Wednesday, January 19, 2011

جامعة العين للعلوم والتكنولوجيا : الندوات وورش العمل للفصل الثاني 2010 - 2011

If you have trouble viewing or submitting this form, you can fill it out online:
https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?formkey=dGdBb2tLT2xuMWJDaXRZMXhncWIzaWc6MQ

جامعة العين للعلوم والتكنولوجيا : الندوات وورش العمل للفصل الثاني 2010 - 2011

السادة اعضاء هيئة التدريس المحترمين يرجى التفضل بالاجابة على هذا الاستبيان لتحديد الاحتياجات التدريبة للفصل الدراسي الثاني 2010- 2011 فاستجاباتكم ستتيح للجنة تكنولوجيا المعلومات التخطيط الجيد لانشطة الفصل الدراسي الثاني








مع خالص الشكر والتقدير

د. ايناس


Saturday, January 15, 2011

INNOVATION AND CHANGE IN EDUCATION

INNOVATION AND CHANGE IN EDUCATION

Amanda Credaro ©1999-2006

INTRODUCTION

Educational institutions, like all other organisations, require constant monitoring to identify areas for potential improvement. However, educational reforms are often not well implemented. This results in massive wastage of finances, human resources, and lost potential.

Change may be described as the adoption of an innovation (Carlopio 1998, 2), where the ultimate goal is to improve outcomes through an alteration of practices. However, the process of change is complex, with many different types of change possible. Further, there are a number of differing strategies for implementing these changes, with the success of implementation being highly variable.

Factors that drive change may be internal or external to the environment (Yee, 1998), innovations may be initiated at any level in the organisational structure (Swenson 1997) and reforms may be systemic or local (Reigeluth 1994) in nature.

Commercial enterprises, non-profit organisations, service industries, government instrumentalities and educational institutions all undergo change. As educational institutions have characteristics in common with each of the preceding, they may be considered as being typical of an organisation undergoing change.

EDUCATIONAL STRUCTURES

The structural framework of education is hierarchical in nature. Each of these strata are comprised of individuals with differing goals, interests and perspectives. This results in groups that possess different cultures, structures, practices, policies and goals, which ultimately determine the success or otherwise of the implementation of innovations. Whitely (1995, 44) notes that there are three "intersecting sets of core values" underlaying organisational culture; organisational (the company's corporate values), group values and individual values.

Educational institutions are organised on many levels, from the individual classroom under the management of a single teacher, to groups of classrooms supervised by a Head Teacher or Executive Teacher, to a whole-school structure, under the guidance of the principal. Independent or private schools generally report to a School Board. Government schools in NSW are grouped into "districts", whilst Catholic schools are administered by a central regional authority. Overseeing these geographic divisions is a statewide body which in turn is controlled by Federal legislation and its accompanying Ministerial corporate identity.

Within each level of educational endeavour, there exists the possibility of improvement to practices and their resultant outcomes. An individual teacher at classroom level may instigate a new assessment process of benefit to the members of that class; the teacher librarian may adopt a different procedure in the school library to achieve a more efficient service for the whole school; district offices may organise a network for the sharing of expensive equipment for member schools; or the state-wide authority may action procedures in an attempt to address inequities between schools.

THE NEED FOR CHANGE

Both internal and external forces (Yee, 1998) drive the need for change. Referring to "change drivers", large scale forces that produce complex change, Swenson (1997) notes that "globalisation" of society has produced an imperative for continual reappraisal of practices in order to maintain a competitive edge. In educational terms, this may be interpreted as the need to update practices in keeping with the findings of international research, and to continually conform to national trends.

Internal to the school are the pressures brought to bear by curricular reform. Further, alterations in staff-student relationships from teacher-centred to student-centred create the need for modification of teaching practices, and policies and procedures to support more meaningful educational experiences.

Societal Changes

The student population of Australia has been undergoing change for some time, with increased retention rates resulting in students of lesser ability staying at school beyond the mandatory 15 years of age. Also, cultural diversity has become a hallmark of Australian educational institutions. In addition, part-time work has become entrenched amongst the student population. Together, these societal factors have produced a rapid amendment to the typical profile of Australian students.

