactionandempowerment,thecommunitybuildingaspectofe-Learning.

Themainoutcomesoftheanalysisone-Learningcontributiontoenhance �nternationalisation of Education and Trainingcanbesummarisedasfollows:. IfLifelongLearningforall is tobecomeareality, it is fundamental towidentheavailabilityofcoursesorprogrammesat

affordable costs. The local provision of learning experiences having an international profile should be widened. There is also aneedtosupportandenhancevirtualmobilityinordertoincreaseevenmorethenumberofEuropeanstudentswhohaveaccesstointernationalstudyexperience.

. Theinternationale-Learningmarkethasdeveloped-andstilldevelops-atamuchlowerratethanforeseensomeyearsago,with significant differences per country and per sector. Nevertheless, a process of consolidation is becoming visible around multinationalprovidersandthesomehowparallelprocessofconvergenceofdifferentlearningdevices,aswellascontentandvalueaddedservices.

. Therearetwoextremepositionsinrelationtotheabovementionedconsolidationofglobalplayers:onethatsuggeststhatglobalisation will ‘homogenise’ and ‘westernise’ education, and the other that affirms that the reduction of space and time barrierscreatedbyglobalisationwillallowmoredialogueamongexistingmodelswithout reducing theworld toasingleeducationalmodel.TheroleofICTinlearningcouldfurtherstrengthenthesepositions.

. Virtualmobilitycanberegardedasmobilityofidentitiesinthecyberspace,mobilityoflearningdevices,virtualcooperationof learning providers, mobility of learners or learning facilitators. Virtual mobility is at the edge of the debate but oftenunderestimatedinitspotential.AccordingtotheresultsoftheHELIOSsurvey,theinformalexchangesamonglearnerslikeonlinetransnationalcommunities,blogsandforaarethemostpromisingdevelopmentsinthisarea.

. According to the HELIOS desk and field research, international e-Learning is mostly exercised/developed in the following subjects/disciplines:businessstudies,languages,scienceandengineeringandICT.

. Thecontributionofe-Learning inpromotingapositiveclimate for transnational collaborationandultimately improve thelearningexperiencecanbeassessedwithregardstovirtualoronlinelearningcommunities.However,aclearcutjudgementisnoteasy.

. According to the majority view of the respondents to the HELIOS survey, e-Learning is expected to contribute significantly to thedevelopmentoftheEuropeanEducationandTrainingarea.



Withregardstothecontributionofe-LearningtoOrganisational ChangeofEuropeancompanies,thefollowingconclusionshavebeendrawn:. Whereasthetechnologicalandpedagogicaldimensionofe-Learninghavealreadybeenstudiedtoarelevantextent,there

is a need of filling in the research gaps on the impact of e-Learning in organisational change terms.. “The status of training has always been problematic. It is perceived as a separate activity from the core business,

immeasurable and unquantifiable: in other words, it’s not perceived to be a core business process, but rather a ‘cost’ or ‘overhead’, which is frequently the first in the firing line when budgets need to be cut”2.e-LearningshouldcontributetoraisethestatusofenterprisetrainingnotonlyintermsofROIbutalsointermsofenhancingtherelevance,thequalityandtheflexibility of learning opportunities within companies.

. Although there is an enthusiasm to adopt new technologies for knowledge acquisition, some institutional opposition tochange exists. New technology often comes with a requirement to change old ways of thinking and working. Buildingnewmotivationsystemsandincentivestocompetencesdevelopmentshouldbeconsideredasnecessaryrequirementforsuccessfulimplementation.Rewardstoproactivityandchangeneedtobedeliveredearlyonintheimplementationprocess;andinvestmentshouldbemadeonsupportmechanisms.

. Devicesandplatformsavailablearediverse,soare theknowledgeacquisitionscenarios foreach typeofsituation. It isresource-andtime-consumingtocreateindividualisedlearningpaths.Andyetthisistheonlywaytomultiplytheimpactofe-Learning.

. CostofintroductionisstillhighespeciallyforSMEsandforcountrieswherethetakeupofInformationSocietyisnotatanadvancedstage.Thereisanurgentneedtosolveinfrastructuralproblems.

Thelastthematicstudyhasdealtwithe-Learningand�nnovation of Education and Training SystemsinEurope.Themainconclusionsarepresentedbelow:. AccordingtothemajorityofparticipantstotheHeliossurvey,e-Learning iscontributingto integratingformal,nonformal

andinformallearning.Theemergenceofbottom-upon-lineinformalandnonformallearningistakingplaceatafasterpacethantheevolutionoflearningsystems,suggestingtheneedtoincreaseinstitutionalcommitmentinfosteringinnovationinlearningsystems.

. Learningspacesarenowvirtualandreal,self-managedand/orcollaborative,public/private,andnotnecessarilysupportedandmediatedverysubstantiallybyconventionaleducationandtrainingorganizations.Newactorsaregaininggroundaslearningproviders.Inthisscenario,willEducationandTrainingprovidersbeincreasinglymarginalizedorrootedinsociety?Thisdepends toacertainextenton theircapability toavoidself-referentialityandestablishacommongroundwithnewactorsandlearningspaces.

. One of the key problems of first generation e-Learning was the lack of sense of ownership of the learning experiences, due tolackofpersonalisationandinteraction,baddesignandalsotechnicalfaults.e-Learninghasconsiderablyevolvedoverrecentyearsandatleasttriedtosolvesomeoftheseproblems,byprovidingforinstancee-portfolios,multisensoriallearningexperience,possibilitiesofbottomupinteractionandcreationofcontents.

. Thereisanincreasingneedtosupportthetransformationprocessandmanagementofchange,ofwhichICTisanenablerand amplifier, into formal education.

