Data analysis report. Interviews
| Authors: Maria del Mar Sanchez Vera, Linda Castañeda Quintero, Isabel Gu>érrez Porlán
| Universidad Murcia
Part 1. Theore,cal Framework .............................................................
2
1. Introduc>on .................................................................................
2
2. European legisla>ve framework in VET............................................
3
3. EQARF/ EQAVET: European frameworks for quality VET ....................
6
4. The importance of e-­‐learning in VET contexts ..................................
9
PART 2. Interviewing ...........................................................................
11
1. Instrument design and collec>ng data process.................................
11
2. Data collec>on instrument ............................................................
12
2.1 Guidelines for the interviewers ...............................................
12
2.2 Ques>ons ..............................................................................
13
3. Process of analysis ........................................................................
15
4. Analysis general aspects ................................................................
15
5. Final Analysis ................................................................................
15
5.1 Descrip>on of the experience .................................................
15
5.2 Pedagogical and digital competence ........................................
19
5.3 Preferences about the course .................................................
22
Part 1. Theore,cal Framework 1. Introduc,on In order to find out the start of the poli>cs and the essen>al educa>onal changes that give room to the informa>on and knowledge society in the field of voca>onal educa>on and training systems, and with the point of view of a reinforced coopera>on at an European level, we need to place ourselves in the Process of Copenhagen (in the Lisbon 2000 framework) and its outcomes about an ac>on plan for 2020-­‐2010. Its con>nuity nowadays, and a`er several communica>ons that have developed it during the years 2004, 2006 and 2008, it's established through the Bruges Communica>on, with a new strategy for the period 2011-­‐2020. This strategy gives an answer to the revision of the Copenhagen achievements un>l the year 2011.To improve the quality and efficiency of VET, and to enhance its aerac>veness and relevance, VET should have high relevance for the labour market and people’s careers. In regarding with these goals, Member States should pursue different objec>ves and ac>ons. A summary of these objec>ves can be found in the following table:
Declara,on of Copenhagen 2002
Bruges Communica,on 2010
Ensure a quality VET. European Framework (EQARF). Make ini>al VET an aerac>ve learning op>on.
Ensure VET Credit Transfer: Common qualifica>ons framework EQF
Policy Guidelines 2005/36/CE
European Credit System for VET ECVET. Foster the excellence, quality and relevance of VET in the labour market.
Promote transparency of professional qualifica>ons: common framework. EUROPASS. Enable flexible access to training and qualifica>ons
Encourage interna>onal mobility in VET
Encourage interna>onal mobility in VET
Promote and ar>culate par>cipa>on of all the agents involved in VET, especially the social partners.
Promote innova>on, crea>vity and entrepreneurship, and the use of new technologies. At na>onal level, partnerships between VET ins>tu>ons, higher educa>on establishments, and design, art, research and innova>on centres should be encouraged. VET ins>tu>ons should be provided with the necessary equipment in terms of new technologies.
Develop professional orienta>on.
Promote equity, social cohesion and ac>ve ci>zenship. Inclusive I-­‐VET and C-­‐VET making VET accessible to all.
Meet the needs of disadvantaged groups, with learning difficul>es and low skilled.
Increase the involvement of VET stakeholders and making the results obtained through European coopera>on beeer known.
Improve the aerac>veness and image of VET as an alterna>ve.
Coordinate the European governments and na>onal instruments in the areas of transparency, recogni>on, quality assurance and mobility.
Strengthen the link between job requirements and VET.
Intensify the coopera>on between VET policy and other relevant policy areas.
Promote entrepreneurial culture and create a business friendly environment.
Improve the quality and comparability of data for EU policy-­‐making in VET.
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
2
Develop skills of workers over 25 years in the context of lifelong learning.
Make good use of EU support.
Reduce barriers between VET and con>nuity in the educa>onal system.
Address the specific needs of VET teachers and trainers, and their adapta>on to the necessary change in the new role of the student, teacher, and the new organiza>onal culture in the knowledge society.
Tab. 1. Main objec>ves and ac>ons in the VET Context. Source: Copenhagen´s Declara>on 2002 and Bruges’ Communica>on 2010. A`er a look to the previous figure we can find how the study and the proposal of the project acquire full meaning in order to obtain a modern VET able to respond to the labour challenges that need to be adapted to the new open and globalized market created by ICT. On the one hand, ICT have created new demands for educa>on in general and VET in par>cular, with regards to the new social and produc>ve requirements. On the other, the quality and the efficiency of the training need to be based in ICT. It's necessary to train for and trough ICT, within more flexible educa>onal frameworks and the new condi>ons for a con>nuous learning. Therefore, and in a European clear bet for VET, it's essen>al to strengthen the necessary condi>ons to adapt the skills and qualifica>ons of the people to the requirements and demands of the current produc>on environment (affected by the global crisis, the increase of the emerging economical powers, unemployment, demographic change and inequality, climate change and also the increasing and fast technological change) In a more explicit way, in the following lines we will be dealing with, on the one hand, the general legisla>ve framework governing the VET development in Europe and EQARF/ EQAVET, such as the European frameworks for quality VET; and on the other, with a quick reference to the virtual learning environments (e-­‐learning) and their importance in a VET context. 2. European legisla,ve framework in VET
The main legisla>ve sources to take into account in a VET context are the following: • Communica>on of 8 December 1999 on a Commission ini>a>ve for the special European Council of Lisbon, 23 and 24 March 2000 -­‐ eEurope -­‐ An informa>on society for all [COM(1999) 687 final -­‐ not published in the Official Journal]. In hep://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/
sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=en&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=1999
&nu_doc=687
• Communica>on from the Commission of 3 March 2010 -­‐ Europe 2020 A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth [COM(2010) 2020 final] In hep://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/
LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52010DC2020:EN:NOT
• Communiqué of the European Ministers for voca>onal educa>on and training, the European social partner s and the European Commission, mee>ng in Bordeaux on 26 November 008 to review the priori>es and strategies of the Copenhagen process. In hep://ec.europa.eu/
educa>on/lifelong-­‐learning-­‐olicy/doc/voca>onal/bordeaux_en.pdf
• Communiqué of the European Ministers for Voca>onal Educa>on and Training, the European social Partners and the European Commission, mee>ng in Bruges on 7 December 2010 to review the strategic approach and priori>es of the Copenhagen process for 2011-­‐2020. In hep://ec.europa.eu/educa>on/lifelong-­‐learning-­‐policy/doc/voca>onal/bruges_en.pdf
• Communiqué of the European Ministers of Voca>onal Educa>on and Training, the European Social partners and the European Commission, convened in Helsinki on 5 December 2006 to eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
3
review the priori>es and strategies of the Copenhagen Process. In hep://ec.europa.eu/
educa>on/lifelong-­‐learning-­‐policy/doc/voca>onal/helsinki_en.pdf
• Conclusions of the Council and of the Representa>ves of the Governments of the Member States, mee>ng within the Council, on the priori>es for enhanced European coopera>on in voca>onal educa>on and training for the period 2011-­‐2020 . In Official Journal C 324 , 01/12/2010 P. 0005 – 0015 hep://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:
2010:324:0005:01:EN:HTML
• Decision No 2318/2003/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 December 2003 adop>ng a mul>annual programme (2004 to 2006) for the effec>ve integra>on of informa>on and communica>on technologies (ICT) in educa>on and training systems in Europe (eLearning Programme) Official Journal L 345 , 31/12/2003 P. 0009 – 0016 hep://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/
LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003D2318:EN:HTML
• Decision No 2241/2004/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 on a single Community framework for the transparency of qualifica>ons and competences (Europass). In hep://europa.eu/legisla>on_summaries/educa>on_training_youth/
lifelong_learning/c11077_en.htm
• Declara>on of the European Ministers of Voca>onal Educa>on and Training, and the European Commission, convened in Copenhagen on 29 and 30 November 2002, on enhanced European coopera>on in voca>onal educa>on and training. In hep://ec.europa.eu/educa>on/pdf/
doc125_en.pdf
• Declara>on of the European Ministers of Voca>onal Educa>on and Training, and the European Commission, convened in Copenhagen on 29 and 30 November 2002, on enhanced European coopera>on in voca>onal educa>on and training. In hep://ec.europa.eu/educa>on/pdf/
doc125_en.pdf
• Maastricht Communiqué on the Future Priori>es of Enhanced European Coopera>on in Voca>onal Educa>on and Training (VET) (Review of the Copenhagen Declara>on of 30 November 2002). In hep://ec.europa.eu/educa>on/lifelong-­‐learning-­‐policy/doc/voca>onal/
maastricht_en.pdf
• Recommenda>on (EC) No 2006/961 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on transna>onal mobility within the Community for educa>on and training purposes: European Quality Charter for Mobility [Official Journal L 394 of 30.12.2006]. In hep://
europa.eu/legisla>on_summaries/educa>on_training_youth/lifelong_learning/c11085_en.htm
• Recommenda>on 2006/962/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 on key competences for lifelong learning [Official Journal L 394 of 30.12.2006]. In hep://europa.eu/legisla>on_summaries/educa>on_training_youth/
lifelong_learning/c11090_en.htm
• Recommenda>on of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European Credit System for Voca>onal Educa>on and Training (ECVET) Text with EEA relevance Official Journal C 155 , 08/07/2009 P. 0011 – 0018. In hep://eur-­‐
lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:155:0011:01:EN:HTML
• Recommenda>on of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2009 on the establishment of a European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for Voca>onal Educa>on and Training Text with EEA relevance. Official Journal C 155 , 08/07/2009 P. 0001 – 0010. In hep://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2009:155:0001:01:EN:HTML
• Recommenda>on of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifica>ons Framework for lifelong learning (Text with EEA eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
4
relevance) Official Journal C 111 , 06/05/2008 P. 0001 – 0007. In hep://eur-­‐lex.europa.eu/
LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32008H0506%2801%29:EN:HTML
Title
Summary
Areas
COPENHAGUEN DECLARATION 2002
Set the priori4es of the Copenhagen process on enhanced European coopera4on in voca4onal educa4on and training (VET).