Further, workplace practices have significantly altered in the last few decades. No longer is the accumulation of skills and knowledge the primary prerequisite for employment, but an ability to be able to adapt to new situations, to continue to learn independently, and to work cooperatively have become imperative. Rifkin (1995, 25) suggests that an era where an employee's worth is determined by the market value of their labour is coming to an end. Creativity is replacing knowledge base extent in determining "value", whilst ability to work in a team environment is a prerequisite for many employment opportunities. This produces a need to develop instructional practices that develop a self-directed , life-long learner.

Educational Paradigms

The unprecedented volume of information (Hancock 1993, Siitonen, 1996, Hahm et al, 1998) that is now available has generated a need for complex analytical skills to appropriately access this information in an efficient, meaningful way. Although much publicity in the media has been generated in the last few years regarding the perceived reduction in standards for functional literacy (reading and writing), the educational perspective requires a shift in paradigm to an information literacy focus.

To achieve this goal in a meaningful way, educational institutions themselves must restructure the framework of their organisation to form learning communities (Hough & Paine 1997, 192), rather than institutions whose core function is the dispensing of information.

Information Landscape

In the current "information age", a new economy has emerged in which knowledge is traded as a marketable commodity (Tinkler, 1996). In this global knowledge economy, it is imperative that school students be equipped to undertake appropriate access to data and manipulate it to fulfil their information needs.

Hazell (1990) notes that school libraries are the largest component of the Australian library and information network, with some 11,000 schools providing educational opportunities for over 3 million students. It is therefore self evident that in order to cater to a student's information literacy critical skills, an appropriate "library program" is necessary.

Whilst traditional bibliographical instruction, delivered by the teacher librarian, is still fundamental to introducing the principles of information access, a more integrated approach to information literacy is required in order to engender meaningful, relevant direction for school students. This type of instruction is most efficiently delivered by the subject or class teacher in collaboration with the teacher librarian.

THE CHANGE PROCESS

Change management is the core activity in realising organisational goals, whilst implementation is the practical or physical process of delivering an innovation. People and relationships are the majory components to successful implementation, and support mechanisms are required to achieve an improvement in practices and procedures.

"Change" itself has undergone change in the description of various models. Whilst previous decades have witnessed the concepts of "Quality Circles", followed by "Total Quality Management", and most recently "Business Process Reengineering" (Honeywell Australia, 1999), the basic procedure for actioning change has remained reasonably constant.

The identification of areas for improvement is the initial stage of the change process, followed by the generation of possible solutions to address issues so identified. Activity in these areas is independent of position in the organisation. These first two stages of the change process are possibly the most easily achieved.

Implementation of proposed innovations, the third stage of the change process, is the most complex and difficult to achieve. In the school context, this may be even more arduous than in other organisations. Fullan (1993, 46) notes that educational reforms are "hard to conceive and even harder to put into practice" . The implementation of change is not linear (Carlopio 1998, 5), and must progress through various stages over time, with commitment from stakeholders that is achieved through shared decision-making, common vision, collaboration and the establishment of support structures.

Carlopio (ibid ) notes that the implementation stage of change is itself constructed of four periods. The creation of "knowledge and awareness", the first step of implementation, is noted by Shields (1989, 41) as consisting of a further six "stages of concern". The second step in the implementation process is the establishment of facilitating structures, whilst the third is the complex simultaneous process engagement in persuasion, decision and commitment; Lastly, "rollout and fine tuning" complete the implementation of innovation.

Interestingly, a study on business decisions reported that the success rate of implementation (Wind & Maine, 1998) was only about 50% . The lowest rate of implementation was for the most successful practices, such as group problem solving, whilst the highest rate of implementation was for the least successful practices, such as issuing directives (Sauer, 1997).

It is self evident that the implementation stage of change must be followed by evaluation and reassessment, possibly with further amendments needed as issues of concern become identified. Honeywell Australia (1999) comments that change is "like fractal patterns", complex and iterative, with stakeholders making "thousands of incremental adjustments" in reaction to each of the stages noted above.