. Finally,according to themajorityof respondents to theHELIOSsurvey,e-Learning is ‘motivatingalthoughraisingsomeconcerns’forthecommunityofteachersandtrainers.Andthiscanbeexplainedfollowingthe‘diffusionofinnovation’theory:accordingtothisapproache-Learningtendstocreatedividesbetween’earlyadopters’and‘laggards’,withseveralnuancesinbetween.

2 Lesley Mackenzie-Robb “E-Learning and Change Management - The Challenge” Vantaggio Ltd http://www.vantaggio-learn.com/Vantaggio_CM.htm



Since the thematic analysis carried out by the HELIOS consortium has embraced a wide range of issues, it is difficult to formulate univocalconclusions.However,someoverarchingremarksarepresentedbelow:. Giventhefactthate-Learningiswellaliveinpractice,onecouldarguethatitiscontributingtotheachievementofsuchpolicy

prioritiesasaccesstolearning,employability,internationalisation,personaldevelopment,thoughatamuchlowerlevelthanitcould.

. Somepolicyobjectivessuchasinternationalisation,accesstolearningoremployabilityarecertainlymoretangibleandcanbeassociatedtoprecise indicators. It iseasierto ‘measure’ thecontributionofe-Learninginachievingtheseobjectives.Otherpolicygoalssuchasinnovation,personaldevelopmentororganisationalchangeimplyapreliminaryconsensusontheir definition and the related indicators and different perspectives hinder comparability.

. It is therefore extremely difficult to formulate any judgment on which policy goals are being achieved more effectively thanks toe-Learning.Nevertheless,ashiftcanberegistered:ifintheearlydayse-Learningwasassociatedmainlytosuchobjectivesasemployabilityoraccesstolearning,nowe-Learningisconnectedtoalloftheabovementionedobjectives(andpossiblytoothers)underthebroaderInnovationframework.

Probably the time of specific e-Learning policies or strategies has gone: e-Learning is now seen as an instrument to contribute to broaderinnovationpoliciesanditisinitsinstrumentalnaturethate-LearningmayliveanewspringinEuropeanpolicies.



III. e-Learning for Innovation

Therearesomepositivesignsthate-Learningin2007isgoingupagaininthepriorities’listoftheEuropeanpolicyagenda.Inthelastfewyearsthetermwasseldomusedinpolicymakingandthefeelingthatsomethingwentwrongwithe-Learningwas(andtoacertainextentisstill)widelyspread-notonlyamongpolicymakers-butparadoxically the practice of using �CT to support learning processes is more diffused and better articulated than ever before.

Differentiation is the key wordtounderstandhowthisispossible:whileintheyear2000e-Learningwasperceivedasasinglemega-trendforeducationsystemsandthecorporateworld,experiencehasshownthatthepurpose,thepedagogicalmodels-orbetterthelearningpatrimony-theorganisationandtheeconomicassumptionofe-Learningwereverydifferentiatednotonlyaccordingtothelearningsub-systems(school,highereducation,vocationaltraining,corporateprofessionaldevelopment,adultlearning)butalsoaccordingtothevisionsoftheworldthatthoseinchargeofpromotinganddesigningeLearningsystemshadinmind.SuchdifferentiationinwhatHELIOScalls‘e-LearningTerritories’3hasprovokedaperceivedlossofmeaningoftheterm,toobroadtorepresentrealitieswhichhaveverylittleincommon,excepttheuseoftechnology(seeFigure1).

Figure �: TheHELIOSe-LearningTerritories

3 HELIOSConsortium‘Evolvinge-Learning:theHELIOSYearlyReport2005/2006’bytheMENONNetworkEEIGin2006;http://www.education-observatories.net/helios


e-Learning territories are themeta-contexts in which different innovation aims and paradigms areassociated to theuse ofICT,forlearningbut-moreandmorefrequently-notonlyforlearning.Newlearningpracticesaretakingplacewithoutaclearseparationfromworkingprocesses,socialaggregationandleisureactivities.Toacertainextentthisisalsohappeningwithinformallearningenvironments,suchasschoolsanduniversities,butitisnormallyignoredornotconsideredveryimportant,whenitisnottreatedas‘intrusion’ofimproperactivitiesintoaseriouseducationalenvironment.

FromtheHELIOSanalysisitappearsmoreandmoreevidentthat,while there is a huge potential of �CT to unbound and multiply the opportunities of learning informally, most of the technology enhanced learning research and policy has concentrated on reproducing formal teaching environments in a technology supported way.

Figure 2: TheIdealPlaceofe-Learning

The ‘ideal place’ for new e-Learning is not where consolidated knowledge has to be spread - this was the vision of first generation e-Learning that is still explaining much of both the superficial enthusiasm and the rejection we observe -, but where new knowledge is developed, where innovation objectives are to be shared and achieved in a participative way. The huge social aggregation potential of ICT is becoming clearer and clearer, but learning specific applications are rare to befound.

Technology designed specifically for learning and teaching has produced some impact in formal or corporate learning environments,but‘generic’technology(forexampletelevision,theweb,mobilelearningdevices,portablePCs)hascertainlyproducedamuchbiggerimpactonhowpeoplelearnthroughouttheirlives.

Learningtakesplacewithfullmotivationwhenachangeisperceivedasnecessary/desiredbyindividuals,teams,organisationsorcommunities:theimmediateaccesstounlimitedsourcesofinformationandlearningopportunitiesputstheeducationsystem,thepublicadministrationandeventhetrainingdepartmentsofcompaniesinatotallynewsituation.

Whilst it is clearer and clearer that much of what we learn is not taught by anyone, but just identified, organised and retained by eachofusasaresultofinformalprocessesnotledbyanyteacher,itwouldbecatastrophictounderestimatetheroleof‘learning



process specialists’ - the teachers, the trainers, the tutors, any name to define someone who deliberately and professionally supports the learningofotherpeople- in therevolutionaryprocessofappropriationofone’sown learningthatoursociety isexperiencingalsothankstoICT.