This process aims to improve the performance, quality and aCrac4veness of VET in Europe. It seeks to encourage the use of the various voca4onal training opportuni4es within the lifelong learning context and with the help of the digital tools.
Reinforcing the European dimension in VET;
Increasing informa4on, guidance and counselling on, as well as the transparency of, VET. Developing tools for the mutual recogni4on and valida4on of competences and qualifica4onsImproving quality assurance in VET.
Confirms the success of the Copenhagen process in raising the visibility and profile of VET at the European level. At the same 4me, it develops the priori4es set by the Copenhagen Declara4on.
Applica4on of common instruments and references in reforming and developing VET systems and prac4ces. Increasing public/private investment in VET. Drawing support from European funds (such as social and regional development) to develop VET.
Development of VET systems to cater for the needs of disadvantaged people and groups.
Establishment of open learning approaches as well as flexible and open VET frameworks to enable mobility between different educa4onal levels and contexts.
Improving the relevance and quality of VET in collabora4on with all relevant stakeholders.
Development of learning-­‐conducive environments both in educa4onal ins4tu4ons and in the workplace.
Promo4on of VET teachers’ and trainers’ con4nuous competence development.
MAASTRICH
COMMUNICATION
2004
Evaluates the Copenhagen process, as HELSINKI COMMUNICATION well as reviews its priori4es and strategies. The EUROPASS single 2006
framework for the transparency of qualifica4ons and skills was adopted in 2004. And work is underway on the European Qualifica4ons Framework, the European Credit System for VET (ECVET) and the European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for VET. Improving the image, status, aCrac4veness and quality of VET.
Developing, tes4ng and implemen4ng common European tools for VET, so that they will be in place by 2010.
Taking a systema4c approach to strengthening mutual learning and coopera4on, in par4cular with the use of consistent and comparable data and indicators.
Involving all stakeholders in the implementa4on of the Copenhagen process.
Reviews the priori4es and strategies of BORDEAUX
COMMUNICATION the Copenhagen process in the sight of a future educa4on and training 2008
programmers’ post-­‐2010.
The process has proved to be effec4ve in promo4ng the image of VET, while maintaining the diversity of na4onal VET systems. Implementa4on of VET tools and schemes to promote coopera4on at the European and na4onal levels.
Further improvement of the quality of VET systems and promo4on of the aCrac4veness of VET to all target groups.
Crea4on of beCer links between VET and the labour market
Consolida4on of European coopera4on arrangements.
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
5
Title
Summary
Areas
BRUGES
Provides long-­‐term strategic objec4ves COMMUNICATION for European coopera4on in VET for the 2010
period 2011-­‐20. These objec4ves draw from past achievements and aim to respond to current and future challenges, while taking into account the underlying principles of the Copenhagen process.
VET needs to be flexible and of high quality.
Adapt to labour market evolu4ons and understand emerging sectors and skills.
Ensure the provision of tailored and easily accessible con4nuing training.
Ensure the sustainability and excellence of VET through a common approach to quality assurance.
Empower people to adapt to and manage change by enabling them to acquire key competences.
Be inclusive;
Facilitate and encourage VET learners’ and teachers’ transna4onal mobility.
Secure sustainable funding for VET and ensure the efficient and equitable use of this funding.
The Copenhagen process forms an integral part of the “ET2020” strategic framework and will contribute to achieving the educa4on-­‐related targets of the Europe 2020 strategy.
The global vision for VET calls for a European VET system that is more aCrac4ve, inclusive, relevant, accessible, career-­‐oriented, flexible and innova4ve by 2020.
Based on this vision, the 11 long-­‐term strategic objec4ves for European coopera4on in VET for the period 2011-­‐20, together with the 22 short-­‐
term deliverables for the period 2011-­‐14 that provide concrete ac4ons at na4onal level for achieving the strategic objec4ves. The strengthening of the quality and efficiency as well as the aCrac4veness and relevance of VET.
The improvement of mobility in VET.
The development of crea4vity, innova4on & entrepreneurship
The promo4on of equity, social cohesion and ac4ve ci4zenship.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING
ET2020
Tab. 1. European legisla>ve Framework in VET: Polity & Priori>es. Source: Europe. Legisla>on’s Summaries. European Legisla>ve Framework In Vet: Policy & Priori>es.
3. EQARF/ EQAVET: European frameworks for quality VET
Among all the Copenhague VET progress highlighted and recognized in the following communica>ons a`erwards (2004-­‐2006-­‐2008), being the last one in Bruges 2010, it's worth men>oning what we could call five essen>al instruments supported by all the Members State. Their approach and development is made with the purpose of promo>ng the modernisa>on of VET, transparency in the qualifica>ons, the development of the mobility and the promo>on of the lifelong learning. These five instruments are the following: 1. Common European principles for the iden>fica>on and valida>on of the formal and informal learning, as a common guide and reference for the development and implementa>on of methods and acknowledgements systems of the Members States. 2. Europass: a tool that provides greater clarity in the common understanding of the different capaci>es and qualifica>ons of all European ci>zens. This contributes to the mobility among Member States. In par>cular, there are five essen>al documents in the Europass worth men>oning: •
Curriculum vitae. eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
6
• European Language Passport. • Europass Mobility. • Cer>ficate Supplement • Diploma Supplement 3. European Quality Framework (EQF), with two main objec>ves: Promote the transac>onal mobility and lifelong learning. 4. European Credit System for Voca>onal Educa>on and Training. (ECVET): European System for the transfer and accumula>on of credits for voca>onal training between the United Members. 5. European Quality Assurance Reference Framework, and in par>cular, European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for VET. A more visually detailed study is provided with the following table.