LEVELS OF CHANGE

Systemic

All organisations, including educational systems, have concerns that are addressed by attempts at organisational renewal. Productivity (class sizes, teaching periods per day), cost effectiveness (global budgeting was introduced in 1989 in NSW government schools), capital utilisation, market orientation (increasingly higher enrolments in non-government schools, together with an increasingly greater proportion of "out-of-area" enrolments, demonstrating that pupils are exercising their right of choice), organisational renewal and viability are primary of importance for all organisations.

Whole School

As individual schools have unique cultures, practices and traditions, it is self-evident that an individual tailoring that is context-specific is required. The leadership style of the administrator will to a large extent determine the types of change that are likely to occur, together with the ultimate success of their implementation and subsequent improvement to learning outcomes. Lincoln (1987, 16) states that a whole school approach is necessary, with the need for shared decision-making and collaborative practices being paramount.

At Classroom Level

Individual teachers and teacher librarians are in an ideal position to instigate innovative practices and processes. Whilst their "self-imposed isolation" (Smith & Scott, 1990) has numerous drawbacks, it does allow the freedom to experiment with innovation.

It may be hoped that by individuals taking risks by developing educational practices that embrace the concepts of information literate learning communities, gradual change to some of the barriers may occur, thereby laying the foundations for a whole school approach. Fullan et al (1990, 14) view this approach as a catalyst for innovation, linking classroom practice to school improvement. While this is to be viewed as a long-term goal, the nature of change and the resistance to it makes this option a more pragmatic strategy.

However, innovation implies risk taking (Hirose, 1992). Current educational practices do not support unsuccessful outcomes (Santos, c1998). The nature of accountability in government schools determines to a large extent the school principal's response to suggestions of innovation at the local (school) level. However, these "unsuccessful experiments" are part of the learning process itself.

BARRIERS TO EFFECTIVE CHANGE

Effective change to any organisational structure, philosophy or practice is not an easily obtainable goal. At each level of organisation, there are dynamics in operation which may resist the proposed change. However, organisational culture, the perceptions of stakeholders, a lack of holistic approach, absence of followup or support, and even the process of change itself all present barriers to achieving effective change.

Organisational Culture

Schools, perhaps more so than other organisations, are characterised by "balkanisation" ( Fullan 1993, 82) created by faculties at secondary level, and Year teaching cohorts at K-6 level. These factions are often insular in nature, and may have cliques within each group. However, Nonaka (1988) notes that in order to grow, the coexistence of several subcultures is necessary to generate "creative conflict". Senge (1992) agrees with this appraisal, and states that "creative tension" between groups and subgroups assists in organisational growth.

Without dissent, discussion will not ensue. This raises the possibility that stakeholders in the change will not understand the implications of and for the change, and thus will not effectively participate in the process of change. The necessity of dialogue rather than debate is noted (Lashway, 1998) as the key to successful "group dynamics". It must be emphasised that practice must concentrate on listening, suspending judgment and seeking common understanding.

Senge (1992, 5) comments that many of the "best ideas" are not put into practice due to conflict with "deeply held internal images". The failure to critically review prevailing assumptions and philosophies (Whitely 1995, 48) when formulating new strategies may be considered to be one of the many causes of failure to implement innovative structures and practices.

Perceptions of Stake Holders

Schools are possibly unique amongst other types of organisations. Stakeholders are not only those within the physical boundaries of a school, nor those beyond the school charged with its administration. Parents and primary caregivers are also greatly concerned with activities within the school. Tertiary institutions have expectations of school leavers, as do employer groups and social welfare organisations. Wider society is similarly concerned with educational structures and procedures. Each of these stakeholders have perceptions which form barriers to the implementation of innovation, and the resultant changes that occur.

Students have a firm view that school work involves "reading and writing" ( Lincoln 1987) and where classroom practice is negotiated and participatory, the students' perception is that of not actually engaging in learning. Similarly, parents expect that their children will spend much of their school time in writing-based activities, as a result of the parents' own learning experiences. Potential employers to a great extent still require a subjective assessment based on examinations for lower level employment, prior to promotion to higher level positions requiring higher order skills.