“Much of learning quality depends on the relevance of embedded teaching”4.Infactmanyteachersandtrainers,manymorethan five years ago, can be observed embracing - at least to a certain extent - the renewal potential of ICT to embed learning in everyday’slifeandshiftingtheirrolefromcontentproviderstowardslearningprocessfacilitators.

Some ‘e-LearningTerritories’ are already experiencing major shifts in the use of technology towards an innovation-centredparadigm, whilst others are still dominated by ‘first generation’ e-Learning, purely reproductive of consolidated teaching practices.Whatshoulddeterminethe‘right’speedofchangeisthelearningcontext,the‘e-LearningTerritory’andthescopeoftheoverarchingprocessofchange.

Sothefocusshallbeplacedonthelearningcontextorterritoryratherthanonthespeedofevolution,aseachterritorypresentsdifferentneedsanddemandsforchange.

Whatwasnotunderstoodbyearlye-Learningmarketerswastheweightofservices,contextandlearningcommunitytodeterminethe satisfaction of learners, whatever learning approach is used. By making efficient e-Learning almost a synonym of ‘lonely‘ learning,theycontributeddramaticallytothedoubtsonthepossiblequalityofsuchalearningexperience.

Recent trends observed are all in the direction of enhancing and refining the human component of e-Learning approaches, practically in all e-Learning territories “the chance of joy through emancipation and control”5ofthelearningprocesshastobesharedwithothers.

Simply said, the new place for e-Learning as a catalyst of innovation and as an enhancer of informal learning processes requires a completely new policy approach, in which education policy makers are not the only, and maybe not even the main actors. Learning has to be encouraged and rewarded when and where it occurs, at the workplace or in civic behaviours: local and regional development policy makers are very well placed to implement meaningful policies in this respect.

4 NicholasBalatcheff,eAgendaForum,Barcelona,October20065 WalterKugemann,eAgendaForum,Barcelona,October2006.


�0 European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting


��European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting

IV. Foresight on e-Learning Developments - In and around the 2.0 (R-) Evolution

Itmightindeedbetruethatthelandscapeofe-Learningterritoriesisratherdifferentiated.Andyetithasbeenturnedupsidedown,overthelasttwoorthreeyears,bytheso-called‘2.0revolution’.Itcanbearguedthate-Learningcannotbeobservedanymore only from above, i.e. from the perspective of the designer and developer of e-Learning course or the e-Learningindustry.Thisobservationneedstobecomplementedbylookingate-Learning‘frombelow’i.e.byanalysinginformalandbottome-Learningpracticesemergingfromusers.

ManyemergentandintertwiningshiftsinpracticeandchangeprocesseshavebeenconsideredasanintegralpartofanewevolutionarystageofWorldWideWebthathasbeenlabelledasWeb2.0.

ThemainprinciplesofWeb2.0applicationscanbesummarisedasfollows:. Thewebbecomesaplatformdelivering(andallowinguserstouse)applicationsandservicesentirelythroughabrowser.

Theseserviceswerenotweb-basedbefore,orintheWeb1.0stage.. Usersownthedataonthewebandexercisecontroloverthem.Theycanmanipulate,shareandmodifythemeasilyand

freely.. Networkeffectsarecreatedbyanarchitectureofparticipationthatencouragesuserstoaddvaluetotheapplicationasthey

useit.Thisstandsinsharpcontrasttohierarchicalaccess-controlinapplications,inwhichsystemscategorizeusersintoroleswithvaryinglevelsoffunctionality.

. Innovationinassemblyofsystemsandsitescomposedbypullingtogetherfeaturesfromdistributed,independentdevelopers(akindof‘opensource’development).

. Appearanceoflightweightbusinessmodelsenabledbycontentandservicesyndication.

. Differentpatternsofon-lineparticipation,basedonthe‘LongTailParadigm’i.e.manylow-popularityarticles,postsinblogsorotherdata,collectively,createahigherquantityofdemandthanalimitednumberofmainstreamwebsites.

. Rich,interactive,anduser-friendlyinterfaces.

. Somesocial-networkingaspects(seebelow).

Thereareseveralexamplesofnewonlineservicesandactivitiesthatembodytheseprinciples:. Wikipedia,anonlineencyclopaediabasedontheunlikelynotionthatanentrycanbeaddedbyanywebuser,andeditedby

anyother,isaradicalexperimentintrust,applyingEricRaymond‘sdictum(originallycoinedinthecontextofopensourcesoftware) that “with enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.” Wikipedia is already in the top 100 websites, and many think it willbeinthetoptenbeforelong.Thisisaprofoundchangeinthedynamicsofcontentcreation!

. Siteslikedel.icio.us6,myspace7,Flickr8,iTunes9,andYouTube10havepioneeredaconceptthatsomepeoplecall‘folksonomy’(incontrast to taxonomy),astyleof collaborativecategorizationof sites,photos,musicandvideosusing freelychosenkeywords,oftenreferredtoastags.Taggingallowsforthekindofmultiple,overlappingassociationsthatthebrainitselfuses,ratherthanrigidcategories.Inthecanonicalexample,aFlickrphotoofapuppymightbetaggedboth‘puppy’and‘cute’-allowingforretrievalalongnaturalaxesgeneratedbyuseractivity.

6 http://del.icio.us/7 http://www.myspace.com/8 http://www.flickr.com/9 http://www.apple.com/itunes/10http://www.youtube.com/

�2 European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting

. OtherservicesaregoingbeyondtraditionalInternetusagepatternstoencompassactivitiesformerlydoneinpresence(e.g.anauction), throughPCs (e.g.workonaspreadsheet, schedulingmeetings), throughamusicplayeror the telephone.ExamplesareeBay11,Doodle12,Craiglist13,Skype14,Dodgeball15,WorkACE16.