EQARF
Recommenda4on of the European Parliament and the Council of 23th of April 2008 on the establishment of the European Qualifica4ons Framework for lifelong learning: A common reference framework will help Member States, educa4on ins4tu4ons, employers and individuals to compare qualifica4ons across the EU’s diverse educa4on and training systems. This tool is essen4al for developing a European employment market.
CONTEXT
OBJECTIVE
Help Member States to increase the mobility of workers and students in the context on a lifelong learning, through a common recognised qualifica4on outside their own country
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
EQAVET
EQAVET forms part of a series of European ini,a,ves looking for a beCer recogni4on of skills and competencies acquired by learners in different countries or learning environments, including Europass, the European principles for the iden4fica4on and valida4on of non-­‐formal and informal learning, ECVET and the European Qualifica4on Framework for lifelong learning (EQF). EU-­‐level discussion on quality assurance started formally in 2000 with the launch of the European forum on quality.
The Barcelona European Council in March 2002 set up the ambi4ous goal to have European educa4on and training systems a world quality reference by 2010 (see presidency conclusions).
The Copenhagen Declara,on in November 2002 called for enhanced coopera4on in VET quality assurance.
In 2003 a Common Quality Assurance Framework for VET (CQAF) was established proposing common principles, guidelines and tools.
The CQAF was endorsed by the Council in May 2004.
The Helsinki Communiqué in December 2006 highlighted the need to progress from the CQAF to a culture of quality improvement and to strengthen coopera4on on quality improvement in VET.
Help Member States to promote and monitor quality improvement in VET through a common basic quality principles, reference criteria and indicators.
7
EQARF
PREMISES
EQAVET
Member States are called upon to create links between the na4onal qualifica4ons systems and the European Qualifica4ons Framework (EQF). By making competences and qualifica4ons more transparent, the European Qualifica4ons Framework (EQF) is an instrument for the promo4on of lifelong learning. This framework covers both higher educa4on and voca4onal training and It will make it easier for individuals in the EU to communicate the relevant informa4on concerning their competences and their qualifica4ons. Increasing the transparency of qualifica4ons will enable individual ci4zens to judge the rela4ve value of qualifica4ons and improve employers’ ability to judge the profile, content and relevance of the qualifica4ons in the labour market.
EQAVET, which was adopted by EU Member States in June 2009, is a reference tool for policy-­‐makers based on a four-­‐stage quality cycle that includes goal seeng and planning, implementa4on, evalua4on and review. It respects the autonomy of na4onal governments and is a voluntary system to be used by public authori4es and other bodies involved in quality assurance.
Educa4on and training providers will also be able to compare the profile and content of their courses and ensure their quality. The EQF is a tool based on learning outcomes rather than on the dura4on of studies. The main reference level descriptors are: skills; competences and knowledge.
The European Commission supports Member States in this process, par4cularly through ini4a4ves that support co-­‐
opera4on and mutual learning, tes4ng and by developing and providing guidance material and other informa4on. The Commission will also ensure follow-­‐up through a report every four years to the European Parliament and the Council.
The core element of the EQF is a set of eight reference levels describing:
Member States are encouraged to use the framework, and develop, by mid-­‐2011, a na4onal approach to improve quality assurance systems involving all relevant stakeholders. This approach should include the establishment of na4onal reference points for quality assurance, as well as ac4ve par4cipa4on in the relevant European-­‐level network.
As a reference instrument, the framework makes methodological sugges4ons that will help Member States to assess clearly and consistently whether the necessary measures for improving the quality of their VET systems have been implemented and if Unlike systems which guarantee academic they need to be reviewed.
recogni4on based on the dura4on of studies, The methodology proposed by the the EQF covers learning as a whole, in par4cular framework is based on:
learning which takes place outside formal • A cycle consis4ng of four phases educa4on and training ins4tu4ons.
(planning, implementa4on, assessment In 2010 a system for comparing the na4onal and review) described for VET systems and the European framework was providers/systems;
established in all par4cipa4ng States. From • Quality criteria and indica4ve 2012, all new qualifica4ons issued by EU post-­‐
descriptors for each phase of the cycle
secondary ins4tu4ons will automa4cally refer to • Common indicators for assessing one of the EQF's eight qualifica4on levels.
targets, methods, procedures and training results – some indicators are to The EQF is not designed to replace na4onal be based on sta4s4cal data, others are qualifica4ons systems but to supplement the of a qualita4ve nature
ac4ons of the Member States by facilita4ng The recommenda4on stresses a culture of coopera4on between them. This European quality improvement and responsibility at ini4a4ve is based on na4onal qualifica4ons frameworks, although these are themselves not all levels, i.e. at the VET-­‐system, VET-­‐
provider and qualifica4on-­‐awarding levels.
based on any single model.
• What the learner knows.
• What the learner understands.
• What the learner is able to do, regardless of the system under which a par4cular qualifica4on was awarded.
IMPLEMENT
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
8
EQARF
To implement this shared framework for coopera4on between Member States, the Commission emphasises the necessary mutual trust and the level of commitment of the various stakeholders at na4onal, regional and sectorial levels.
The Commission also proposed to designate a na4onal centre to coordinate the rela4onship between the na4onal qualifica4ons system and the EQF by establishing, by April 2009, an EQF advisory group, composed of representa4ves of the Member States and involving the European social partners and other stakeholders.
EQAVET
The European Quality Assurance Reference Framework for VET aCaches importance to systema4c self-­‐assessment. It includes internal and external assessment mechanisms that are to be defined by Member States. This will allow feedback on the progress achieved. Drawing on the framework, Member States should have developed approaches for improving their na4onal quality assurance systems by 18 June 2011 as the most. All relevant stakeholders should have been involved in this development work.
The EQF should also help interna4onal sectorial organisa4ons to bring their own qualifica4ons systems into line with this system shared by the Member States. EQARF Indicators are:
• Relevance of quality systems for VET.
• Investment in the training of both teachers and trainers.
• Par4cipa4on rate in VET programs.
• Comple4on rate in VET programs
• Placement rate in VET programs.
• U4lisa4on of acquired skills at the workplace
• Unemployment rate according to individual criteria.
• Prevalence of vulnerable groups.
• Mechanism to iden4fy training needs in the labour market.
• Schemes used to promote beCer access to VET.
Tab. 2. European Quality Assurance Reference Framework in VET. Source: Legisla>on’s Summaries. 4. The importance of e-­‐learning in VET contexts
The labour market and the demanding jobs are absolutely linked to an essen>al improvement of the educa>onal level. It's necessary to train future workers in a way that enables their integra>on in a modern produc>on apparatus condi>oned by the technological progress. Therefore, the necessary human resources, the workers of the knowledge society, need to have higher technological training; so inves>ng in ICT is a must. That's it, to take advantage of the ICT possibili>es in the area of VET by using new flexible environments in training and from the perspec>ve of lifelong learning. And this is a clear compromise and objec>ve to be reached in 2020, according to the legisla>on men>oned.
The virtual learning environments, the e-­‐learning, can be defined as "The use of technologies in learning opportuni>es, encompassing flexible learning as well as distance learning; and the use of informa>on and communica>on technologies as a communica>on and delivery tool between individuals and groups, to support students and improve the management of learning", according to the Higher Educa>on Funding Council for England.(Cited by Andrews and Haythornthwaite, 2006:2)1 1 Andrews, R & Haythornthwaite, C. (2006). The Sage Handbook of E-­‐learning Research. London: Sage publica4ons. eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
9
Therefore, e-­‐learning shows itself as a clear alterna>ve with a great poten>ality in reply to the recommenda>ons from the general legisla>ve framework in VET, as well as by UNESCO 2. As early as 2002 UNESCO issued a report about the current and future advantages of an open distance learning.