The combination of these perceptions creates a barrier to achieving change at local level, where the amount of written work, the format of examinations and classroom experiences diverge from the ineffective, if traditional, practices. In the educational environment, the genuine support of teachers is necessary for any attempt at change (Hargreaves 1993, 16). Teachers must not only accept the inevitability of change, but must also understand the rationales for any proposed changes.

Lack of Holistic Approach

The rapid introduction of ill-conceived changes without consideration to the effect on individual parts of the system or the system as a whole (Senge 1990, 15) has resulted in a piecemeal approach (Henri & Hay, 1994) that produces a fragmentation rather than a coagulation of the organisation.

Similarly, Newman (1998) comments that incremental reforms , which she refers to as "tinkering to remove defects" aim to improve existing structures, whilst fundamental reforms transform and permanently alter structures. Further, Newman (ibid ) notes that attempts at these fundamental reforms frequently mutate into a series of incremental reforms.

An examination of recommendations of the "Scott Report" (1989) provides an interesting illustration of this phenomenon. Entitled Schools Renewal: A Strategy to Revitalise Schools Within the New South Wales Education System , the report concluded with an indicative implementation timetable which graphically illustrated each element of change together with a timeline for implementation and the tasks involved. Of the twenty strategic elements of change described, twelve were implemented completely, three were partially implemented, and the remainder were not attempted.

The omissions to the strategy were those most closely affecting school personnel, such as staff briefings and consultations, and appointment of both executives and teachers by the principal. It is to be noted that the implementation only part of the holistically conceived strategy did not produce any changes at school or classroom level. Although the published Strategy attempted a holistic approach, implementation of the innovation was, indeed, "piecemeal" and ineffective in producing any of the desired educational outcomes.

Absence of Follow-up

The implementation phase of change does not represent the conclusion to the effective creation of change. Not only will support structures collapse without continued attention, but the absence of an evaluative procedure is vital in confirming that the expected outcome has been achieved. In the event that there are deficiencies in either the original strategy or the implementation procedure, future evaluation procedures are necessary to identify required amendments. Should the outcomes have been successfully achieved, continual monitoring is required to ensure their sustained success. However, these monitoring and evaluation procedures have budgetary implications, and are therefore frequently omitted from strategic plans.

Again, the Scott Report (1989) provides a further illustration of this particular barrier to successfully implementing change. Of the twenty strategic elements proposed, possibly the most serious omissions were those concerning ongoing evaluation and provision for future amendments. Anecdotal evidence suggests that the changes enacted at the highest levels of administration have made no difference to teaching practices at classroom level and subsequent educational outcomes, which presumably was the ultimate goal of the strategy.

Further, Mayer (1992) generated a report entitled Putting general education to work: The key competencies report. Commissioned by the National Board of Employment, Education and Training, the report identified a number of "key competencies" that were required for successful school-to-workplace transition. Of these, only functional literacy has been pursued with vigour. Despite information literacy also being identified as crucial, it remains largely confined to the realms of the school library. Whilst functional literacy is now assessed by means of a highly culturally-based examination, information literacy has remained obscurely delivered within teaching programs in all but the most progressive of schools.

This absence of follow-up has highlighted the ineffectual nature of these educational reforms. Had effective evaluation and monitoring been actioned, the deficiencies of implementation would have been highlighted, and the necessary amendments accomplished.

Absence of Support

Despite the background research that precedes any major organisational change, it is noted that "top-down" policies are almost without exception ineffective. Addleson (c1998) asserts that "structure and strategic plans" have little to do with organisational achievement, as organisational structure is composed of relationships between individuals and groups, and is shaped by individual's attitudes towards others both within and beyond the organisation. It is therefore manifestly obvious that the implementation of changes requires a support structure for the individuals and groups involved.

Carlopio (1998, 2) notes that change is a social process, undertaken over a period of time, and not a "decision event". Those involved in the change must undergo a learning process in order to appreciate the aims and goals of the proposed change, make adaptions to cater for the new practices and be permitted to achieve personal and professional growth prior to attempting to implement the change.