. Evenmuchoftheinfrastructureoftheweb-includingtheLinux,Apache,MySQL,andPerl,PHP,orPythoncodeinvolvedinmostwebservers-reliesonthepeer-productionmethodsofopensource, inthemselvesaninstanceofcollective,net-enabledintelligence.Therearemorethan100,000opensourcesoftwareprojectslistedonSourceForge.net.Anyonecanaddaproject,anyonecandownloadandusethecode,andnewprojectsmigratefromtheedgestothecenterasaresultofusersputtingthemtowork,anorganicsoftwareadoptionprocessrelyingalmostentirelyonviralmarketing.

Likemany importantconcepts,Web2.0doesn‘thaveahardboundary.There isstillahugeamountofdisagreementaboutjustwhatWeb2.0means17. And yet a main common denominator can be identified, i.e.: the socialization of the Web. In a wide sense, all the above mentioned technologies can be classified as Social Software (Boyd, 2003). They can be considered as a supportinglayerforthegrowingamountofservicesthatareemergingjustrightnowintheWeb,pavingthe‘Web2.0way’.

Butitisnotjustabouttechnologies.Wearecertainlytalkingaboutacertainkindofuser,thedigitalnative-capableofleadingthewayintheprosecutionofanewtechnologicalfrontier.Userscancreate,edit,publish,share...content(everykindofcontent)by collaborating through the Internet in a social manner i.e. giving their actions a social significance.

Justtomentionthemostwell-knownservices(whoseadoptionisincreasingatadoubledigitrate),therearedifferentbloggingservices like Blogger, TypePad or WordPress; users can share their photos in Flickr, defining our different social circles (friends, family, colleagues); they can define, manage and extend their social (personal or even professional) networking (contact networks)withLinked-in,eConozcoorOrkutservices; theymayalsocollaborateon linewithprojectmanagement tools likeBaseCamporwikiserviceslikeSocialTextoreApuntes;theycanpublishtheirvideosoraudioclipsinOurMedia,orbroadcasttheirpodcaststhroughOdeo;theycanaccesstoencyclopedia-likearticleswithanoutstandingupdatefrequencyinWikipedia.

Movingtoe-Learning2.0,thisreferstoasecondphaseofe-LearningbasedonWeb2.0andemergingtrendsine-Learning.

Thetermitselfismeanttoimplythatthetraditionalmodelofe-Learningasatypeofcontent-producedbypublishers,organizedandstructuredintocourses,andconsumedbystudents-isturnedonitshead.Insofarasthereiscontent,itisusedratherthanread-andis,inanycase,morelikelytobeproducedbystudentsthancoursewareauthors.Andinsofarasthereisstructure,itismorelikelytoresemblealanguageoraconversationratherthanabookoramanual.Thee-Learningapplication,therefore,beginstolookverymuchlikeabloggingtool.Itrepresentsonenodeinawebofcontent,connectedtoothernodesandcontentcreationservicesusedbyotherstudents.

Theconnectionbetweenthesetwofacetsofthesameemergenceprocessisthee-Learning2.0metaphordescribedbyStephenDownesinanonlinearticle.

PartiallyrelyingonStephenDownes’approach,theHELIOSconsortiumhassummarisedtheparadigmshifttowardse-Learning2.0assuch:. Learnerscreatecontent,collaboratewithpeersthroughmechanismssuchasblogs,wikis,threadeddiscussions,RSSand

othersmeanstoformlearning.

11 http://www.ebay.com/12http://www.doodle.ch/13http://craigslistfoundation.org/14http://www.skype.org15http://www.dodgeball.com/16http://www.workace.com/17http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/08/not_20.html



. The learning experiences are learner-centered, taking advantage of many sources of content aggregated together intolearningexperiences.

. Teachers(ifany)andlearners(students)arepeerswithinsocialnetworkingenvironment.

. Learningexperiencesareincreasinglyfeaturedbyknowledgemanagement,collaborationandsearch.

. We are moving “From Communities of Practice to Social-Networking” (Downes).

. Finally, there is shift from traditional learning applications and systems managing learning objects within a pre-defined learningarchitecturetoanopenlearningenvironmentcomposedof interoperablelooselycoupledopen-sourceplatformsandtoolsaimedtosupportthesocialinteractionsofpeers.

There is some criticism of e-Learning 2.0 as a term, primarily citing the lack of clear definition. There is also widespread support fordroppingthe‘e’andjustcallingitLearning2.0.

HELIOSdoesnotintendtoenterinthissemanticdispute,asitiscertainlymostimportanttofocusonthepossibleimplicationsforlearningofthe‘2.0revolution’.

This topic isnot yetdealtwithextensively.However,according toMarkPrensky, thanks to thewidespreadadoptionof2.0servicesbydigitalnatives,“traditionaltrainingrolesshouldbereversed.Intheolddays,newworkerswereconsideredpeoplewhodidn‘tknowanythingandwhohadtobetrainedtodothingsthewaythecompanydidthem.Butyoungpeopleexpectfromday one to be making contributions and they can write programs that change the way business is done.”

Further research iscertainlyneeded in this respect.Themainquestion for researchersandpractitionersat themoment is:‘Wheredoesthee-Learning2.0paradigmapplyrightnow?’

Thereareevidencesofthefactthatitismorewidespreadinthedebatethaninpractice.However,whilesomeofthefeaturesdescribed above are observable in on-line communities, the full implications are still rare to find in any given learning environment. ‘Structuringthenew’accordingtotraditionalteachingmodelsispracticallyimpossibleandwouldnotanyhowmakesense.Oneprovisionalconclusionisthatnew‘structuralphilosophies’andpedagogicmodelsareneededinrelationtoe-Learning2.0.

