Higher Education, Work based learning and Web 2.0

After reading David Gray’s (2001)[i] “A Briefing on Work Based Learning” this document picks up on the main points that characterize work based learning (WBL) and briefly explores their relationship with higher education and web 2.0 technology.

Work based learning and its value

Three common understandings of the term work based learning are:

• Learning for work e.g. work placements on a sandwich degree programme (may be referred to as work placed learning)
• Learning at Work e.g. in house training or personal development programme
• Learning through work with formal accreditation

Understanding 1 (even though it as a long history at higher education level) and understanding 2 are not usually assessed or accredited. For higher education (in consultation with employer organizations and the employee) the newer understanding 3 brings with it the role of providing academic rigor by way of i) defining appropriate learning outcomes, ii) effective teaching and learning strategies and iii) valid and reliable assessment.

If these three elements are met then the work based learner will more likely be in a position to reap the satisfying rewards of self fulfillment and self development which will be important in motivating them during the period of a course. For work based learning to be of value to an employer organization, then at the end of the learning process, amongst other things they may like to see that the learner has i) acquired specific skills ii) demonstrated general problem solving skills iii) demonstrated ability to be creative in generating ideas, in addition to iv) a mechanism to identify what level of skills and ability an individual has achieved. With the advent of e-learning in general and web 2.0 technology in particular, Higher education is in a position to take advantage of the ease of use and flexibility of 21^st century learning tools to i) improve communication between all three parties ii) provide opportunities for learners to present and externalize their knowledge iii) engender a dialogic framework that can easily elicit feedback from tutors, employers and the wider world and iv) foster the development of a learners own personal learning environment and personal knowledge management skills to enhance their development as a lifelong learner.

This last point may have additional resonance with employer organizations that have a mindset of a learning organization, as they will be looking to go beyond isolated programmes of learning and look to embed systems which encourage learning and will benefit the whole organization as an ongoing way of being. This sort of organization will ideally have structures in place that encourage individual participation, create opportunities for interaction and create mechanisms to share ideas so that a culture of learning from each other ensues.

Differences between WBL and classroom learning

David Gray refers to Raelin (2000) who argues that work based learning is different to classroom learning in a number of important ways:

1. Work based learning is centered around reflection on work practices
2. Work based learning views learning as arising from action and problem solving within a working environment.
3. Work based learning requires not only the acquisition of knowledge but the acquisition of meta-competence – learning to learn.

For these reasons and the fact that the adult learner is perceived to be self-directed, has personal experience and motivation to bring to the table of learning assessment methods for work based learning need to be reflected in a student-centered, problem-based approach rather than formal examinations that characterize traditional assessment methods. With this in mind assessment methods could include:

• Self and peer assessment
• Assignments and projects
• Portfolio building
• Presentations
• Practical assessment of professional competence in the workplace
  

In addition it’s important to note that “the link between a learner’s objectives and the outputs of learning can be bridged through the use of learning contracts”. Gray (2001)1

With employers having an investment in the learning of work based learners and the benefits that this will offer in the future this further “underlines the need for developing the higher level skills of analysis, evaluation and synthesis as well as the ability to be an independent learner”. Gray (2001)1

WBL and Web 2.0

Web 2.0 technology sits nicely within a student centered, problem based approach learning and the socio-constructivist approach that this implies. There are many web 2.0 technologies that can become home for student developed resources; The staple web 2.0 tools will be Blogs for reflection, wikis for collaboration and resource management and e-portfolios for presentation of knowledge, ideas and the products of the learning process. Also in this connectivist age in addition to their own Personal Learning Networks, there should also be a role for an institution or employer initiated web 2.0 based learning network which can help to facilitate the informal and incidental learning that can be so useful.

---

[1] Gray, D (2001) A Briefing on Work Based Learning LTSN generic centre Learning and Teaching Support Network

HE Institutional Strategies for E-learning

Well just as higher education embraces the notion of e-learning and start investing heavily financially, strategically and emotionally in commercially driven e-learning VLE’s such as Blackboard along comes those damn pesky web 2.0 technologies. After all the staff and student training that has gone into learning how to make that cumbersome beast (my view) Blackboard be a useful catalyst to promote and develop a sustainable and consistent e-learning strategy it is hard to contemplate that their may be a better way forward other than via Blackboard or similar VLE’s.

Now I am not saying exactly for sure what they way forward is, as I am not privy to the costs involved or the administrative, security and control issues, that said a strategy involving web 2.0 technologies should be piloted and I feel eventually adopted if not totally, but in a dual approach over the next few years because of the simple benefits that web 2.0 technologies can offer both students, but just as importantly to staff.

