Proceedings of the EDEN 2006 Annual Conference

(1)

EDEN 2006 ANNUAL CONFERENCE

E-Competences for Life, Employment and Innovation

"E" is more! E-learning Enabling Education in Evolving Europe

Proceedings of the EDEN 2006 Annual Conference

Vienna University of Technology Vienna, Austria

14-17 June, 2006

Edited by

András Szűcs and Ingeborg Bø

on behalf of the European Distance and E-Learning Network

European Distance and E-Learning Network

(2)

EDEN 2006 Annual Conference Vienna, Austria

Published by the European Distance and E-Learning Network

Editors:

András Szűcs Ingeborg Bø

Editorial co-ordination:

Anna Wagner

The EDEN Secretariat mailing address

EDEN Secretariat

Budapest University of Technology and Economics H-1111 Budapest, Egry J. u. 1

Hungary

Tel: (36) 1 463 1628, 463 2537 Fax: (36) 1 463 1858

E-mail: secretariat@eden-online.org http://www.eden-online.org

No part of the material protected by this copyright may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or by any storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the copyright owners.

ISBN 963 06 0063 3

(3)

Introduction

Experience and understanding of the knowledge society is taking ever greater root in Europe. Globalisation, technology development, and changes in the economic and social environment are modifying the ways in which the knowledge society is developing. The accelerating development of information and communication technologies is creating way forward to new solutions.

The impact of economic challenges, market developments and policies at national and European levels has considerably influenced these processes. Growth and employment are the present keywords, that embody the strong message of the relaunched Lisbon strategy, and innovation is one of the core factors for modernisation and economic growth. Innovation systems and industrial policy share common interests, and there is an ever stronger demand for the integration and more effective use of innovation in the economy, particularly in the knowledge industries. According to the recent EU Economic Policy Guidelines, all forms of innovation should be facilitated and the development of ICT and content industries make up key areas to be promoted. Increased performance in these fields is expected to contribute to the creation of the sustainable knowledge economy.

The academic and professional community is continuously at work on developing efficient solutions and identifying new, creative forms of education. It is becoming increasingly clear that the new learning space will be realised in the context of its contribution to employment and economic development.

E-competences and professional development are important elements in establishing the background for competitiveness and economic growth. The need for flexible response to new challenges, for better adaptability, for training the workforce with renewed competences, and above all the broad concept of lifelong learning, make up the key terms in the new generation EU educational programmes.

E-competences are essential for successful careers and for the promotion of links between education, training and business. E-learning is the major enabling factor for the efficient involvement in the new competence development process, contributing also to the mainstreaming of innovation. A developing consensus is confident that e-learning has moved from vision to reality, accompanied by the evolution of its practical meanings and concepts. The new competency system is strongly rooted in and related to e-learning, using collaborative and knowledge management tools, in the increasingly integrated contexts of education – training – work – home.

Proper identification and development of competences, and e-competences in the digital economy requires the reconsideration of different modalities of achieving knowledge and integrating it into personal portfolios. The ongoing Bologna process is adding further requirements to the new structuring of skills and competences, with creative contributions from the educational community. Recognition of informal and non formal learning is becoming a massive movement, incorporated in educational and employment policies, and with the prospect of leading to a European qualification framework. An even more confident approach to issues of quality in learning is a pre-requisite for consolidated implementation.

The EDEN 2006 Annual Conference in Vienna, announced with the above concept, welcomes the European professional and academic community and acknowledges with pleasure their positive feedback expressed by the high interest and the many valuable submissions received. We hope to contribute to the organic development and successful integration of knowledge in the field of e-competences, open, distance and e-learning.

Ingeborg Bø and Andras Szűcs

(4)

Acknowledgement and thanks are given to the Programme Committee

Ingeborg Bø, President of EDEN, Executive Director, Norwegian Association for Distance Education, Norway (Chair)

Hans Kaiser, Rector of Studies, Vienna University of Technology, Austria (Co-Chair)

Peter Kreiml, EU Presidency in VET co-ordinator, Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, Austria (Co-Chair)

Ulrich Bernath, Director, Center for Distance Education, Carl von Ossietzky University of Oldenburg, Germany

Mara Brugia, Head of Area, Cedefop

Claudio Dondi, President, Scienter – Research and Innovation for Learning Systems, Italy Christian Dorninger, Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, IT and e-learning

co-ordination, Austria

Ulf-Daniel Ehlers, University of Duisburg Essen, Germany

Maruja Gutierrez-Diaz, Head of Unit, European Commission – DG Education and Culture, Unit: Innovation and transversal policies

Werner Herrmann, Senior Advisor h.c., Cedefop

Carl Holmberg, Swedish Agency for Flexible Learning, Sweden and Chair, EENet – European Experts’ Network for Education and Technology

Nikitas Kastis, Deputy Director General, Lambrakis Foundation, Greece and President, Multimedia Educational Innovation Network, MENON EEIG

Gabriele Kotsis, Chair, Austrian Computer Society, Austria Walter Kugemann, FIM New Learning, Germany