Thedisruptivepotentialofe-Learning2.0andWeb2.0hasbeenunderlinedbymanyauthors.Inanutshell,itcanbesummarizedasfollows:. Endlesspossibilitiesofcreating,editing,publishing,sharing,commentingcontent(everykindofcontent)bycollaborating

throughtheInternetinasocialmanner.. Dramaticallylowerefforttocomposee-LearningsolutionsbasedonWeb2.0technologiesandtools.. Thetrendtowardsstudentcentereddesignandthedeclineofthe‘hierarchicalwayoflearning’.. Theunfoldingoftheconnectivismparadigm,inwhichlearningbecome‘networkcreation’.

However, the emergence of e-Learning 2.0 has also created some concernsintheeducationalcommunity.Thesecanalsoberegardedaschallenges.Someofthemarepresentedbelow:

. The boundaries are not clear,andnotalltheauthorsagreeonthefactthatwearewitnessingaradicalchange.Moreover,accordingtosomeobservers,e-Learning2.0shouldnotbeperceivedasasubstituteofe-Learning1.0(whateveritisthedifference)butratherasacomplement.

. Despitetheclaimsofapedagogicrevolution,thereisstilllittle research on the evaluation of e-Learning or learning 2.0 experiences.Wesee,onthecontrary,acertainfearorinertiaofformaleducationtoincorporateinthecurriculume-Learning2.0experiences,alsoduetothefactthate-Learning2.0istherealmofdigitalnatives,anditisnotyetfullyunderstoodbyteachersandtrainers.


�� European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting

. As it is the case of any informal learning experience, the certification and recognition of competences developed through e-Learning 2.0 is still an open issue.

. Motivational aspects and the learning styles of new learners identified in the literature as ‘digital natives’ (Prensky) or the ‘netgeneration’(Oblinger)are not yet adequately taken into consideration.

. Not all learners are digital natives and not all digital natives are autonomous learners: thefactthatlearnersarereadytoadoptorlearntoadoptquicklye-Learning2.0cannotbegivenforgranted,northeneedforcriticalandnetworkingskillstomasterlearninginthe‘2.0’eracanbeignored.

. Key issues to be considered are the credibility of socially generated knowledge and the risk of manipulation and persuasion by digital native leaders: e-Learning 2.0 poses serious concerns in terms of scientific validity of self-created andmanagedlearning.Furthermore,theriskishighthatthe‘student-centreddesign’supportedbye-Learning2.0leadstoanalternative,butstill ‘hierarchicalwayof learning’,whereanewminorityofdigitalnativeleadersgovernstheonlinesocialisationandlearningprocesses.

. Lastbutnot least, traditional learning cannot (and will not) disappear from the scene: if it is true thatonlinesocialnetworkingandsocialtoolsareveryusefulfortheacquisitionofcriticalandnetworkingskills,andifitistruethatlearningincreasinglyhappensbynetworking,wecannotdenytheneedfor traditional learningmodelswhenwehavetoaddressspecific targets or specific needs. As mentioned in Chapter 5, the future is not traditional learning nor e-Learning 2.0, rather acombinationofthetwoadaptingtothedifferentneeds,featuresandconcernsofthelearningcontext(territory)andofitslearners.



V. In the Agenda

This section presents the concluding remarks resulting from the HELIOS study on e-Learning developments in Europe in2006/2007.

e-Learning is back - call it as you like!

Therearesomepositivesignsthate-Learningin2007isgoingupagaininthepriorities’listoftheEuropeanpolicyagenda.Inthe‘EducationUnites’ConferenceoftheEuropeanEducationMinisters(Heidelberg,March2007),forinstance,Ministersstressedtheneedtoconsidertheopportunitiesresultingfromtheuseofe-LearninginpromotingLifelongLearningtherebywitnessingthefactthate-Learninghasregainedthepoliticalattention.Thesepositivesignsaremirroredinpracticebythefactthate-Learningkeepsongrowingsteadilyacrossthee-Learningterritories,thoughatdifferentspeedsandwithdifferentchallenges.Differentspeed,prioritiesandchallengesfeaturealsothenationalstrategiesaddressingtheissueofinnovationinlearning,witnessingthekeyroleofgeographicalcontext(besidethelearningone)indeterminingtheeffectivestateofdevelopmentandpotentialforgrowth of e-Learning. Therefore, no ‘one-size-fits-all’ conclusion can be drawn on e-Learning trends and speed in Europe: these differaccording to the learningcontext (e-Learning territories)andaccording to thegeographical,politicalandsocio-culturalcontext. This confirms the need (anticipated in the L-CHANGE report 2003/2004) for “converging European aims accompanied by adapted policies/strategies to meet the different needs of quite differently matured national markets”18.

The ‘Knowledge Sharing’ Mantra vs. Digital Rights Management: Enemies or Allies?

Followingthemantrabasedontheconceptthatknowledgeistheonlyasset thatmultipliesbysharing,asetofmovementssupporting‘freecirculationandsharing’ofcontentandsoftwarehaveemergedinthelastyears.Copyleft,copydown,creativecommons,no-copyrightmovementsareaddressingindifferentwaystheissueofdigitalrightsofUserCreatedContent(UCC).Inthesoftwarearena,OpenSource,freesoftware,FLOSSEmovementsaresupportingthesharingofsourcecodesandthepossibilitytopersonaliseandadaptsoftwareaccordingtoone’sneedsandtosharethiswithothersasopposedtoproprietarysoftware whose profit is based on the unavailability of source codes.

Ofcoursethisphenomenonhasstrongimplicationsonlearning.

OnthesoftwaresidethemovetoOpenSourceisalreadyaconsolidatedstrategyinmanye-Learningterritories(ICTforlearninginschoolandICTforlearninginHigherEducation).IncreasinglythesametrendisrecordedintheterritoriesrelevanttoVET,teachers’trainingandmoreingeneraline-Learninginpublicadministration.

