Summary of the conclusions of the Velenje workshop
01-February-2006
permalink comments (2) forum (2) email thisWith this posting I try to summarise the main conclusions of the Velenje workshop and set some accents on the work that will be undertaken in the near future. If I have missed something, I am more than happy to take on board your comments. Also, if some additional points or specifications can be made, I would welcome them immediately. In another blog entry I try to set our ECER-proposal into the context of our work programme.
In general, the conclusions from the Velenje workshop can be summarised in the following way:
1. There is a need to clarify the relations between "Country studies" (National maps/ National reports) and "Case studies" (Case studies/ Case stories) and how to use them. This is mainly a matter of reusing, refocusing and repurposing existing material.
2. In the context of re-processing the country studies and case studies there is a need to pay attention on different kinds of workplace learning partnerships and on the possibilities of training providers to support them with research & development activities. This aspect was somewhat underdeveloped in the current version of the European (interim) synthesis report.
3. The instruments that have been discussed so far (LPA, LAR, Portfolio) have not been developed to a similar degree of maturity and usability. In this respect the LPA-applications can be used as preparatory instruments that pave he way for partnership-creation whereas the LAR-applicationa have a role as accompanying instruments that are related to ongoing cooperatio. The Portfolios have only been brought into picture as a wide range of possibilities without specifying the particular usablity in the WLP project.
4. The discussion on the uses of Web in the WLP covered several aspects that need to be considered parallel to each other:
4a) Optimising the use of the WLP website for presenting the project and related materials for the develomental communities,
4b) Opimising the use of communication facilities (e.g. the blogs) for internal and external collaboration,
4c) Development of specific web-based tools that are directly accessible for individual users and/or for interested user-communities.
5. Regarding the next phase of work the partners are in dfferent positions regarding the following arenas for piloting:
5a) Development of a pragmatic tool for individual learners ("personal summative review") to be used in workplace learning contexts,
5b) Development of a pragmatic tool for training providers and/or training enterprises ("joint resource pools") to be used as a support for shaping the workplace learning opportunities,
5c) Development of a framework for aggregating learning opportunities that are provided in different country contexts for European or trans-national cooperation ("cross-cultural learning opportunities").
In all these arenas there is a need to find pragmatic solutions for piloting and for drawing conclusions on existing pilot activities.
6. There is a need to adjust the work programme and to give room for working in pairs or sub-teams that focus on different arenas for piloting. On the basis of a more differentiated working period there is a possibility to discuss the way that the "WLP-Web" and the "WLP-Course" are being shaped.
7. In order to keep the developmental activities visible to each other it is worthwhile to use the "WLP Project Management" blog as a joint forum for informing each other. Parallel to this there is a chance to bring some issues into the public domain via the blog "Work & Learning Partners: Discussions". This perspective will be developed further in the proposal for ECER.
This was my interpretation - written from the perspective of the project coordinator. I now welcome your comments and ideas how to proceed further.
Pekka Kämäräinen
1. There is a need to clarify the relations between "Country studies" (National maps/ National reports) and "Case studies" (Case studies/ Case stories) and how to use them. This is mainly a matter of reusing, refocusing and repurposing existing material.
2. In the context of re-processing the country studies and case studies there is a need to pay attention on different kinds of workplace learning partnerships and on the possibilities of training providers to support them with research & development activities. This aspect was somewhat underdeveloped in the current version of the European (interim) synthesis report.
3. The instruments that have been discussed so far (LPA, LAR, Portfolio) have not been developed to a similar degree of maturity and usability. In this respect the LPA-applications can be used as preparatory instruments that pave he way for partnership-creation whereas the LAR-applicationa have a role as accompanying instruments that are related to ongoing cooperatio. The Portfolios have only been brought into picture as a wide range of possibilities without specifying the particular usablity in the WLP project.
4. The discussion on the uses of Web in the WLP covered several aspects that need to be considered parallel to each other:
4a) Optimising the use of the WLP website for presenting the project and related materials for the develomental communities,
4b) Opimising the use of communication facilities (e.g. the blogs) for internal and external collaboration,
4c) Development of specific web-based tools that are directly accessible for individual users and/or for interested user-communities.
5. Regarding the next phase of work the partners are in dfferent positions regarding the following arenas for piloting:
5a) Development of a pragmatic tool for individual learners ("personal summative review") to be used in workplace learning contexts,
5b) Development of a pragmatic tool for training providers and/or training enterprises ("joint resource pools") to be used as a support for shaping the workplace learning opportunities,
5c) Development of a framework for aggregating learning opportunities that are provided in different country contexts for European or trans-national cooperation ("cross-cultural learning opportunities").
In all these arenas there is a need to find pragmatic solutions for piloting and for drawing conclusions on existing pilot activities.
6. There is a need to adjust the work programme and to give room for working in pairs or sub-teams that focus on different arenas for piloting. On the basis of a more differentiated working period there is a possibility to discuss the way that the "WLP-Web" and the "WLP-Course" are being shaped.
7. In order to keep the developmental activities visible to each other it is worthwhile to use the "WLP Project Management" blog as a joint forum for informing each other. Parallel to this there is a chance to bring some issues into the public domain via the blog "Work & Learning Partners: Discussions". This perspective will be developed further in the proposal for ECER.
This was my interpretation - written from the perspective of the project coordinator. I now welcome your comments and ideas how to proceed further.
Pekka Kämäräinen
2 Replies (comments)
1 Portfolio discussion
Here are my comments on the portfolio discusion
Regarding the portfolio discussion on Saturday perhaps we were trying to do too much under the single term 'portfolio' and that we need to revisit our May 2005 agreement that:
KnowNet produce a more generic portfolio
and I will produce a separate tool that is more of a 'personal summative review' (at a higher level of aggregation that also involves examples of more holistic performances i say 5 - 10 areas)
this will also give scope for Elmo and others to develop other tools too for other circumstances
hope this helps
Alan
Alan Brown, 01-February-2006 19:53:47
forum / discussion
2 Comments to "Summary of the conclutions of the Velenje workshop"
I do agree with the interpretations made by Pekka and all the points he has made. However, in relation to:
- point 4 - running parallel training in different companies, in a different period while using the WLP website, could be an issue to be investigated further. I like to explore this possibility in the next two weeks, while meeting with the SMEs - Silver Car, San Marco, COMEC. Have you explored this possibility?
- point 6. - "Working in pairs". I think that you have in mind two communities from two different countries. If this is the case than we should consider the language issue, which is a divide in most cases, especially for the Italian workers. Probably we can concentrate on a specific target group willing to share own training experiences.
Point 7 : I am glad we are already using this "blog" system for better communication.
I welcome your input..Thanks. Elmo De Angelis
Elmo De Angelis, 02-February-2006 18:45:40
forum / discussion
Linking and trackbacks
When linking to this weblog entry, please use the 'permalink', which is http://www.workplace-learning-partners.org/collaborate/management/entries/4070394408