Gila Kurtz, Director, Bar-eLearn Center at Bar Ilan University, Israel Torstein Leidig, SAP Research, Knowledge Management

Roland Mittermeir, University of Klagenfurt, Austria

Claudia Montedoro, Head of Department, ISFOL – Istituto per lo Sviluppo della Formazione dei Lavoratori, Italy

Franz Reichl, Vienna University of Technology, Austria

Torstein Rekkedal, Director, Research and Development, NKI Distance Education, Norway Dangoule Rutkauskiene, Head, Distance Education Centre at Kaunas University of Technology,

Lithuania

Albert Sangra, Director, Educational Innovation and Methodology – EduLab, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Spain

Dirk Schneckenberg, Center for Research on Higher Education and Faculty Development, University of Dortmund, Germany

András Szűcs, Secretary General, EDEN

Alan Tait, Dean, Faculty of Education and Language Studies, The Open University, UK and Chair, EDEN NAP Steering Committee

János Tóth, Member of the Bureau of the European Economic and Social Committee, Vice-President, Hungarian Association of Technology Parks

Wim van Petegem, EuroPACE, Belgium

Martine Vidal, Cabinet director of the rector of CNED, Chief Editor of the Journal “Distances et savoirs”, Chargée de mission for research and development on behalf of the rector, general director of CNED, France

Margerita Zagmajster, Deputy Director, Slovenian Institute for Adult Education, Slovenia

(5)

E-Learning in the First Semester of an Undergraduate Medical Curriculum 559 Josef Smolle, Institute of Medical Informatics, Reinhard Staber, Florian Hye, Virtual Medical Campus Department, Elke Jamer, Student Records-Registrar’s Office, Silvia Macher, Heide Neges, Quality Assurance and Organization of Teaching, Gilbert Reibnegger, Vice-Rector’s Office for Teaching and Studies, Medical University of Graz, Austria

(14)

Semiprofessional Content for Schools – Experience of Ten Years Assessing, Evaluating and 565 Maintaining E-Content

Peter Lorenz, Höhere Lehranstalt für Datenverarbeitung, Austria

INSTITUTIONAL PRACTICE OF INTEGRATING E-LEARNING

Virtual University Model in Finland – From Strategy to Practice 569 Eija Ristimäki, FVU Service Unit, Päivi Virtanen,University of Helsinki, Kristiina Karjalainen,

Lappeenranta University of Technology, Julian Lindberg, FVU Service Unit, Kari Liukkunen, Merja Ruotsalainen, University of Oulu, Finland

Integrating Quality into the DNA of Distance Education 573

Scott G. Herd, Utah Valley State University, USA

The Fostering of Innovative eLearning Strategies in European Higher Education 579 James Aczel, Pascale Hardy, The Open University, United Kingdom, Olivier Cotinat,

Katherine Maillet, Institut National des Telecommunications, France, Adelaide Franco, Microsoft, Portugal, Helen Iggulden, Karen Staniland, University of Salford, United Kingdom,

László Komáromi, SZÁMALK Education and Information Technology Ltd., Hungary,

Sara Medina, Andreas Meiszner, Mark Spinoglio, Sociedade Portuguesa de Inovaçăo (SPI), Portugal, Eva Obermueller, Franz Reichl, Vienna University of Technology, Austria

E-Literacy and the Role of Academic Libraries in Lifelong Learning 585 Christine Michielsens, Wim Van Petegem & Steven Verjans, AVNet – K.U.Leuven, Belgium

How to Assess the Quality of Online Learning and Teaching Material? Quality Guidelines for 591 Educational Online Content and its Practical Applicability Illustrated with a Current Case Study:

Evaluation of Austrian E-Content Collections

Veronika Hornung-Prähauser, Heinz Mayringer, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft, Austria

“To Change or Not to Change” – How Professionals Cope with the Digital Change in Higher 598 Education

Hege Christin Stenhammer, Bodø University College, Norway

Re-Educating Professors to Enter the E-Learning Arena 604

Bodil Ask, Agder University College, Harald Haugen, Stord/Haugesund University College, Norway

Language Tutors at the OUUK – Their (E)-Competencies in Open and Distance Learning 610 Uwe Baumann, Monica Shelley, Linda Murphy, The Open University, United Kingdom,

Cynthia White, Massey University, New Zealand

From Classroom to Online: Transition in the Instructor’s Roles in Higher Education 617 Miika Rouvinen, University of Helsinki, Finland

(15)

Professional Development Online for Educators Worldwide 623 Irana Morris, Cambridge International Examinations, Jill Grimshaw,

Cambridge Assessment Network, Cambridge Assessment, United Kingdom

E-Training as a Key Tool for Lifelong and Cross-Sectoral Learning: The Example of 626

“Teaching Europe”

Ruben Lombaert, Frederique Lambrecht, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Belgium

The Hogeschool Gent Experience: Change Management as the Key to Success 632 Jean-Marie Maes & Ivan D’haese, Ghent University College, Belgium

Integrating New Media into University Teaching or Integrating Teachers into New Media? 638 Claire Englund ,Centre for Educational Technology, University of Umeå, Sweden