In par>cular, an regarding VET, the agued references throughout this work make a clear bet for enhancing crea>vity, innova>on and entrepreneurship as well as the use of ICT; which should be used to maximise the access to training and to promote ac>ve learning, as well as to develop new methods in both work and school-­‐based VET (ET2020). Addi>onally, there are some explicit references to e-­‐learning 3. The ini>a>ve "eLearning: designing tomorrow's educaHon", launched in May 2000 by the Commission, in response to the Lisbon Council, was endorsed by the European Council at its mee>ng in Feira in June 2000. At its mee>ng in Stockholm in March 2001, the European Council noted the posi>ve results of the ini>a>ve. The "eLearning AcHon Plan" developed the four ac>on lines of the eLearning ini>a>ve (infrastructures and equipment, training, European quality contents and services and coopera>on at all levels) in 10 key ac>ons, bringing together the various Community programmes and instruments, for an increased coherence and synergy between them and for enhanced accessibility to users.
However, and in spite of the flexible learning integra>on being already a compulsory requirement for the formal ins>tu>ons in the UE, UNESCO (2002) points out in the afore men>oned report the lack of teacher training, administra>ve system and support tutorials for students, quality design of courses, methodology used and evalua>on designs. Therefore, and although there are some >mid ini>a>ves in VET, a lot is s>ll to be done4. Summing up, it's necessary a defini>ve unfolding of the e-­‐learning in VET as a proven plan of improvement in the worker's training and their integra>on in the labour market, as well as for the increase in the technological qualifica>on of the ci>zens and the increase in the general knowledge. eLearning allows a more flexible training that adapts to difference profiles with greater number of users and under the same premises of shared knowledge building in coopera>on. Therefore, the required competence standards required in VET have to be acquired trough flexible training environments among others; being e-­‐learning the one chosen. 2
UNESCO (2002). Aprendizaje abierto y a distancia. Consideraciones sobre tendencias, polí4cas y estrategias. División de educación superior. Trilce: Uruguay. 3
Decision No 2318/2003/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 December 2003 adop4ng a mul4annual programme (2004 to 2006) for the effec4ve integra4on of informa4on and communica4on technologies (ICT) in educa4on and training systems in Europe (eLearning Programme) 4
For instance: Opendock Proyect: Create a corpus of learning materials. Published under a Crea4ve Commons license, with provision for IMS Learning Design, drawn from a range of different sectors of VET from different languages and cultures. Establish a repository of learning resources building on current best prac4ce and exis4ng Open Source repository implementa4ons and standards. hCp://www.elearningeuropa.info/es/node/39400
And Blended learning in the meat industry: a training course using e-­‐learning to qualify staff to work in meat processing, one Carsten Gydahl inicia4ve (guiding SIMTECH proyect) for workers in the swine industry.
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
10
PART 2. Interviewing
1. Instrument design and collec,ng data process
In October it was discussing on Google docs (from a proposal from Murcia) about who are the poten>al users that can be interviewed. Based on the criteria established in Krakow mee>ng, it was decided that they will be VET teachers with experience in e-­‐learning, but not experts.
From October to November it was discussed on Google docs, about goals to achieve in interviews, and specifically, what ques>ons were interes>ng enoght to be asked to the teachers.
In addi>on, evet2edu project makes a flashmee>ng videoconference monthly. During the months of the Work Package 1, this videoconference was used to bring together several ideas, discuss tasks and organize the process, reaching agreements.
From the proposal made in Google Docs, each partner includes its opinion on a table at the end of the document, indica>ng which ques>ons are considered as appropiate, and what would change.
It is made a second version of the document, which is discussed by comments by all partners. From the comments made, there were a third and a fourth version of the document. At the fourth version partners reached a consensus and it was considered that this structure is the final. The men>oned agreed document shows the process to collect data and instruc>ons, which are as follows:
• To decide who is going to be responsible in this process in each country, and include this informa>on into PIER environment (in a wiki table).
• To include the name of the responsible in this Google docs document.
• To look for 4 people to be interviewed.
• To do the interviews and organize the informa>on for the on-­‐line form (in English).
• To send the on-­‐line Google formularies (complete) to Murcia team in English.
Partners decided do not includes personal data from each interviewee, thereby, codes were used to organize the informa>on:
• Poland: PL
• Croa>a: Carnet: HRC, Obrtna: HRO
• Czech Republic: CZ
• Lithuania: LT
• Slovenia: SL
• Italia: IT
• Norway: NO
• Spain: SP
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
11
2. Data collec,on instrument Semi-­‐structured interview. Aim of this interview: to gather experiences and best prac>ces of the leaders/innovators in VET e-­‐
learning.
2.1 Guidelines for the interviewers
InstrucHons As a semi-­‐structured interview we present general ques>ons to guide the interview. In some sec>ons (like sec>on 2) every partner can find general ques>ons and the key informa>on we want to get in the answers.
Important Deadlines:
• 22th -­‐ 23th November: To decide who is going to be responsible in this process in each country.
• 22th -­‐ 23th November: To include the name of the responsible in this Google docs document: • 26th -­‐ 27th November: To look for 4 people to be interviewed, to record the names of the people to be interviewed together with the schedule
• November -­‐ December: To do the interviews and organize the informa>on for the on-­‐line form (in English).
• December 21st, 2012: To send the on-­‐line Google formularies (complete) to Murcia team (the formulary is going to be ready November 27th) in EN
Codes We do not need personal data of each interviewee, but we need iden>fying each par>cipant with a code in order to organize the informa>on. Here you have the different codes for each partner, please, to organize the interviews use this code follow of a number of the interview. Thus, for example, Italy should register its interviews as IT1, IT2, etc. and for each interview (and each code) used a form.
• Poland: PL
• Croa>a: Carnet: HRC, Obrtna: HRO
• Czech Republic: CZ
• Lithuania: LT
• Slovenia: SL
• Italia: IT
• Norway: NO
• Spain: SP
Important Notes •
Please record the interview (to have the basic data in case we need it).
•
Stress in the key informa>on. Please, revise the sugges>ons in every ques>on. •
Try to be as clear as possible when you translate the answers into English in the on-­‐line formulary. It´s no necessary the transcrip>on of all the answer if the interviewer judges that there is anecdo>c informa>on.
Basic DefiniHons •
Interviewee profile: teacher in VET with some experience in e-­‐learning process
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
12
•
Learners: all the people involved in the learning experience led by this teacher (pupils, students, adults)
•
TEL in VET: instead of e-­‐learning we mean technology enhanced learning, although it will need more elabora>on during the talk
•
Project or experience: general term to describe planned, purposeful and con>nuous interven>on of that teacher.
2.2 Ques,ons
Basic informa,on for partners
(Internal data to contact with the interviewee, not to send to Murcia team)
Name
Email
Phone
Interview Code
you have to use the proposal above
Ques,on: Descrip,ve data Number of years of teaching in VET
VET subject you teach
Your latest experience/project with e-­‐learning
Short descrip>on of Core learner group (if relevant)
Ques,on: Experience in VET e-­‐learning Please describe/ talk about your recent/ most valuable/ ongoing project or experience of TEL in your teaching prac>ce. [Guidelines for the interviewers: use these ques>ons as triggers for conversa>on. You can go beyond but make sure you cover all the aspects listed on the right of the table for each ques>on]
Ques>on
Key aspects to find
(if it´s necesary, the interviewer must ask for them to complete the ini>al obtained answer to the global ques>on in the le` of this table)
Can you describe your experience?
Who was the learner (adolescents, adults, unemployed, employees etc.)
Is it obligatory or voluntary?
How long it was? hat kind of competencies/ skills were mastered/ trained during this project?
How was the assessment system?
What have you changed? Why? How?
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
13
How would you rate this project?
Posi>ve aspects.
Aspects you would change (nega>ve).
