school foresight conference – athens, 13-14 november 2004 seequel s ustainable e nvironment for...

School Foresight Conference – Athens, 13-14 November 2004

SEEQUELSEEQUEL

SSustainable ustainable EEnvironment for thenvironment for the

EEvaluation of valuation of QUQUality in ality in E-LE-Learningearning

Dr Nikitas KastisDr Nikitas Kastis

Lambrakis Research Foundation – MENON NetworkLambrakis Research Foundation – MENON Network


ObjectivesObjectives

To define a Conceptual Framework for Analysis, corresponding to a holistic approach to quality in e-learning, in order to serve as a basis for productive long-term dialogue and consensus building between the stakeholders in Europe.

To establish the European eLearning Quality Forum, with representation from all relevant bodies, organizations and authorities in Europe, as a sustainable forum for dialogue, consensus building and policy support in the field

To develop a set of eLearning Quality Tools


1. 1. Mapping of approaches to QualityMapping of approaches to Quality

Categories of Stakeholders

Industry providing e-Learning

Industry as users (HR departments, etc.)

Government (EU/nat./reg.)

K12 (providers, learners, parents and proxies, teachers)

Higher education (providers, learners, teachers)

Initial VET (providers, learners, teachers)

Informal learning (providers, learners, trainers)

Continuous Professional Development (providers,

learners, trainers)


SR V

Perception

Stakeholder

Object

Learning Experience

LS LP LC

Quality of Learning experience

2. Conceptual Framework2. Conceptual Framework


Value features The World of Inspiration Singularity, difference,

innovation, originality, irrationality, imaginary, spirituality, unconscious, chance

The Domestic World Confidence, responsibility, merit, respectability, convention, dignity, tradition, hierarchy, rank; parents, children, generation; rules and confidence, principles; harmony; the "natural"; the duty

The World of Opinion Image, reputation, fame, success, honour, acknowledgement, visibility, audience, credibility, identification

Visions of the World Visions of the World ((adapted from Boltanski and adapted from Boltanski and ThévenotThévenot)) 1/2 1/2


Value features The Civic World The general will, the common

interest, generosity, self-abnegation, sacrifice, pride, the group, collective action, collective entities (ideas, values, symbols and institutions).

The Merchant World Wealth, money, luxury; business, fair deals, good deals, bargain; interest, attentions to others; contract; competition, rivalry, opportunism, freedom,

The Industrial World Progress, future, functionality, efficiency, optimality, performance, productivity, professionality, reliability, far-sightedness, system

Visions of the World Visions of the World ((adapted from Boltanski and adapted from Boltanski and ThévenotThévenot)) 2/2 2/2


Learning experienceLearning experience

Learning Sources• Teachers CV/

Qualification• Learn. Materials• Reference

Materials• Components

Core learning processes• Guidance/

Recruitment/TNA/ Planning

• Design (Guidance Principle)

• Delivery (T&L)

• Evaluation

Learningcontext

• Institutional setting

• Centr./ Decentr. curriculum

• Culture (nat., org.,prof., gen.)

• Learn. Environments

• Legislation• Financial

rules• Value

systems


Learning Sources• Teachers

CV/Qualification• L. Materials• Reference

Materials• Components

Example of area specific criteria• Pedagogical quality• Content updated/reliability• Technical quality• Portability (tech)• Capacity to (be) integrated (context/org)• Adaptability (context/indiv.)• Aesthetics/Attractiveness/Empathy• IPR conformance



Core Learning Process• Guide/Recruitment/TNA• Design (Guidance principle)• Delivery (T&L)• Evaluation

Example of area specific criteria• Tracking progress• Interaction• Learning Motivation• Open endedness• Collaboration• Production of change• Effectiveness (pedag.)• Efficiency (econ.)



Learn. Context

• Instit. setting• Centr./ decentr.

curriculum• Culture (nat., org.,

prof., gen.)• Equipment and

connectivity• Learn.

Environments• Legislation• Financial rules• Value system

Examples of area specific criteria• Supportive (climate + service)• Open-mindedness• Tolerance to mistakes• Valorisation of Learning results• Encouraging implementation



SEEQUEL on the webSEEQUEL on the web


3. European Quality Forum3. European Quality Forum


European Quality ForumEuropean Quality Forum

1.1. What can you find there?What can you find there?

Desk researchDesk research results results

More than 800 registered usersMore than 800 registered users

Analysis of different approaches, methods, criteriaAnalysis of different approaches, methods, criteria

Ongoing documentationOngoing documentation

SEEQUEL consortium discussionSEEQUEL consortium discussion

Workshops: presentation, discussion, findingsWorkshops: presentation, discussion, findings

Documents: revision of initial analysis, integrating the Documents: revision of initial analysis, integrating the

“Communities” view“Communities” view


• Identifies needs for Quality tools• Checks availability at international level• Proposes new tools or

improvements/adaptations• Gives mandate to Working Groups for progress• Evaluate progress and results

4. SEEQUEL Quality Lab4. SEEQUEL Quality Lab

The Quality Lab materialises the input of the Forum into a programme

for action


Goals of the Quality LaboratoryGoals of the Quality Laboratory

a) Facilitating long-term discussion, exchange of ideas, experiences and “good practice” and knowledge consolidation as a policy support mechanism at the European level

b) Providing a reliable and value-added environment offering a consistent approach for the testing and certification of “Quality Assurance Frameworks”, addressing the practical requirements for the effective development of learning technologies and learning services

It is an experts environment to validate quality assurance schemes for e-learning content and practice and to disseminate “good practice” to both the industry and the Education and Training users.


The Forum - Lab LinkThe Forum - Lab Link

Position/identity (stakeholder's identity)

Consider objects and weight criteria

Choose approach to Quality

Implement

Report/share/compare

Improve your approach


5. The SEEQUEL Working Groups5. The SEEQUEL Working Groups

WG 1 Coordination of the Quality Lab

WG 2 Core Quality Framework

WG 3 User Guide

WG 4 Informal learning

WG 5 Industry

WG 6 Self positioning path (accompanying the user)

WG 7 External Coordination


6. The SEEQUEL Tools6. The SEEQUEL Tools

Core Quality Framework

eLearning Quality Guide for the User (Learner)

(e)Learner’ s Bill of Rights

Reaching eLearning Quality in Informal Learning

Quality Analysis Tool (for the industry)


Contacts – Information - Contacts – Information - Contribution to the discussionContribution to the discussion

www.education-observatories.net/seequelwww.education-observatories.net/seequel/forum

[email protected]