Living the E-Campus Dream 644

Sinisa Tomic, Kristijan Zimmer, Mario Zagar, Vlatka Paunovic, Ivan Voras, University of Zagreb, Croatia

E-Learning Experience at the Department of Construction Economics and Property Management 650 of Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Lithuania

Natalija Lepkova, Silva Rimkuviene, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Lithuania

CONTRIBUTION OF E-LEARNING TO SOLVING SOCIO-CULTURAL PROBLEMS

Globalisation – An Opportunity for the ‘Uneducated’ to Become ‘Learned’ or Further ‘Excluded’? 656 Mary Bolger, National Learning Network, Ireland

Innovative Learning for Social Inclusion: Equality and Diversity Training Developed by the 661 Open Learning Centre (Galway, Ireland)

John Bradley, Open Learning Centre, National University of Ireland, Alan Bruce, Universal Learning Systems, Ireland

Internet Use by Students in an Attempt to Seek Help in Dealing with School Violence 666 Yaacov Boaz Yablon, School of Education, Bar-Ilan University, Israel

Teachers for Roma Pupils through Distance Learning 672

Michaela Logofatu, Cristina Nedelcut, Beatrice Almasan, University of Bucharest, Gheorghe Sarau, Ministry of National Education, Romania

Nomadicity and Mobility – WiMAX Network in Distance Learning 676 Mehmet Kesim, Anadolu University, Turkey

(16)

NATIONAL E-LEARNING DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES

The E-Learning Experience in Israeli Higher Education: Current Status and Challenges for the Future 681 Gila Kurtz, Zemira R. Mevarech, Bar-Ilan University, Tami Neuthal, MEITAL and Bar-Ilan University, Dov Te’eni, Tel-Aviv University, Sigal Scher-Lahav, MEITAL, Israel

Supporting E-Learning Development Processes: Creating a Context for Teacher Competence 686 Development in Lithuania

Airina Volungeviciene, Danguole Rutkauskiene, Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania

E-Learning Possibilities on National and Institutional Scale in Lithuania 692 Eugenija Strazdiene, Danute Ambraziene, Danguole Rutkauskiene,

Kaunas University of Technology, Lithuania

Taking Higher Education into the Future: A Perspective for Teaching and Learning Biotechnology 698 in the Malaysian Context

Malini Eliatamby, Taylor’s College Subang Jaya, Malaysia

SHORT PAPERS

The Disappearing Entry Barriers to the Provision of Distance Education 703 Brian Mulligan, Institute of Technology Sligo, Ireland

Message from the Floor 708

Jan-Erik Stark, Nynashamns KompetensCentrum, Sweden

E-Competence Based Globalised Employment 712

Sarolta Zárda and Géza Bognár, Dennis Gabor College, Hungary

Transition from Traditional Distance Learning to E-Learning at the Budapest Business School 719 Éva Sandor-Kriszt, Tamás Radványi, Budapest Business School, Hungary

The Field Study as an Educational Technique in Open and Distance Learning 722 Paraskevi Vassala, Hellenic Open University, Greece

Library Support for Lifelong Learning: Remaining Current 728

Nancy J. Mactague, Aurora University, Veronica Oleszkiewicz, American Academy of Pediatrics, USA

Welcome – Webbased E-Learning for SME and Craftsmen of Modern Europe 735 Helena Bijnens, Johannes De Gruyter, Ilse Op de Beeck, EuroPACE ivzw, Belgium

Onno Reiners, Bitmedia, Germany, Mario Felderer, Bitmedia, Austria

Is E-Learning a Threat to Distance Learning? – A Word of Caution 740 Ben Elder, The College of Estate Management, United Kingdom

(17)

Knowledge Cooperation: A Way for Integrating Learning and Knowledge Processes 744 Marco Bettoni and Ronny Mathieu, Swiss Distance University of Applied Sciences, Switzerland

Institutional Organisation and Use of Technology for Teaching in Higher Education in Norway 748 Per Arneberg, Norway Opening Universities, Norway

The Impact of the Organizational Environment on Process-Oriented Workplace Learning 750 Richard Pircher, Hanna Risku, Danube University Krems, Austria

Establishing an Interactive E-Learning Programme by Using Project Based Computer Supported 756 Collaborative Learning

Enrique Benimeli Bofarull, Peter Haber, Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria

The Methods, Aims and Problems of ICT and E-Learning Development in Lithuanian Universities 761 Arturas Mickus, Vida Zviniene, Antanas Vidziunas, Vytautas Magnus University, Lithuania

(18)

TEACHING AND LEARNING AFTER THE KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY DIGITAL CHALLENGES AND NEW STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITIES

Per R. Stokke, Statoil ASA and Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

Abstract

Many educators still struggle to understand the implications of the continuing development of information and communication technologies. While some tend to assume that the knowledge economy will continue to evolve as a human centric communications network between teacher and student, this paper argues that education in the future increasingly will be conducted through “software-based teachers” on ubiquitous networks of digital knowledge components managed and maintained by autonomous agents. Such object centric networks will be operated by new and powerful computer technologies with little or no human interaction, linked across the planet on a new ubiquitous network of autonomous objects. It will change virtually every aspect of our lives; business, investing, science, health care, entertainment, teaching, learning and more.