AsforUCCandcopyright,“thegeneralquestioniswhataretheeffectsofcopyrightlawonnon-professionalandnewsourcesofcreativityandwhethercopyrightlawmayneedtobeexaminedordoesnotneedtobere-examinedinordertoallowco-existenceofmarketandnonmarketcreationanddistributionofcontent,andspurfurtherinnovation.[…]TheideathattheIPRsystemmaynothavekeptpacewithprogressinthissenseandthatcontentproductionbasedonthereuseofexistingmaterials[…]shouldnot be penalised per se has been echoed at the policy level […] More flexible and efficient licensing processes for copyrights havebeensuggestedinthedigitalcontext[…]thiscouldforexampleinvolvethecreationofclearinghousesto/centresfortheattribution of rights to UCC and other creators”19.

18Scienter&MENONNetworkEEIGetal.‘L-CHANGEYearlyReport2003-2004’,KeyMessages,p.619DirectorateforScience,TechnologyandIndustry,CommitteeforInformation,ComputingandCommunicationsPolicy:WorkingPartyontheInformationSociety,Participative

Web: User-created Content DSTI/ICCP/IE(2006)7/final


The e-Learning Winds of Change: Different Speed for Different Territories.

Somee-Learningterritoriesarealreadyexperiencingmajorshiftsintheuseoftechnologytowardsaninnovation-centredparadigm,whilst others are still dominated by ‘first generation’ e-Learning, purely reproductive of consolidated teaching practices.

Thistablecharacterisestheexpectedevolutionfrom‘e-Learning2000’towards‘innovativee-Learning2010’,butdoesnotmean-notatall-thattheHELIOSteamexpectstoseeonly‘i-e-Learning’in2010.

e-L 2000 i-e-L 20�0

. distributesconsolidatedknowledge, . generatesnewknowledge;

. isstille-Teaching, . isownedbythelearner;

. mayisolatethelearner, . createslearningcommunities;

. isdeliveredbyasingleprovider/institution, . istheresultofandatooltosupportpartnership;

. ignoresthelearner’scontextandpreviousachievements, . buildsonthelearner’scontextsandpreviousachievements;

. depressesthelearner’screativitybytransmissivelogics, . stimulatesthelearner’screativitybyenhancingthespontaneousandplayfuldimensionoflearning;

. squeezestheroleofteachersandlearningfacilitators, . enrichestheroleofteachersandlearningfacilitators;

. focusesontechnologyandcontents, . focusesonquality,processesandlearningcontext;

. substitutesclassroomsessions, . isembeddedinorganisationalandsocialprocessesoftransformation;

. privilegesthosewhoalreadylearn, . reachesandmotivatesthosewhowerenotlearning.

Table �: Frome-Learning2000toInnovativee-Learning2010

Whatthetableisusefulforistodetectdifferencesinthedirectionandparticularlyinthe‘speed’ofchangeindifferente-Learningterritories.Typically,thespeedobservedishigherininformallearningenvironments,stillrelativelyhighincorporateenvironmentandratherlowininstitutionaleducationandtraining.Provocatively,onecouldask:‘Arehighspeedterritoriesthoseinwhichprofessionalteachersandtrainersarelessinvolved?Oraretheythoseinwhicheducationpolicymakersandformalcurriculahavelittletosay?’

More reflexively, we should ask ourselves whether ‘high speed’ is a good in itself, or should we not rather aim at ‘the right speed’.Inspiteoftherecognisedexcessiveresistancetochangeofinstitutionaleducationalsystemsand-toacertainextentand sometimes for well justified reasons - of ‘professional’ teachers and trainers, there is already some consolidated evidence that when ‘high speed’ is required by policy makers - especially when accompanied by frequent variations in the directionof march - it may result counterproductive and frustrate authentic innovators, so loosing their constructive energy forever.



Forexample,one thing is toexplore thepotentialofSecondLife for learningpurposes,another is toassume that learningpracticewillchangeat thespeedof thoughtofvisionary thinkers.Whatshoulddetermine the ‘right’speedofchange is thelearningcontext,the‘e-LearningTerritory’andthescopeoftheoverarchingprocessofchange:ifanindividualfeelsanurgentneedtore-shapeher/hislife,nothing-nolearningsupply-canappearfastenoughwithrespecttothisneed;ifthechangeaffectsacomplexsystemlikeeducationinstitutions,thepressuretochangeismaybepartiallybalancedbythepressuretopreservestabilityandmeettheexpectationsofacomplexsetofstakeholders.Insuchacontextthestrategybecomesthenincreasingly-asforinstanceinthecaseofhighereducationinstitutions-tocreatespinoffs(suchasonlinemasterdegrees)togetahighvelocitymodelwherethedemandforitisstronger.

‘e’ for Experience?

In2004MarcCanter20wrote:“Thepursuitofdigitalconvergencehasbeenburningintheheartsandmindsofbothend-usersandvendorsforover10yearsnowandmature,highlyevolvedproductsandservicesarestartingtoreachmainstreammarket.[…]DigitalLifestyleAggregationisthenotionofasoftwarelayerthatunitesalloftheaspectsofdigitalconvergence.Whetheritbeamediacollectionathome,acalendarofmemoriesofroadtripsortodolistsforapicnicinthepark-DLAs(DigitalLifestyleAggregators) will become a major part of our lives in the future”. This is actually happening at the moment, with applications such asClaimidorBoxnetallowingmultiformat,multidisciplinary,multilingualandmulti-identitystorageofinformationofindividuals’digital identities.Thepotential implicationsfor learningaremanifoldandrangefromthepossibility tohaveeasierandfasteraccesstopeopleandcontenttothepossibilitytopresentone’sdigitalidentity(includinge-Portfolio)inamulti-levelformat.

Thecombinationofdigitalconvergence,socialsoftwareande-Learningleadsthereforetoapersonalisedlearningagendathatisnotonlyaboutsoftwareoptionsandlearningstylesbutaffectthewholeexperienceoflearning.