What were the main challenges (say: 1-­‐2) and how did you (you as a group: learners and you) overcome them?
What kind of support would you like to have?
Interac>ons: Have you planned any What interac>ons among learners and yourself and group work/ collabora>on?
materials have you planned?
Ques,on: digital and pedagogical competence: • Would you be able to develop a plan (objec>ves, methodology, assessment) in an e-­‐learning experience in VET? How would you do?
• What tasks do you think makes a teacher in an e-­‐learning course?
• What is -­‐ if -­‐ added value inf e-­‐learning in VET? (in your context).
• Tools: [Here you have a list of tools in order to ask for them. This list works as a guideline in order to have a complete answer about different tools and uses].
What tools do you know?
Did you use this tool in your Would you like to learn e-­‐learning experience?
(more) about it? VLE (Sakai, Moodle or others) yes/no
Email yes/no
Forum yes/no
Chat/ Instant Messaging yes/no
Blogs yes/no
Wikis yes/no
Videoconference yes/no
Social Networks (Facebook, Linkedin) yes/no
Twieer yes/no
Places to share resources (YouTube, Flickr, Glogster, Slideshare) yes/no
Ques,on: preferences about the course
In a future e-­‐learning experience as learner:
• Would you like to work in an individual or collabora>ve way?
• How many hours/weeks could you dedicate in the course?
• What pedagogical and tecnhical help would you need as a learner in a e-­‐learning course?
• Would you take part in EN e-­‐learning course?
• In general, what´s your opinion about the future of e-­‐learning in VET context?
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
14
3. Process of analysis Interviewing, as a qualita>ve research method, allows us the most important aim for this part of the project: the understanding of the VET's needs regarding eLearning perceived by their principal characters: VET's trainers. Therefore, with the inten>on of doing a deeper explora>on of the data obtained and in order of drawing conclusions, it has been performed a content analysis procedure. In this type analysis, the interviews content is divided into categories and subcategories, as a mechanism for analyzing. It help us for understanding the responses in terms of key topics and focuses of interest, as well as it allows us to extract general data (informa>on alluded by every interviewed person), as well as individual special data (an example of the analysis of content's matrix in the Fig. 4 24) .
The working process of emptying informa>on it had two phases:
• First analysis: The first analysis was done with the idea of ge€ng a first interview data. It was shared with all partners in the month of January, 2013.
• Second analysis: The second analysis required a deeper analysis into subcategories with the idea of being able to draw conclusions for the future e-­‐learning course. It was conducted during the month of February of 2013 and it is presented below.
Fig. 1. Example table for content analysis
4. Analysis general aspects A`er analysing some aspects related to cases HRC 2 and HRC 3, it was considered that they did not respond to interview agreed profile. Consequently, they have not been taken into account in the final analysis.
In addi>on, it has been found a mistake in the SL1 and SL3 cases, when entering the data referred to ques>on 2 of sec>on 2; therefore, for the rest of the analysis remains but it has been avoided the answer to that ques>on in one of two cases. We have, therefore, with a total sample of 29 teachers.
5. Final Analysis 5.1 Descrip,on of the experience
Descrip,on of their experience
In every interview we have found informa>on about this topic. The answers in this ques>on tell us about several important aspects in cases studied. In this part teachers told us about: subjects and the main goal of the experiences; learning model, courses organiza>on, Character of courses (mandatory or eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
15
voluntary), number of students, target group, dura>on, didac>c dynamics and assessment techniques used. We didn´t have response in every topic, but we will indicate it when it is necessary. About the courses subject we have found a lot of variety in the interviews: •
“Study organiza>onal issues”. •
“Descrip>ve economics of Czech Republic”.
•
“Applica>ons of the use of injec>ons”.
•
“Programs for business secretary, commercialist, accountant and IT engineer”. •
“Shipbuilding technology”.
•
“Example history and Business educa>on regionally in Gavleborg, Sweden”. On the other hand, interviewees talked about the main goal of the courses. We found two big main goals:
•
Theory and Methodology Learning in Groups (3 cases).
•
Develop of the skills: ICT skills (5 cases), management skills (1 case), learning styles and teaching skills (1 case). About the target group, we found that the the wide majority of students in VET elearning courses were adults (in 16 of 19 responses) and in just three cases, interviewees referred to some youth people as VET students (students in secondary school). Some of the adults are unemployed (6 cases, and in 3 of them students were referred to the course from the Official Employment Service). Other adult students are professionals in different fields (policeman (1), welders (1), nurses, (1) economist (1) teachers (3), student of tourist (1), miners (1), personal of industry (1)). In addi>on, two of them referred to the number of learners they had, exactly 200 and 600 learners for each trainer. Courses dura,on depends on the kind of the courses. There are a lot of variety in this aspect referred by 19 responses (from our total sample of 29 people). Some courses last more than one year, exactly 4 years (2 courses). There are 3 courses that lasted an academic course (1 year), one course lasted seven months, two courses lasted one semester, one course lasted four months, one course lasted two months and one course lasted one month. On the other hand, there are courses with the dura>on expressed in hours. One course lasted 1200 hours, one course lasted 400 hours, one course lasted 200 hours, four courses lasted 20-­‐60 hours (exactly one course lasted 20 hours, two courses lasted 40 hours and one courses lasted 60 hours). The shortest is a course that lasted just 8 hours. Speaking about the model of the learning experience, we found that the most common experience is blended learning (from here on, b-­‐learning). About this topic there are 10 responses, and only in three of them, interviewees referred to an e-­‐learning experience (7 experiences talked about a b-­‐
learning model). In addi>on, there are two kinds of b-­‐learning experiences: the most common is the use of technology as a complementary resource in face to face sessions (6 of 7). Just in one case, the face to face sessions are referred as the complement of on-­‐line sessions (being the on-­‐line sessions the most important part).
On the other hand, in the most part of the experiences the par,cipa,on is mandatory (9 interviewees from the 12 who referred this topic, include par>cipa>on as a mandatory requirement), in the other 3 interviews, people explained us that the par>cipa>on was voluntary and just in one case is par>ally mandatory and par>ally voluntary. Interviewees also talked about the dynamics during the course (exactly we have 18 responses about it). The most common dynamic is the group work (5 cases), ac>ve learning (3 cases), lectures (2 cases), discussions (2 cases), tasks (2 cases), seminars (1 cases), use of mobile learning (1 case). In one of them, the interviewee talked us about the Interna>onal guidelines to design the course. eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
16
Regarding to the dynamics on the courses, the tried to use web 2.0 tools for improving ac>ve learning, for this purpose, they have tried: wikis (1 case), blogs (1 case), web 2.0 in general (1 case), Youtube (1 case), and Google maps (1 case). Addi>onally, other technologies referred by interviewees as used in VET experiences are: Computer games (1 case), Videoconferences (1 case), Video Streaming (1 case), the use of an LMS (2 case), forums (1 case), Chat (1 case) and Search Engines (1 case). Regarding educa>onal resources, one interviewee talked about the use of Learning objects, and other referred the possibility that their students upload materials in the course's website.
There are several interviews that speak to us about the courses' assessment process. One interviewee told us that the assessment process depends on the teacher (1 case); some Interviewees said that in their ins>tu>on they did not use exams (2 case) while other Interviewee said that he used the Common European Framework of Languages as a base during the assessment process (1 case). Some people referred in their interview to the scale they used for assessing (1-­‐5 Likert scale in 3 cases), while one interviewee talked about the percentage for evalua>ng each part on its course: 90% con>nuous assessment and 10% final examina>on. In general, interviewees did not use e-­‐learning modali>es during the assessment process. Only in 4 cases e-­‐learning assessment techniques were used in the process of con>nuous assessment (4 cases) and for assessing theore>cal content (2 cases). ICT Tools used in this processes were: Google docs for recording answers (1 case); Moodle points system (2 cases); A specific system to know how many >me students are using e-­‐learning resources (1 case); electronic porƒolio (1 case). The face to face modality is the most common way for assessing used, specially in the case of final examina>on (5 cases specifically referred to that). In these final exams, teachers referred to the use of ques>onnaires or tests (4 cases). To conclude this ques>on, interviewees talked about some things that they would like to change, as p.e.: aspects did not work correctly, the communica>on with the students’ parents is beeer face to face instead of using electronic communica>on, developing the materials of learning (smaller and new learning material in na>onal languages).