Introduction

The prevailing economic and organizational paradigm has always influenced profoundly teacher education. Advances in information and communication technology continue to be the key driving forces behind each new paradigm. During the industrial economy of the early and middle part of the last century teacher education was organized around the fact that knowledge resources had a physical presence and co-existence in time and space (documents, books, teachers, students), and that a hierarchical command and control structure (the sage on the stage) were essential prerequisites for teaching and learning.

In the latter part of the 20th century we witnessed enormous developments in information and communication technologies. This lead to virtually networked organizations of today’s knowledge economy enhanced by ICT and thus made independent of time and space. This was accompanied by an evolution in teacher education from a teacher centric to a more learner centric paradigm, sometimes characterized with the expression “from the sage on the stage to the guide on the side”. Teacher education today seems to reflect the basic premise of this new economic paradigm. The traditional role of the teacher as a “sage on the stage” is increasingly seen as a legacy from the industrial economy, and we are now increasingly focusing on ICT enabled knowledge networks rather than hierarchies. The emphasis seems to be on the more active role of the learners and the teacher is increasingly seen more as a guide than a commander (the guide on the side).

Faced with the emerging technologies of tomorrow, we see the contours of yet another such paradigm change. With the gradual convergence of new, miniaturized, extremely powerful and cheap technologies, we see the outlines of completely “individualized learning” in a “ubiquitous global network” in an object networked economy based on “automata relationships”. The next economy will be dominated by ubiquitous technologies and pervasive computing partly independent and to a large degree beyond direct human control and interaction. The old industrial style dichotomy of the human teacher’s role vis-a-vis the learner will loose its relevance and seize to be a valid concern in the completely wired world of the future. It will be entirely “learner centric” and the “guide on the side”will not be a human but an intelligent automated software agent; “the ghost in the machine”. The coming of the object network economy will challenge our powers of creative imagination to a point not at all foreseen, nor even partly understood, by most educators today.

(19)

Visioning

In a 1997 paper in Harvard Business Review by Peter Drücker, Esther Dyson, Charles Handy, Paul Saffo and Peter Senge, entitled “Looking Ahead: Implications of the Present”, Drücker states the following: “In human affairs – political, social, economic, or business – it is pointless to try to predict the future, let alone attempt to look ahead 75 years. But it is possible – and fruitful – to identify major events that have already happened, irrevocably, and that will have predictable effects in the next decade or two. It is possible, in other words, to identify and prepare for the future that has already happened.”

(Drücker et al.,1997).

New technologies emerge (ETC, 2004) and become realities (Roush, 2003) long before they gain attention and wide application in business and industry. Some emerging technologies are science fact today, and the potential impact of these and other emerging technologies is up to our imagination and ability to vision the future.

In 1985 in two consecutive landmark articles in Harvard Business Review, Pierre Wack, former head of the business environment division of the Royal Duch/Shell Group planning department, demonstrated the power of scenarios in envisioning and preparing for the 1973 oil crisis well in advance of this devastating incidence for the global economy (Wack, 1985). Since then, scenarios have come to be regarded as a sober and effective tool for well founded visioning of plausible futures.

In 1995 Accenture, then Andersen Consulting, developed a series of scenarios under the name

“DAVINCI; Virtual Corporation”, outlining how present and future technology was changing the way business and industry organized for creating value. Subscript to these scenarios was: “Challenging Your Assumptions”, a telling expression testifying to the onset of the knowledge economy, and the need for a new outlook, a new perspective and new solutions to old problems.

The Future is Already Here…

“The future is already here, it’s just unevenly distributed.” This famous quote from science fiction writer William Gibson rings as true today as when it was first published (Gibson, 1984).

At the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) we have, since 1999, experimented with new methods for sourcing, processing and distributing knowledge. One of the courses in this experiment, entitled “Digital Communication and Organizational Challenges”, is designed to serve as an example of its own name. The course illustrates in practice how modern information and communication technologies challenges accepted organizational theory in general and the current educational paradigm in particular, and outlines scenarios for how new and emerging technologies will change organizing in the future. It uses most available information and communication technologies including online multimedia demos, web based streaming video, live web casts, and video conferences, and is built entirely around a virtual value chain sourcing absolutely all its knowledge content in a global knowledge network.

The bulk of the course consist of up to twenty virtual guest lectures by educators, researchers, consultants and industry executives around the world. The digitized knowledge products made available by these resource persons make up the core value of the courses and represents its intellectual capital.

Traditionally, guest lecturers would have to be physically present in the class room. However, new ICTs are used to make all guest lecturers available real time, via video conference and real time web cast for a global audience authorized to access to the course web. In addition, recordings of all lectures are made available on the course web as streaming video synchronized with slides and accompanying multimedia demos for later perusal at the students’ leisure. This year we are experimenting with streaming recorded and live broadcasts via cell phones on the new 3G network and on the newest wireless and Bluetooth enabled PDAs.