Maybe the time has come to define e-Learning as ‘experience learning’ as the ‘electronic’ component has been fully incorporated inthenotionoflearning(especiallyinformallearning),atleastbydigitalnatives.

The Issue of Reliability in a Wiki World and its Implications for Learning.

Web2.0ande-Learning2.0havethemeritofhavingledtheuser/learnerfarclosertothecentreofcontentcreationandlearningprocesses.Doesthismeanweareheadingtowardsaclashwithtraditionallearningmodels?HELIOSdoesnotbelieveso.

Wedonotbelievethatinthefuture-beitnearorfar-educationwillonlylieinthehandsoflearners,thoughthepossibilitiesprovidedbyavailabletechnologiesandsocialtoolsaregoingtoincrease-positively-theroleandparticipationoflearnersintheirlearningprocess.

WeshallnotbebewitchedbytheexcessivehypeandexpectationsonusercontentcreationastheriskforasecondBubbleburst in the field of e-Learning is high. The role of reliability of the created, shared and networked content as well as the issue of scientific quality (see for instance the split Wikipedia/Citizendum21)remainkeyindeterminingthefutureof(e)learning.

20http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=308521http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Main_Page.Asfromthemainpage:“Theproject,startedbyaco-founderofWikipedia,aimstoimproveonthatmodelbyadding“gentleexpert

oversight and requiring contributors to use their real names”.



New ‘Learning’ Tools for Knowledge Society Skills: is Education lagging behind?

Onlinesocialnetworkingandsocialtoolssuchaswikisandonlinegamesarealreadyusedforlearningpurposesbutyetnotregardedasseriouslearning.AccordingtoBECTA22“Inthemediumtermwecanexpecttoseesocialtoolsbeingusedtohelpdevelopcriticalskillssuchasnetworking,searchandassimilationofnewtopics,sensemaking,patternrecognition,anddecisionmakingaswellasinthedevelopmentofsharedvalues.Thesetoolsareaboutconnectionsandcontextandnotcontent[and][…] they operate at the intersection of technology, teaching and creativity”. This implies the emergence of what BECTA names the “hidden curriculum of new media literacies”, which is not yet considered relevant enough by formal education though it is made of the key competences and skills for the knowledge society. If the attention of policy makers is already high in the field ofpriorandinformallearningrecognition,afurthereffortisrequiredinmonitoring,analysingandrecognisingthevalueofsocialtoolsforlearningandinsupportingtheiruseinformaleducationfortheacquisitionofcriticalandnetworkingskillsbyyounggenerations.

22EmergingTechnologiesforLearning,BECTA2007



VI. Building the European Observatory

By googeling ‘e-Learning + Europe’, one finds more than 1,300,000 responses including web portals, reports, most of which seemextremelyrelevanttothequery,showingthatinformationonICTforlearningisthereandabundant,atnationalandatinternational level,virtuallycoveringallsectorsofEducationandTraining.Bybrowsing theseresults, itclearlyappears thatanumberofinternationalorganisationsareprofessionallycollecting,analysingandproducinginformationone-Learning(i.e.Eurostat,Eurydice,IEA,OECD,EUN,EurobarometeraswellasobservatoryprojectswithintheeLearningandISTprogrammes).IfonesearchesinlanguagesotherthanEnglish,itappearsthatinalmosteveryEuropeancountrysomeworkisbeingcarriedoninordertounderstandtheimpactofICTonlearningsystemsandtodesignpoliciesthattakethisimpactintoaccount.

But ifwe lookabitdeeperat the information that thosemanysourcesprovide, itappears thatdifferentmethodologiesareusedtoprovidedifferentoutputsintermsoftiming,geographicalcoverageandtargetusers.Inotherwords,mostofthetimesthe existing information on e-Learning is scattered and difficult to compare, this representing an obstacle in the understanding processthatEuropeanandnationaldecisionmakersshallputinplacetoimprovetheperformanceoftheireducationandtrainingsystemsonthebasisofwhatworksandofwhatdoesnotwork.

In order to contribute solving this problem, HELIOS has carried out, in parallel with its analysis, surveying and reportingcomponent,anexerciseaimedattheestablishment and consolidation of a sustainable observation platform of European e-Learning based on what exists and abletodynamicallymonitortheprogressofICTforlearninginEuropeasawholeandinEUcountriesvis-à-vispolicyobjectivesaswellastoforecastfuturescenariosofe-Learningevolution,thusclosingthegapbetweenthelargeamountof‘fragmentary’dataexistingtodayaboute-Learningpolicies,practices,researchandmarketandtheneedforunderstandable,usableandcoherentpolicy-relatedinformationbyEuropeannationalandlocalpolicymakers.Incarryingonthiswork,HELIOShasworkedtoavoidanykindofcompetitionwithexistingobservationmechanismsandhastriedtostimulatesynergyandnetworkingamongthosemechanismsinviewofthecreationofasustainableco-ownedplatformforthesystematicmonitoring,assessmentandforecastofcurrentandfuturedevelopmentsofe-LearninginEurope.

TherationaleoftheHELIOSexerciseofbuildinganetworkofnationalobservationpointswasbasedontheneedtocontextualiseobservation efforts at national level andat the same timeon theassumption that a common analysis approach should befollowedintheinterpretationandprovisionofinformationfeedingtheEuropeanplatform.

Toachievethis,HELIOSworkedatnational levelinsomecountriesbyactivatingsome‘dynamiser’groups/networkstobuildnationalobservationunits,byaggregatingall theactors thathaveastakeone-Learningtomonitorandanalysee-Learningdevelopmentsandimpact inthecountry intermsof indicators,methods, informants,proceduresandtiming.Tocomplementthis,HELIOSworkedatEU leveltoensurethatallnationalobservationunitswouldbeabletoproviderelevantinformationandrecommendationstopolicyanddecisionmakers,practitionersandstakeholdersintheirrespectivecountryandatthesametocontribute-underafederativemodel-tothecontinuousupdateoftheEuropeanobservationplatform.