Rate of this project
In this ques>on we asked about the interviewees’ general opinion about their VET experiences. Interviewees talked us about: benefits, disadvantages, responsibili>es, challenges and evalua>on in general of the project (rate). Regarding on the benefits, we found three different types of them. From one part, there are general benefits: e-­‐learning makes instruc>on more interes>ng and incline with technological trends (5 cases); it gives >me saving and quality of the display, creates a posi>ve learning environment (1 case); It covers a wide geographical area and reaches many students (1 case); it increases the interac>on level with students (1 case). From the other part, there are benefits for teachers: learning something new (1 case), mee>ng new people (1 case), exchanging some experiences (1 case), enjoying the project itself (1 case), and the sensa>on that the project in which it was par>cipa>ng, was a good scenario for the crea>on of e-­‐
learning materials (1 case). Finally there are benefits for learners: students learnt how to use ICT tools (2 cases), 100% of the students passed the exam in the group with Moodle test (1 case).
When interviewees talked about the disadvantages, they only men>oned: that the excess of electronic communica>on deprives us of personal contact (1 case); adults in par>cular experience a certain new technologies' fear (1 case) and in e-­‐learning teachers work harder and spent more >me (2 cases). Regarding the responsibili,es during the experience, we found one case where the teacher has to provide internal training for colleagues, and other case that if learners did not pass an internal exam must to go home and did not finish the course.
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
17
Interviewees also speak to us about challenges. They referred to they need textbooks for voca>onal training (2 cases), in addi>on they consider a greatest challenge, the planning and prepara>on processes of eLearning materials (anima>ons and mul>media principally), and finally they talked about the need of improving students' feedback, as well as the need of linking the assessment with eLearning tools and techniques When we asked about suppor,ng we found that the more common kind of support that interviewees needed is technical support (5 cases). Only in 2 cases they referred to the need of pedagogical support, and just in one case they demanded some kind of ins>tu>onal support. Finally three interviewers rated their experience between 9 (2 cases) and 10 (1 case).
Posi,ve aspects
Regarding of this ques>on, we found several kinds of posi>ve aspects. Regarding resources and materials, interviewees men>oned as posi>ve: the possibility to have a lot of materials (3 cases); the percep>on of e-­‐materials as more aerac>ve (1 case); the possibility of making materials themselves (2 cases); the permanent availability of online resources (1 case), and the possibility of doing authen>c tasks using these resources (1 case). Tools are one of the other posi>ve aspects. Interviewees referred the e-­‐learning plaƒorm (3 cases); the novelty and variety of tools (2 cases), and the tools and visual components (1 case). There are posi>ve aspects regarding to learners. The more common is the stronger mo>va>on and the interest of the students (4 cases); they referred as well to students could get more confident (1 case); the success rates (1 case), and the improving of students organiza>on (1 case). Nevertheless, just one interviewee referred to a posi>ve aspect about teachers: the possibility to transfer subject into blended mode.
From other part, there are posi>ve aspects related to the course and methodology. About course we found: personaliza>on (1 case), innova>on (1 case); students' management (1 case); self-­‐ sufficiently (1 case), being an example for others (1 case), having an overview of done tasks (1 case) and leading to share results (2 cases). About methodology, interviewees talked about the benefits of using various methods: collabora>on, face to face, conferences (video) and so on (5 cases), and to demonstrate that the tradi>onal learning is not enough nowadays (2 cases).
Finally we found that the possibili>es for communica>on and for providing feedback for students is other posi>ve aspect referred (3 cases), as well as the >me (5 cases) and space (2 cases) flexibility.
Aspects that he/she would change There are several nega>ves aspects that interviewees would like to change. The most common aspect is the lack of learners' and teachers' technological experience (6 cases) as well as the lack of pedagogical experience (3 cases). Other common nega>ve aspect referred is the need of more technical support (7 cases) connected to the lack of technical knowledge. Also interviewees declared that they need more help from the administra>on through a systema>c approach (4 cases) and more funding (2 cases). About the materials, they said that they would like to have beeer materials (2 cases) with more interac>ve elements (2 cases). Other nega>ves aspects that interviewees underlined, are the fact that face-­‐to-­‐face communica>on (personal contact) is beeer than the online communica>on (1 case); teachers in VET sector need more professional developing (1 case). In addi>on, they referred that being teacher or learner in a b-­‐learning course is more difficult, because for students it is not easy to study material eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
18
independently; students had "to be online" for some hours per course and teachers need more >me too (5 cases). Finally they demanded longer courses in terms of dura>on (1 case) as well as integra>on of eLearning into the tradi>onal learning (2 cases). Interac,ons
The wide majority of interviewees designed interac>on between learners in a collabora>ve way (12 cases) and a part of them provided face-­‐to-­‐face sessions with students at the beginning in order to improve interac>on (4 cases). For those interviewees that had designed the interac>on in an individual way, we found that one of them was because it had too many students (600). Others combined the group work with the individual work (3 cases). There was just one case, where the interviewee proposed for its students individual work. Some>mes interviewees said that the interac>on depends on the subject or of the previous trainer's experience. Interviewees tried to maximize the power of online tools (preferably in the virtual campus) during the interac>ons with the students (4 cases). Other tools used for the teachers-­‐students and students-­‐students' interac>ons were: email, Dropbox, teacher's website, Youtube, Forums, Google docs. Finally we found that interviewees used some materials to improve the interac>ons on the course (5 cases). 5.2 Pedagogical and digital competence
Being able of developing an eLearning experience design (objec,ves, methodology, assessment) In this case we have a blank response, so the total responses are 28 for this ques>on. This ques>on seeks to know whether of teachers would be able of designing an elearning course. 20 (of 28) teachers interviewed declared that they have been and would be able to design an e-­‐
learning experience. Actually, many of them explained, in this ques>on, their experience doing tasks related to pedagogical issues planning an e-­‐learning course. Only 3 of them explained that they are not able to develop a plan, and 2 declared that perhaps they would need support / help for doing it.
Nonetheless, in some responses we can glimpse the idea that planning is a difficult task. This ques>on led to many teachers spontaneously to comment on whether or not need help to do this ac>on. 8 people spontaneously specified they would need help to perform this ac>on. Among them, 6 had indicated that, despite knowing how to do it, they would need help.
Regarding on the fact that some of them explained they would need help, it is notably that some teachers have spoken of tools or technical issues in this sec>on, where the key point is to talk about a course´s pedagogical development. Specifically, there are 6 teachers that have spoken about the importance of receiving technical help. Deeply the data, we find that countries that answer that need technical assistance are: Italy (three cases), Lithuania (in two cases) and Czech Republic (in one case).
Despite of this fact, there are teachers who talked about the importance of pedagogy:
•
Three interviewed people men>oned the methodology as a key point.
•
Competences, methodology and assessment are key aspects considered in planning. But, only two teachers talked about the objec>ves, responsibili>es and assessment in this ques>on.
•
When they talked about pedagogical issues in this ques>on, some teachers said that >me is an important ques>on to develop this kind of experiences. Three teachers specified the >me as an important issue.
Finally, there are some differences in the responses of different countries. One notable may be that all respondents from countries like Poland and the Czech Republic showed that were or would be able to carry out the planning.
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
19
What kind of task he or she would do as a teacher in an e-­‐learning course?