The Change Process

The process of change is itself a barrier to achieving change. Whilst change may be ongoing, follow a "metastrategic cycle" (Limerick et al , 1994) or be episodic and characterised by "punctuated equilibrium" (Limerick & Cunnington, 1993), the mechanism and methodology of the change has less of an impact that the actual process of change. Any disturbance to the status quo is likely to create friction, and Fullan (1993, 77) cautions that this conflict is inevitable but necessary.

Dunning (1997) remarks that the necessity for closure is one of the most basic of human needs. The last decade has witnessed numerous attempts at reform within the NSW government school system (Carrick's Report, Scott's "School Renewal" , McGaw's "Effective Schools "). Fullan (1993, 42) observes that "irregular waves of change and episodic projects" produce a fragmentation of effort and a "grinding overload". With progressive, continual change there can be no closure. Continual gradual improvement or dramatic rapid initiatives are equally unsettling to the human psyche, and therefore are frequently resisted.

In discussing innovation in the workplace, Carlopio (1998, iii) notes that resistance to change is more pronounced in Australia than countries such as USA or Japan. Referring to "reform fatigue", Carlopio (ibid ) comments on the counterproductive nature of ongoing modifications. The negative effects of these continuous modifications include "overload and burnout" (Hargreaves 1993, 16), but may be curtailed if any change was perceived to be an improvement, and the stakeholders were actively involved in its implementation.

SCHOOL LIBRARIES: A CASE STUDY

Libraries in NSW government schools have undergone major changes in structure, practices and organisation in the last few decades. Clyde (1982) records the 'humble beginnings' of school libraries, originating from collections of books belonging to Sunday schools in the colonial period. With the development of an education system over the following century, an accompanying accumulation of print resources occurred within each school.

Tanner (1997) notes that 'teacher librarianship' prior to the 1960's was represented by a classroom teacher acting as custodian of the books, with Collection Management of being a minor role. Whilst the 1960's saw the move of scattered school resources into a converted classroom (Tanner, 1997), the 1970's witnessed the appointment of specialist teacher librarians to oversee the management of the library collection in purpose-build centres, with accompanying instructional roles. In the 1980's, the introduction of computer technology produced a focus on user services and information skills instruction.

However, the current decade is one in which digital technology is making a huge impact on school libraries, as elsewhere. Not only are school library systems becoming increasingly more commonly computerised, the availability of library management software is dictating library automation be the norm, rather than the exception (Freeman, 1999). Tanner (ibid ) notes the effect not only of automation of library management, but Local Area Networks, Wide Area Networks, Internet access and an increasing diversity in format of resources. In this regard Dow (1998;181) notes that teacher librarians must have information technology skills not required of many of their classroom teaching colleagues. Not only must the teacher librarian have the necessary competence to utilise the resources, but also exhibit appropriate expertise in imparting instruction in the use of these resources.

Thus, over the last five decades, teacher librarianship has progressed from a custodial role assumed by a classroom teacher, to an information professional based in the school library. Interestingly, there has been little change in the development of classroom teaching (Newman, 1998). Information technology has created an additional strand to the curriculum, but classroom practice remains largely unchanged even in this sphere. Oberg (1990, 9) observes that an understanding of the nature of change is essential to every teacher librarian, whilst classroom teachers have "developed orientations of conservatism, individualism and presentism".

This creates something of a paradox in that almost all schools have a multiplicity of teaching staff, and thus opportunity for collaboration, colleagiality, peer tutoring and discussion amongst teachers; whilst the teacher librarian position is singular in most schools and therefore does not provide these opportunities at the workplace.

It is pertinent to inquire as to how these broad changes have been so effectively actioned in the sphere of the school library, and in such a relatively short time. Teacher librarians have been subject to external influences such as technological developments to an extent not yet apparent in the mainstream classroom. From the relatively innocuous replacement of card catalogues to an electronically based OPAC, school libraries have been involved in innovative practices concerning networked digital reference works and access to external information sources via the Internet. This has resulted in teacher librarians frequently being cited as the technology expert within many schools.