Supplementing this main core of digital knowledge products are the traditional reading assignments, all of whom are made available or accessible as digital full text documents or books via the course web.

Many science journals now offer online copies of their articles for teaching purposes, and while online bookstores make it possible to purchase most traditional books online, many are now offering an

(20)

increasing number of e-books for purchase and download online. Most university libraries offer online access to a large number of digital full text documents and books.

The traditional reading assignments normally constitute the bulk of the knowledge transfer in a traditional course-based learning experience. However, the new multimedia technologies make it possible to substitute much of the traditional written text with rich and powerful multimedia demos offered online as streaming video. These courses use online multimedia demos from a global network of suppliers as a test for this new concept. Multimedia demos can be short recordings edited and cast especially for teaching, communication and demonstration purposes, or they can be ad-hoc recordings illustrating real-life processes and occurrences, much like TV reports and features.

All in all, the course illustrates the concept of virtual learning enterprises. Operating almost exclusively in “marketspace”, and built around a “virtual value chain” characteristic of the knowledge economy, it uses ad-hoc or permanent knowledge networks for its incoming and outgoing logistics. Based on initially unstructured information and unrefined knowledge components as its basic resource and raw material, it can easily be viewed as the first modest precursor of a virtual learning enterprise.

These budding virtual “learning enterprises” are mostly based on a personal professional network, taking advantage of generous “pro bono” knowledge input. However, we clearly see the contours of an evolving knowledge market where unstructured information and unrefined knowledge components will be available in digital form on open or proprietary networks at market prices following normal market mechanisms. Such digital knowledge components can easily be accessed, sourced, configured and distributed using automated software agents tailored to each student’s individual needs and requirements.

After the Knowledge Economy

While the onset of the knowledge economy challenged the assumptions of both industry leaders and educators with an industrial economy paradigm outlook for how their respective activities should be organized, so will the new paradigm after the knowledge economy. Most educators today, despite experiencing first hand the digital revolution that is hurling us forward through the knowledge economy, still envision the next economy as a continuous function of the present, interpolated linearly into the future. One of the most common but erroneous assumptions is that human-centric networks and human relationships will continue to be key drivers in the next economy as they are in the present knowledge economy.

Some technologies are science fact today, and the potential impact of these and other emerging technologies is truly awesome. New breakthroughs in bandwidth-, transistor-, network-, and software- technologies, the four key technologies for further advances in ICT, are making present day capabilities obsolete before business and industry have managed to come to terms with “what is”, and much less so of “what will be”. Wireless and optical fiber networks of unimaginable bandwidth, and transistor capacity pushing Moor’s law towards its quantum limits and beyond will greatly enhance, not only human communication, but communication with and between any hardware object and software agent in the world.

Such capabilities, morphing into ubiquitous- and pervasive computing, will revolutionize education once again. Tomorrow, the traditional as well as today’s advanced concepts of education will be obsolete. In the next five years, a number of powerful, miniaturized and cheap technologies will converge to gather and intelligently deploy vast amounts of information, enabling a world in which objects can sense, reason, communicate and act. Where, for every physical entity or event, there will be a virtual collaborating double. Where the time between stimulus and response will approach zero.

Where information, insight and knowledge will be bought and sold in a market that rewards those who build trust and harness the real-time economy.

Ray Kurzweil, one of the world’s leading authorities on artificial intelligence, reflects on the future in his 1999 book “The Age of Spiritual Machines” (Kurzweil, 1999). In this book he builds powerful arguments for some staggering visions. “Five years from now computers will be able to perform a trillion calculations per second, and will enable simultaneous translation of most language pairs. Fifteen

(21)

years in the future computers will enable the memory capacity and computational ability of the human brain, and interaction with computers will involve gestures and two way spoken communications. Most learning will be conducted through “software-based teachers”.

Twenty five years from now computers will have the capacity of 1.000 human brains, and the majority of communication does not involve a human. Computers will have read all available human- and machine-generated literature and will be learning on their own. Machines will claim to be “conscious”.

James Martin, the author of the 2000 book “After the Internet: Alien Intelligence” (Martin 2000) states that most computing today is used merely to emulate human thought processes. He also predicts that the next economy will see machine/alien intelligence feeding on itself and growing like a chain reaction, linked across the planet on a ubiquitous Internet. This will change virtually every aspect of our lives: business, investing, science, health care, entertainment, and more. Instead of merely following human logic, computers will develop an alien intelligence that is radically different from human intelligence and incomparably more powerful in its focused areas.

Scenario: Working in an Object Networked Economy

Imagine a world in which most objects embedded with tiny computers will manage most daily tasks, and organizations will deliver goods and services business-to-object, rather than business-to-business or business-to-consumer. The overall effect will be the emergence of an Object Networked Economy based on ubiquitous integration with portfolios of online realities and automata relationships as the new organizing logic. New types of organizations Ubiquitous Corporations, “UbiqCorp” for short – will deliver goods and services to an ever-growing number of objects, all around us. Business-to-object data will flow both ways through wireless and Internet connections, and all scheduling, record-keeping, invoicing and payments will be fully automated. The need for costly, time-consuming person-to-person transactions will be minimized, freeing workers for more productive decision-making activities, which are in turn empowered through superior insight into real-time business activity.