In this case we have a blank response, so the total responses are 28 for this ques>on. Regarding the kind of task that a teacher in an e-­‐learning environment develop, some interviewees focused on what a teacher should do in an e-­‐learning experience (23), while others focused on talking about their experience in courses already developed (6), as a way to explain the task that should be done In general, we find tasks related to coordina>on, facilita>on and mo>va>on. Thus, it can be iden>fy the following roles:
• Coordinator: four teachers said that to coordinate is an important role.
• Create / manage resources: this is a very men>oned role. It means a teacher as the person who manages resources in e-­‐learning experiences. 13 teachers of 28 talked about how they have worked in managing resources or how the following aspects are very important, all related to the materials and resources: uploading material, presen>ng resources, preparing documents, crea>ng content, providing basic informa>on, crea>ng modules, adding and publishing digital materials and designing the course content.
• Facilitator: five teachers thought that in a e-­‐learning environment one important role is to facilitate the learning process. Specifically, when they men>on facilita>on they say the following words: addresser, helper, adviser, and guider.
• Mo>vator: two teachers commented on the importance of energizing and mo>va>ng students.
There are a few contribu>ons talking about the differences with a tradi>onal (face to face) class, but they are interes>ng. They comment that face-­‐to-­‐face learning is very different, and how the teacher
´s role is modified in virtual environments, tending to facilita>on tasks.
A`er analyzing different answers, there are few contribu>ons talking about the differences with a tradi>onal (face to face) class (five cases), but they are interes>ng. Except a case that says that eLearning can have same influence and impact on learning process and output as a tradi>onal methodology, the rest specified the huge difference between an e-­‐learning environment and a tradi>onal one.
Specifically, when they men>on facilita>on they say the following words: addresser, helper, adviser, etc.
Assessment is a topic that is men>oned in some interviews (7). In some cases the person talked about his/her experience and how to do assessment (4), but the rest talk about issues related to assessment, a person talked about final evalua>on while the other (2) spoke about the importance of feedback and how to use an LMS for this.
To sump up, although this ques>on has many different responses, the topic of design and resource management is considered important, and also the fact that the role of the teacher becomes virtuality, referring to being a facilitator of learning.
What is -­‐ if -­‐ the added value in e-­‐learning
In this case we have a blank response, so the total responses are 28 for this ques>on.
In general, we find in this ques>on answers related to different poten>al e-­‐learning VET experience posi,ve effects:
Possibili>es created by the Internet, precisely because of the fact that the Internet allows people to access to online educa>ons programs. A lot of students in VET sector are adults and this is an important factor for teachers. 11 teachers have spoken about this issue, categorized as "advantages of space-­‐>me", where they indicated some advantages:
• The possibility to have a flexible ,metable and op>mize the >me (6). eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
20
• Referring to the flexibility that allows this e-­‐learning environments and the fact that students can combine educa>on with a job (5).
• Geographically access possibili>es (3).
Most of the teachers (14 of 28) talked about the advantage of using online resources. This is an issue previously men>oned in other ques>ons, nevertheless in this ques>on it has been men>oned spontaneously, so we deduce that "online resources" is a big focus of interest for these interviewed teachers. However, although it is commonly referred, there are some differences in their answers. Some (3) teachers referred to specific resources and experiences on how they can be used into e-­‐learning courses. Others focused on the e-­‐learning access and the possibility to use different kind of materials (8) (in this point, they remarked the fact that the Internet provide an easy access to the materials). Others talked about the fact that resources can be interac>ve and how using the Internet entails that students can find more materials and using anima>ons and simula>ons (4).
Mo,va,on is another factor men>oned in the interviews. Some teachers said that eLearning is considering as modern and aerac>ve by students. Mo>va>on is an interes>ng added value for learners for 6 interviewed, because, among other things, the u>lity that the Internet has, the closeness to the real word that can help to increase mo>va>on.
Methodology is men>oned by 8 teachers as an added value in eLearning in VET, because it allows feedback and gives benefits for learners, like to get competences in ICT and personaliza>on.
Interac,on. Technologies provide new tools for interac>on, and this is men>oned for 6 teachers as an interes>ng factor, they said that we can use different tools like videoconference.
The cost by learner is another interes>ng point that teachers thought it can be important, but just for two of them.
Overall, answers show that teachers perceive several advantages of e-­‐learning for VET sector. Some referred to technical aspects, and others to pedagogical ones, but both prac>cal and useful.
What tools does they know?
Now begin a series of ques>ons similar to an instrumental component of a ques>onnaire, which want to know the level of teachers' knowledge and use of some tools. To this ques>on we have a sample of 25 completed interviews. Talking about each tool we find the informa>on we include on the following figure:
Places for sharing resources (Youtube, Flickr, so on)
Twitter
SNS
Videoconferencing
96% 4%
48% 52%
Yes
No
68% 32%
88% 12%
Wiki
56% 44%
Blog
64% 36%
Chat/IM
80% 20%
Forum
84% 16%
Email
84% 16%
LMS
72% 28%
Fig. 2. Do you KNOW this tool? (N=25)
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
21
Analyzing the data by country can find some remarkable aspects: none of the respondents in Italy know what a LMS, the same happens in HRC.
In general, tools that show a lower level of knowledge on the part of the teachers are generally related to Web 2.0 (Blogs, Wikis, Social Networks And Twieer).
What tools did he/she used in his/her last e-­‐learning experience?
To this ques>on we have a sample of 29 completed interviews. Talking about each tool we find that in his / her last e-­‐learning experience:
Places for sharing resources (Youtube, Flickr, so on)
Twitter
SNS
66%
21%
34%
79%
48%
52%
Videoconferencing
31%
69%
Wiki
24%
76%
Blog
28%
72%
Chat/IM
21%
79%
Forum
Email
LMS
Yes
No
52%
72%
59%
48%
28%
41%
Fig. 3. Do you USE this tool? (N=29)
What would he/she like to learn (more) about?
In this ques>on we find very different answers. We find some teachers that have been based their answers on the previous table with tools to answer this ques>on. Other teachers have talked about things in general that they would like to know, related with tools, but also with other aspects.
Talking about tools, some interviews showed that there are teachers that would like to know more about VLE (specially Italy and HRC).
Blogs, wikis and Twieer are also men>oned like something teachers would like to know more about. Other tools (less frequently men>oned) are Prezi, Glogster, Pinterest, Google +. There are three teachers that have men>oned other aspects apart from tools, like they would like to know more about how to built resources in general, or how to assess in e-­‐learning.
5.3 Preferences about the course
Individual or collabora,ve way?
With respect to the first ques>on, most teachers show their preference towards collabora>ve work in the course. Specifically, in terms of frequency, it could be argued the following:
Five of the total staff (29) prefered working in an individual way, and only two people clarified the reasons. Both thought that working in a team could be problema>c. One said that it was because issues solved in groups depend on the implica>on of all the members involved. Other, said that it was eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
22
because it’s inconvenient. In a team, everyone likes doing things in a par>cular way, therefore, it’s not possible to put different points of vide in common. Most people (14 of 29), preferred working collabora>vely. In par>cular, all Spanish and Italian teachers showed this preference. In this sense, one teacher from Lithuania proved this can be a more effec>ve work’s way poin>ng out that there’s a beeer learning atmosphere and more points of views. However, there are two requirements to work effec>vely as a team: first, groups should not be very big. Second is that a similar working experience is needed. Other two Slovakians teachers expressed their preference for teamwork because it is a beeer way to prepare e-­‐materials, with much more and beeer ideas. Finally, one teacher from Czech Republic suggested that she would probably do much of the work online than individually.
A combina>on of individual and collabora>ve work was necessary and useful to seven of all teachers (29). But another four thought that it depends on the members of the group, contents and working scheme. It also depends on the learning abili>es of the people involved; so it might be different according to each situa>on. There are a total of two blank answers too, which are two teachers of the total, one from Poland and another from Norway.