The most common situation that HELIOS found in EU countries is the one where some observation activities in the field of e-Learningarecarriedoutbyinstitutionsororganisationsinafragmentedway,withastrongriskofreplication,overlappingandlackofhomogeneousinformation.TheHELIOSapproachinthiscasehasbeentoidentifytheinstitutionalandtechnical/operationalactorsengagedine-Learningobservationandenhanceaprocessofconcertationaimedatguaranteeingafullcoverageofe-Learning observation through the synergic action of the identified members. Three practical casescanbementioned:inItaly,Greece and Germany, HELIOS has identified the need to articulate the existing observation capacities by stimulating synergy andnetworkingamongtheexistinginstitutionsandactors.Forthesethreecountries,threeactionplanshavebeenputinplace,andsomeinterestingresultshavebeenachieved.

20 European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting

What experience has shown is that building national observation units, although it might seem the most logical ‘first step’, does not work if it is not supported by a strong EU policy interest, accompanied by some financial support. Even when national units havebeencreated,withoutastrongEUpolicydirectionanddirectsupport thoseUnits tend:both to:1)naturally follow thenational policy objectives; 2) be fragile and depend on the continuity of political support; 3) adopt national-specific methodologies and produce data that are difficult to compare across countries. The answer to the question that opens this paragraph, ‘shall the Europeane-Learningobservatorybebuiltonnationalobservatories?’,seemsthereforetobe‘no,unlessitisaccompaniedbyastrong EU centred policy driver as well as by a strong technical and financial support mechanism’.

While stimulating the EU-national dynamic, HELIOS reflected on and validated with many organisations involved in its ObservatoryBuildingexercisetheconditionsthatshouldbeinplaceforane-Learningobservationmechanismtobesustainableandtodevelopitsfullpotential.

A first condition would be to open-up the e-Learning theme in the direction of ‘innovation in Lifelong Learning processes and systems’:HELIOSbelievesthatthisbroader‘conceptualisation’(thatincludesICTasoneoftheinnovationdriversofE&Tsystemsandprocesses)couldbeabletoraisethepolicyattentionandsupportbothattheEUandatthenationallevel

Asecondconditionwouldbetobase the observation mechanism on a differentiation principle,abletolookatthedifferentterritories and their dynamics in a separated but comparable way: HELIOS believes that only by looking into the specificities of thee-Learningterritoriestherealtrendscanbeunderstoodintheircontextandforesightbecomesmeaningful.

A third condition would be to strongly bind the observatory work and foreseen results to Lifelong Learning policy objectives.

Thefourthconditionisthatonly by positioning right in the middle between policy objectives and successful practices the observatory can deploy its full value.

Oncethoseconditionsareinplace, it is importantthattheobservationmechanismrespondstotheneedsofthee-Learningdecisionmakers,practitionersandresearchersoftodayand-ifpossible-oftomorrow:HELIOSbelievesthatthe functions that the EU observatory on e-Learning shall gather go beyond the mere observation-analysis-reporting scheme,andshouldinclude:. Supportthevalorisationofusableresults,successfulcooperationpracticesandsustainableprojects.. Direct support to Lifelong Learning intended as a tool to achieve the EU macro objectives such as inclusiveness and

growth.. Outreach of ICT for learning much beyond the Education andTraining ‘experts communities’, calling for and gathering

communities working on learning and on policies well beyond those specific to Education and Training systems.. Articulationofthenational, local,andEUlevel,tomakesurethatthelinguistic,culturalandmethodologicalbarriersthat

hinderthesmoothcirculationofdataacrossthesethreelevelsareproperlyovercome.


2�European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting


22 European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting


2�European e-Learning Observation System: Observing, Foresighting & Reporting




Research Team:

Alphametrics, United Kingdom: TimHarrison,NirinaRabemiafaraandTerryWard

F�M-NewLearning, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany: ThomasFischer,RolandKleinandWalterF.Kugemann

�stituto per lo Sviluppo della Formazione dei Lavoratori (�SFOL), �taly: MariannaForleo,ClaudiaMontedoroandVitaliaSchirru

Lambrakis Foundation (LF), Greece: NikitasKastisandGeorgeNeofotistos

MENON Network EE�G: TapioKoskinen,MargaritaPerezGarciaandFabioNascimbeni

SC�ENTER, �taly: StefaniaAceto,ClaudioDelrioandClaudioDondi

European Distance and E-Learning Network (EDEN), United Kingdom: IldikóMázárandAndrásSzûcs





MENON Board of Directors: NikitasKastis,LambrakisFoundation,Greece;WalterKugemann,FIM-NewLearning, Germany;ClaudioDondi,SCIENTER,Italy;TapioKoskinen,TKKDipoli,Finland;JoeCullen, TheTavistockInstitute,UnitedKingdomandAndrásSzûcs,CentreforLearningInnovation andAdultLearning,BudapestUniversityofTechnologyandEconomics,Hungary

�SBN:2-930429-13-5EAN:9782930429137Copyright©bytheMENONNetworkEEIG,2007

e-Learning for �nnovation Executive Summary








MENON Board of Directors: NikitasKastis,LambrakisFoundation,Greece;WalterKugemann,FIM-NewLearning,Germany; ClaudioDondi,SCIENTER,Italy;TapioKoskinen,TKKDipoli,Finland;JoeCullen,TheTavistock Institute,UnitedKingdomandAndrásSzûcs,CentreforLearningInnovationandAdultLearning, BudapestUniversityofTechnologyandEconomics,Hungary

AnelectronicversionofthisdocumentcanbeobtainedattheHELIOSwebsite:http://www.education-observatories.net/helios

�SBN:2-930429-13-5

EAN:9782930429137


e-learning for innovation

Documents