These are just some of the effects of a coming technology revolution, driven by the ubiquitous presence of microprocessors in homes, offices, vehicles, appliances – or any object, large or small, inorganic or organic, that surrounds us in our daily life or makes up our global micro- and macro-environment. And remarkable as it is that virtually every object in our daily lives and in our world may soon have a mind of its own.

The implications and opportunities for business and for education and teachers are even more stunning.

In this world all knowledge will be available world wide as high quality digital knowledge components on high speed wireless networks and can be accessed any time anywhere with any suitable object.

Everybody can be life time students with their own private dedicated software based tutor and teacher that will guide us through individually designed learning environments, supplying knowledge from a world wide network, demanding our attention, monitoring our individual learning curves and rewarding our achievements.

What does all this mean for teacher education? Basically it means the same as for any organization, a totally new business model that require new thinking, new assumptions and an entirely new outlook on the current value proposal. Just as businesses seeking to understand and leverage the opportunities of the coming business-to-object era, teacher education should consider these basic “UbiqCorp”

principals: your biggest and best customers will be objects. Your profits will come from value propositions rather than products. There will be no up-front payment; everything will be paid per use.

You will monitor and track all your assets. You will always know what you have, where it is and what it is doing. There will be no waste-inventory based on real data, rather than plans. You will not be working as an employee, rather according to dynamic personalized contracts, or as “freelancers”.

References

1. GIBSON, W. (1984) Neuromancer,HarperCollins, 317p.

2. DRUCKER, P., ET AL.(1997) Looking Ahead: Implications of the Present, Harvard Busines Review 1997

(22)

3. ETC (2004) Emerging Technologies Conference at MIT, September 2004

4. ROUSH, W. (2003) The Internet Reborn, Technology Review, October 2003, pp.28-37 5. WACK, P. (1985) Scenarios: Uncharted Waters Ahead, Harvard Business Review 1985

6. KURZWEIL, R. (1999) The Age of Spiritual Machines: How We Will Live, Work, and Think in the New Age of Intelligent Machines,Orion Business Books, p. 388

7. MARTIN, J. (2000) After the Internet: Alien Intelligence,Capital Press, p. 480 Author

Professor Dr. Per R. Stokke

Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Sociology and Political Science NO-7491 Trondheim

Norway

(23)

UBIQUITOUS LEARNING AN EDUCOLOGICAL QUESTION

Arvid Löfberg, Department of Education, Stockholm University, Sweden

Abstract

In this short paper a view, based in a constructivist understanding of learning and knowledge development, is presented on the process of designing new digital technology with the purpose of enhancing ubiquitous learning. This perspective focuses the space used by the learner for task orientated action as part of the learning process. Designing new educational techniques from this perspective can be understood in analogy with an architect’s work in designing a room for human activity.

The idea that we ought to enhance learning in all places of life has emerged during the last couple of years, especially with the development of electronic tools that make it possible for people to engage in learning activities in hitherto unconventional places for learning. The concept of ubiquitous learning becomes in this sense synonymous with what one could call learning in everyday settings. Following this line of thought we are therefore not talking about the type of learning that occurs in traditional school settings with teachers and pupils. It is rather in line with the learning activity that we all are engaged in or become engaged in when trying to cope with various tasks in daily lives.

The questions one can raise are “Where does the educational perspective fit into this line of thinking?”,

“What could be the character of the activity associated with a teaching ambition?” and “What criteria ought we to apply in order to evaluate an educational activity?”

I would like to follow this line of thought from an educological perspective using the term

“educological” in the sense that Qvarsell (2000) uses it, that is to high-lighten education as a science in contrast to education/teaching as a practical activity.

Let me begin by outlining what I mean with an educological approach, followed by what this implies when it comes to a perspective on human learning in terms of constructivism and how we can conceive the prerequisites for human learning. I will end by discussing what function new digital techniques can have in order to enhance these prerequisites.

Educology and the science of education

By using the concept educology I want to emphasize that the science of education or inquiries into educational issues is not only a question of attaining technical knowledge of how to proceed in order to carry through a preconceived educational strategy. What I am trying to avoid is the idea that basically education is the technique needed in order to transmit knowledge. In order to fully understand the educational issues involved when considering the possibilities of new digital techniques for communication it is necessary to take a much broader approach that involves questions of human learning and what human knowledge construction is all about.

To me an educological approach implies openness to the whole question of human growth, for individuals as well as for people as parts of a social community. In other words, it is an open field of inquiry where we must allow ourselves to address fundamental questions of human development of knowledge. A better understanding of how we as individuals and members of social groups build knowledge will also increase our ability to evaluate the implementation of new technique for human development.

In the following argumentation I will allow myself to approach the question of human learning from a constructivist perspective and briefly present what this perspective implies, and the consequences I can see when considering using new techniques as means to enhance ubiquitous learning.