In conclusion, it would be reasonable to say that most European Vet teachers would be able to work in teams. However, it would be probably necessary to increase the abili>es and competences towards collabora>ve working in some of them, and be careful with their number and experience when assembling groups.
Hours to dedicate to the course?
Regarding the >me spent in the course it could be said, in the first place, that those teachers, as a whole, showed very different answers. But having a thorough look about half of the teachers (13 of 29) agree that the course dura>on should be between one and two hours. This >me frame should of course be flexible according to several variables, such as the tools required for the content produc>on in eLearning. But in any case the course should not be too long. Two teachers argued different reasons for this. One from Norway said >me is a cri>cal resource when obtaining the required skills. Videoconferences could be useful to save costs and >me and to exchange informa>on among instructors about how to use the e-­‐learning techniques. But the rest of the >me asynchronous eLearning could be just as effec>ve. Another teacher from Lithuania said that it is also necessary to take into account several hours too to put some skills into prac>ce. 100% of the teachers from Czech Republic and all Norwegian teachers agreed with this answer. The rest of answers (11) suggested approximately between four and eight hours. In par>cular, one Polish teacher agreed with three hours at the most; one from Spain said three or four hours; two said five hours (from Spain and Italy); other answers were provided by the rest of the teachers such as between six and eight hours a week (one Slovenian teachers); and approximately eight hours according to an Italian and a Slovenian teachers. Only three people thought that dedica>on to the course should be up to 8 hours per week, one from Italy and two from Slovenia. No teachers from Czech Republic answered and neither a Polish teacher (total 5 people of 29). Overall, the answers about the >me to be spent on an e-­‐learning course are half and half for and against spending up to two hours maximum. The first case is explained for all teachers from Czech Republic and all Norwegian people, and the second from all teachers from Slovenia. Nobody from Czech Republic answered. Consequently, the conclusions are not clear and probably it would be necessary a deeper thinking about this ques>on. Even more taking into account the considerable difference between the farther answers (less than one hour a week and twelve hours a week). eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
23
Technical /Pedagogical help?
There are some varied answers about the technical or pedagogical help in e-­‐learning courses. Next some different results are detailed. Nearly half of VET teachers (12 people of 29) believed that they only needed technical help in order to support and make e-­‐learning process easier. The reasons could be classified in four big groups.
Firstly, speaking about equipment. Changing so`ware is, for instance, a problem for a Vet teacher because he knows how to do things in a specific so`ware version, but they can’t do same things in a different one.
Second, about instructor’s guides. Six teachers said they needed the exper>se’s guide for resources about content produc>on, to develop anima>ons, and to know how convert text files in mul>media materials for e-­‐learning plaƒorms. But they thought the need could be probably smaller if Vet teachers would be able to work like a team.
Third, a teacher showed it would be good to refresh different courses about some technical aspects of eLearning during this en>re course.
And fourth, they are four people that showed their need to handle different tools in virtual classroom contexts depending on the subject of their speciality. Some of these tools were video and interac>ve whiteboards, those that could serve to implement industrial and prac>ce cases. And finally another tools to make communica>on and tutorials easier.
On the other hand, only three people had pedagogical needs. They said that it could be necessary to have a competent instructor with skills in showing prac>cal examples of contents. And finally they referred to learn how to use the technologies to get the final result or goals. Four teachers of total (29) didn’t need any help. It is noteworthy that three of these four teachers came from Czech Republic. And it was only those three teachers that thought that the kind of help depended on the course or the subject. Lastly a Spanish teacher gave no answer.
A`er analyzing different answers and considering the preferences of technical help alone and both kinds of needs, the answer is clear: most teachers (18 of 29) from several countries needed technical help. Thus they considered that it their pedagogical skills are enough. But the pedagogical competence is not exactly the same in e-­‐learning environments than in a face to face learning. So one could think that different pedagogical issues maybe would be more difficult during the course for some of these teachers.
English course?
Most VET teachers (22 of total) preferred an English course, and only seven teachers (total is 29 people), two from Spain and two from Poland, and one from Slovenia, Italy and Lithuania preferred eLearning courses in their own languages. So beforehand, we could say that English eLearning courses in VET contexts would be possible. What is your opinion about the future of eLearning in VET context?
The view about the future of eLearning in a VET context is absolutely posi>ve; at least considering that ICT are the way to go. However, there are different answers regarding to the possibili>es and problems of digital tools. And some teachers showed several improvements currently needed and also some sugges>ons for the future. A further considera>on of this issue is discussed below.
All teachers thought that technologies are very important nowadays, and saw the e-­‐learning’s future in a very op>mis>c way. Most of those teachers (17 of total of 29), explained different possibili>es and benefits about it. For instance, they talked about a future bank of short e-­‐learning modules where learners would collect the needed material. They thought that e-­‐learning courses would allow students to push ahead their learning whenever the proper >me is found and new technology is able to support eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
24
VET system and improve it in an innova>ve way. Thanks to this system larger target groups can be reached. In summary those teachers thought that there will be a whole world of opportuni>es to use ICT in an educa>onal context: we need to master recently developed technologies as they are part of our present and will be of an even more importance in the near future.
Nonetheless, 8 of those 29 teachers, talked about current improvement needs and made sugges>ons for the e-­‐learning future. It’s therefore necessary to include in the training the enthusiasm of mo>va>onal teachers and a greater amount of resources and commitment of educa>onal administra>ons. These issues are completely necessary to achieve e-­‐learning’s improvements.
Four teachers talked about some problema>c issues linked to the ICT. Those are two from Czech Republic; one from Slovenia, another from Poland. But the most cri>c teacher was one from Lithuania. The following main problems can be pointed out. The first is that technologies are encouraging student’s illiteracy. The second, that e-­‐learning is not appropriate for all learning contents, especially for prac>cal training. And the third, from a prac>cal point of view, is that formal requirements for voca>onal examina>on do not support this kind of learning in online environment. Finally, there is only one blank answer from a Norwegian teacher. Therefore, we could say that the conclusions drawn about the possibili>es of ICT are framed in the tradi>onal discussion about their poten>al and piƒalls. Technologies are needed and we need to go and get them. But it needs careful thinking in order to allow and adequate training for both teachers and students. It is also necessary a greater ins>tu>onal firm commitment towards ICT. In short, eLearning is valued by teachers and has a promising future in Vet contexts.
Other key informa,on
As for the last ques>on, "key informa>on", there are six contribu>ons, and only five teachers of total of 29, added some informa>on about two main issues.
First, some teachers gave their opinion about the future of e-­‐learning in Vet context. Especially, one Lithuanian teacher highlighted the typical difficul>es of the VET when training on-­‐line. On the one hand, he said VET sector is aimed at prac>cal skills, so there are some special>es such as business organizer or ritual services organizer (florist), that have some possibili>es for full e-­‐learning course. But for services such as haircu€ng, cosme>cs or health care, we do not have any possibili>es today. Maybe it will be in the future. And on the other hand, most teachers haven’t developed enough their skills as for taking the punch from virtual learning environments efficiently. Finally, another Italian teacher completed this ques>on with some sugges>ons. He thought that E-­‐learning development should be combined with tradi>onal educa>onal methods. And so the collabora>on between teachers from different countries could be increased.
Second, there were three teachers that gave different opinions about the tool used in their last e-­‐learning experience. One from Czech Republic and from Spain used Ed-­‐Modo and IEDA respec>vely. The rest, namely a Croa>an teacher, talked about Power Point presenta>ons. Those opinions could be added to previous contribu>ons.
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
25
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission under the Lifelong Learning
Programme. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held
responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
This publication is licencsed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Licence Unported
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
eVET2EDU | WP 1 | Data analysis report. Interviews | April 2013
26