When one thinks of e-learning, the first thought quite naturally is of learning and probably most people conjure up an image of a wed page or maybe an interactive multimedia application. The crucial thing is from an institutional point of view is that apart from the learning, other very important issues are
• Communication between academic staff-students, administrative staff-students and students to student communication.
• Staff training and development
• Staff enthusiasm for the e-learning technology.

In light of the three points highlighted above it is worth considering what web 2.0 technologies can offer. I shall constrain myself to the use of just one web 2.0 technology which is worth exploring as a significant complimentary or maybe alternative approach to the Blackboard VLE approach and that is a wiki.

For staff they are relatively easy to use and learn how to use, they are for group collaboration either via editable web pages or discussion boards. All group members can send messages to each other within the wiki. All group members can choose to be notified of any changes to pages or replies to discussion board posts straight to their email accounts. Pages can be tagged for easy reference, wiki sites can be very easily backed up in html or wiki text format.

Wiki’s can be used for learning activities, project management, project collaboration or as a course management tool. Wiki’s can allow staff to collaborate on projects and developing module material together. The technology is and it has the potential to be useful, it will be up to individuals and groups how they make best use of it.

To give a comparison example, it would be far easier and save so much time in posting an announcement and associated document in a wiki, rather than in the equivalent announcement function in blackboard, especially if the author has to re-edit the announcement or change the associated document.

Another important consideration is that web 2.0 technologies such as wiki’s and blog’s are now becoming commonplace out there in every day life. They are important life skills that students and staff should develop as these transferable skills will be of great benefit to them personally and to future organizations that they work for.

Although there are many web 2.o services freely available on the internet, possible concerns from an institutional point of view may be security and privacy and delivery of service. As an example if we take wiki services on the web these can be made private and secure, as well as having minimal downtime. If institutions are not satisfied with the offerings of companies that do offer wiki servers they can always use ‘MediaWiki’ software which is wiki server software and can be controlled by the institution on their own servers.

To conclude I believe that over the next year or two HE institutions should most definitely design a web 2.0 delivery strategy and adopt and promote it in parallel with any existing Blackboard VLE setup so that they are in position to take the correct fork in the road if required. Personally with a well thought out implementation and staff training plan I believe that the uptake of web 2.0 technologies will spread quicker than an Aussie bush fire and it might have to be if higher education institutions do not want to lose competitive advantage.

,

Embrace web 2.0 technology or die - that's an order!

It seems a no brainer to me that higher educational establishments offering distance learning courses should embrace web 2.0 technologies quickly otherwise their credibility is an institute of repute will quite frankly be tarnished. Relying on subject expertise will not be enough, the online delivery and communication techniques used will sort out the winners from the losers

It would seem that a lot of higher education institutions may think that by providing a VLE such as Blackboard they have done their bit for distance and e-learning and that is the end of the matter. Many institutions even at this stage may not even be aware of the growing influence of web 2.0 technologies and will bumble along quite merrily, as their customer (student) base dwindles away.

If I can make some sort of an analogy between institutions (and it may not be the best, but hopefully you will get the point) that embrace web 2.0 technologies and those that don’t, it would be like comparing an institution that currently asks for all essays to be handwritten instead of an institution that accepts word processed essays. Most students would find this unacceptable, irritating and a sign of an organization not up with the times. This will probably be the case with web 2.0 technologies and the benefits they offer in communication, community building, learning and teaching 5 years from now.

The only conceivable argument I can see for not embracing web 2.0 technologies are considerations of privacy and security of data. If there are good educational and learning reasons for using web 2.0 technology then a way needs to be found to overcome privacy and security of data issues, which I am sure, can easily be found if the desire is there.

Quite bold statements from a mere novice in the field, however after reading various advocates testimony, briefly reviewing some web 2.o technologies the vibe just feels right. My proviso being that web 2.0 technologies give you the platform to do some very interesting things, but you’ve got to know your technology and use it well.

web 2.0 Adventures

My recent adventures into web 2.0 land that have ignited my fire are the web application ‘basecamp’, which uses wiki technology (only it just does not tell you) for the purpose of project management and it makes it feel so damn easy. I am sure higher education can learn a lot from the ease of use of this product and it seems ideal for use as a course management system. I shall investigate further.

The second vitally important element of the whole web 2.0 phenomenon is the XML feed technology e.g. RSS or Atom and the ability to subscribe to blogs. I’m afraid I’m a busy man, hey maybe I’m a bit lazy – I want the action to come to me. I cannot always remember where all the action is or will be so I want notification by the killer internet application email or I want all the action sucked into my central website base.

So this leads to the beauty of subscription where your favourite blogs can be emailed directly to you, using a subscription service such as feedblitz or alternatively, use a service such as bloglines where all your favourite blogs are brought together at a central website.

Wake up there could be a revolution going on.