(24)

Constructivism

I would like to refer to an article I wrote (Löfberg, in press) for an anthology that is under publication and where I discuss the appropriation of digital technique from a constructivist perspective on human learning. The main issue that I raise in this article is the difference between focussing on external stimuli and human reaction (on the one hand) and focussing human perception and action as a paradigm for trying to understand human learning (on the other).

When we focus stimuli and reactions we are actually focusing on how learning appears to us from an outside perspective which easily leads over to the question of what type of external stimulation we can provide in order to enhance learning. As an educational issue it goes hand in hand with the idea of transmitting pre-formulated knowledge which at the same time is the traditional view on education that I want to question. I do not want to argue against the idea of providing knowledge as an educational issue. The issue I want to raise is that this as an educational perspective has its limits. There is more to human learning than providing already formulated knowledge to someone that seemingly lacks that knowledge.

By focusing perception and action we are approaching the issue of learning and human development of knowledge from the learner’s perspective. The basic question is how we as humans construct our knowledge about the world we live in. For me this perspective goes back to Piaget, especially as he puts forward this line of reasoning in his work on genetic epistemology (1970, 1972). It is in interaction with our world that we can obtain the necessary experience or elements that can be used as building blocks for constructing an adequate way to perceive and understand the world around us. By adequate I mean a world that we can act in and act towards in such a way that it meets our expectations. One could say that we appropriate our world or take it into possession by building our own specific human knowledge about what the world in fact affords us.

The central elements in this perspective on human learning are therefore such qualities of the world that can afford meaning to us and can be used by us in order to attain what we aspire when acting in and on the world. It is through our actions we gain experiences about what the world affords, and these experiences become the building blocks in the knowledge we build up and construct about the world we live in. Knowledge is therefore, in accord with this line of reasoning, nothing that lies out there for us to discover. It is a result of our own construction based in our action in the world and our experiences of this world. This line of reasoning is built on Gibson’s (1979) concept of affordance but also on Peirce’s pragmatist view on knowledge explicated during the late 1800´s, especially in his article The architecture of theories, published in the Monist, 1891, according to which knowledge can never be understood as a mirror of the world as it is, in any absolute sense. Knowledge ought therefore to be understood as always delimited by the range of our possible actions and our capacity to perceive the consequences of our actions.

In my view I would therefore argue that learning, when used to describe the process of acquiring knowledge, must always be understood as the result of action in and towards the world in combination with our perception of the world. What we actually do when we learn is building knowledge about the world that leads to the construction of a liveable context and in that sense a meaningful context for us as humans. Before we act we can never know what elements of the world can come to afford experiential qualities that can be assimilated by our existing knowledge or logical system. I would therefore argue that the most essential prerequisite for learning is, in fact, action.

Room and place – an arena for action

Based in the previous reasoning it seems feasible to conceive that what actually happens during the process of learning and construction of knowledge is that we are in fact perceptually differentiating our environment. Perception is not primarily discovering new aspects of our environment or using our senses in a more and more refined way. It is rather a function of applying the knowledge of what to expect out there for us to see. From this point of departure it is reasonable to think that in order to differentiate the environment so that it becomes perceptible in any meaningful way, we must involve a long process of learning from early childhood. It is a process of both individual learning and socialisation, and the world we live in as grown-ups is not the same world we lived in as children. At least not in the sense of the

(25)

world we perceive and hold meaning to us, as humans. This is also the reason why I prefer to use the concept “context” or better still “liveable context” to designate the differentiated environment as we perceive it.

I use the concept liveable because our orientation to the world around is not hap hazardous. The world or rather the context we create is a context that affords us possibilities to carry out the tasks needed in order to live the way we desire or need in order to grow and survive. Our actions towards the world we live in are best conceived as task orientated, where tasks must be understood very broadly. We carry out both mental and physical tasks, both individual and social tasks.

In order for learning and knowledge construction to be possible we need to have access to a room or place that provides the opportunity for task-oriented actions. By acting in the world we create the information we need in order to carry out our tasks, and it is the available room for action that provides the substance that we transform into information.

It is unrealistic or impossible to understand information as something that is transmitted as such. As educators we may perceive and understand something as informative, but it is only by expanding someone’s room for action with the specific information’s actual substance that we may hope to transmit our own view on what has informational meaning to us. Our task as educators or the task that confronts any teacher is to try to conceive what constitutes a specific pupil’s room for action at a given moment, and it is by interacting with that specific room that we may in fact cause a substantial change in that room that will or may allow such action by the pupil that this substantial change is perceived and becomes part of his or hers liveable context. This pertains to whom so ever we see as receiver of the information we feel we want to transmit, either we talk of pupils, students, adult learners, a general public that we feel we want to inform or the person we are having a conversation with.

The above may sound a bit abstract and unduly philosophical, but what I want to say is that as an educator or as an informant we must focus a possible room for action for learners or for those we intend to inform rather than asking how we should design the information so that it becomes transmittable as such.

Designing a room for learning

Considering the foregoing reasoning, especially the notion that from a learner’s perspective all learning takes place in relation to task-oriented actions within the space for action allowed or afforded by a learner’s liveable context, I would like to launch the following idea: as educators, especially when we develop new techniques in order to enhance ubiquitous learning, we are in fact, together with the learner, participating in building up the learner’s room for action.

When addressing the question of designing techniques to enhance learning from an educational perspective there is a tendency to focus on techniques as such. We may ask ourselves how this technique is viewed by the learner or we may ask questions about how this technique can carry certain information. In whatever way we phrase our questions, the technique is often regarded as a mediating link between the learner and the educator, a link that promotes direct communication.

The conceptual frame of reference, I would like to put forward, is the idea that when talking about how new techniques ought to be designed we should recognise that we are involved in designing a room for action. In fact I think it would be fruitful to draw an analogy to the role of an architect who is designing a room for human living, the difference being that the architectural challenge is designing a room for task-oriented action and the questions we should phrase is where and how new technique is related to this room. What changes in the room for task orientated action do we introduce when launching techniques that supposedly are intended to enhance learning? What is the design challenge facing us when we talk in terms of ubiquitous learning?

The crucial issue is that we should be aware of the fact that we are introducing a new aspect in a space for action. As educators we are not involved in transmitting knowledge or information. Instead it could be fruitful to view us as architects participating in the design of the learner’s space for task-oriented action.

(26)

A central and overarching criterion to take into consideration when introducing this new aspect in the learner’s space for task-oriented action is to ask ourselves in what way this technique enhances perceptual differentiation of the learner’s liveable context in the sense I used the term earlier.

Having said this, I briefly want to return to the idea of education as a science, that is to educology. The aforementioned frame of reference does not stop as a way to view the question of designing new technique with educational ambitions. To my mind it is also an interesting approach to deepen our understanding of what human knowledge construction is all about. The new digital technique and its application in daily life and its consequences for ubiquitous learning give us a unique opportunity to deepen our understanding of human knowledge construction.

References

1. GIBSON, J. J. (1979) The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Boston: Houghton 2. LÖFBERG, A. (in press) To study the appropriation of digital technique as perceptual learning,

in: Hernwall, P. (Ed) People and Technology – ICT in Everyday Life

3. PEIRCE, C. S. (1891) The architecture of theories,The Monist, No 2, pp. 171-176 4. PIAGET, JEAN(1970) Genetic Epistemology,New York: Columbia University Press

5. PIAGET, J. (1972) The Principles of Genetic Epistemology,London: Routledge & Kegan Paul 6. QVARSELL, B. (2000) Children’s use of media as transformed experience, Educological and

psychological dimensions, in: Bea van den Berg & Jan van den Bulck (eds.) Children and Media, A Multidisciplinary Approach, Leuven, Belgium: Garant, pp. 33-47

Author

Professor Arvid Löfberg, Ph.D.

Department of Education, Stockholm University SE-10691 Stockholm

arvid@ped.su.se

(27)

TOWARDS CATEGORISATION OF PROFESSIONAL LEARNING PROJECTS

Tapio Koskinen, Anna-Kaarina Kairamo, Leena Saurén

Helsinki University of Technology, Lifelong Learning Institute Dipoli, Finland

Introduction

Professional learning contains many overlapping areas and many researchers have differing views about what constitutes professional learning. This paper introduces two complementary categorisations of the broad subject area of research and development projects of professional learning. The purpose of the categorisations is to provide a system for grouping projects. The categorisation is much needed. It helps to classify projects and makes it easier to identify different areas of research which, in turn, helps collaboration between researchers. The need for workplace learning and together with it the need for research in the field has grown recently due to technological changes and the tremendous growth of global competition. As, for example Marquardt and Kearsley (1998) point out, corporate training has increased 30 times the rate of college education in recent years.

The two models of categorisation of research and development projects in the field are the one elaborated by prof. Jari Multisilta (2004) and the one developed within the framework of ProLearn Network of Excellence project by Helsinki University of Technology.

Model of levels in learning research

The model elaborated by prof. Multisilta is known as the model of levels in learning research (Figure 1.).

The work is done for the University of Helsinki and it is a proposal for clarify interdisciplinary learning research at the university. The model consists of five stages (levels) (Multisilta, 2004).

The research focus on the first level is on brains and learning. The level includes the discipline of researching the biological basis of learning. For example neuroscience is on this level. In the second level, learning is viewed as a process, learning theories from the interdisciplinary starting point, evaluation of learning and knowledge, motivation, effects of culture on learning as well as value-, attitude- and emotional dimensions of learning are examined. On this level the research is interdisciplinary, especially in the area of education, psychology and sociology. In the third level learning is viewed from a technological point of view. Learning machine, materials and technologies are central areas in this level. There are many disciplines within the third level, for example, in learning technology technical and data processing sciences are studied and research concerning learning machines includes technical sciences and neuro-computing. Research uses the results of the previous level research. The fourth level contains learning research through real-world problems. Important questions are, for example, collective learning (interface to the second level), learning organisations, expertise, learning and control of knowledge (interface to the third level) and learning at work. The fifth level perspective is social. How knowledge or know-how and innovations influence the development of society and what economical influences can be seen? What additional values learning gives to society? Is it possible to predict and prevent marginalisation by education?