It is noted that not all teacher librarians are on the "technology bandwaggon", and many resisted both the previous and current changes. An "interplay" (Bennett 1998) between forces for change and resistance exist in this area, as in all situations where changes are occurring. However, despite the singularity of their position within the school, teacher librarians are noted for their development and participation of networks external to their own school. In allowing time and space (Hill, 1995, 49) for reflection, enquiry and professional dialogue, the teacher librarian provides an exemplar for coping with the negative effects of change and innovation.

Departmental policy and budgetary provisions provided another external change driver for the school library. The dramatic injection of government funds radically altering resource housing in the 1960's, from a modified classroom to a purpose-build facility, and simultaneously created the neccesity for a position for a school library professional. Unfortunately, this also produced a shift in paradigm concerning resource-based learning. With the print material being housed separately to the learning areas, there was a gradual decline in their central use for instruction. Contemporary teacher librarians are now in the process of addressing this issue, by actively promoting the advantages of resource-based learning in situations where the practice is not used or used ineffectively.

Internal change drivers also effect the teacher librarian and the school library. Within the whole school environment, the perception by classroom colleagues of the teacher librarian's role as "custodian of the books" has not altered in many schools. Changes to the delivery of tertiary training for teacher librarians have raised awareness of the potential improvements possible to information services within the school. Unfortunately, tertiary instruction regarding classroom teaching practice does not appear to have made teachers similarly cognisant of the potential benefits of collaborative practice, particularly in the secondary environment. Teacher librarians themselves are acting as change agents to promote the benefits of collaborative practice to educational outcomes.

A subtle shift in management style of school principalship also acts as an internal change driver for school library practices. As principals become more aware of the connection between the quality of the school's information services and improvement in educational outcomes, the imperative for quality library services increases. Again, in many instances, it is the teacher librarian who frequently brings these issues to the attention of the principal, and other leaders within the school.

Thus, teacher librarians have managed change in their school libraries by developing their own support structure of networks external to the school (Shields, 1989) and developing relationships with administrators within the school. Whether the forces for change have been external or internal to the school, or indeed identified as an area for improvement by the teacher librarian themselves, the school library has improved practices which ultimately benefit all members of the school community.

CONCLUSION

Paradoxically, the very same factors that produce the need for change present barriers for the achievement of that change. School culture, stake holders perceptions, societal effects, organisational structure and the nature of change itself are together creating both the need for, and method of, continuous improvement to education and its outcomes.

Whilst Fullan (1993, 46) notes that societal problems beyond the control of schools frequently prevent educational reform, these cannot be wholly held responsible for the failure of educational reform. Lack of supporting structures, a deficit in the consultative process, an inadequacy in holistic approach, and the absence of ongoing evaluation and amendment contribute greatly to the impairment of implementing innovative practices.

Present practices are inadequate to meet changes in work, knowledge, and citizenship (Schuyler, 1997) while serving a greater number of students with diverse backgrounds and educational objectives. A paradigm shift from instruction to learning is required to adequately serve the clients of educational institutions, which in turn requires an alteration in procedures for improved outcomes.

Educational practices, and the structures that support them, must change in order to ensure that the citizens of the future - our school children of the present - can exist and grow in a world characterised by change, unpredictability and enterprise.


BIBLIOGRAPHY

Addleson, M. (c 1998). What is a learning organisation? Online. Available. Accessed August 18, 1999.

Bennett, S. (1998) Learning, change and organisations. Online. Available. Accessed August 18, 1999.

Carlopio, J. R. (1998). Implementation: Making Workplace Innovation and Technical Change Happen. Roseville, NSW: McGraw-Hill.

Clyde, L. (1983). Australian school libraries in the nineteenth century. Australian Library Journal 32 (2), pp 11 -17.

Dunning, C. (1997). Got change for a paradigm? From Gutenberg to hypertext. Online. Available. Updated April 15, 1997. Accessed August 18, 1999.

Freeman, A. (1999). Organisation of resources. Introductory Talk for Charles Sturt Subject ETL403. Macquarie University, February 12, 1999.

Fullan, M.G. et al (1990). Linking classroom and school improvement. Educational Leadership May 1990, 13 - 19.

Fullan, M.G. (1993). The school as a learning organisation. In Changing forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: Falmer Press. 42 - 83.

Hahm, M. et al (1998). Media skills of school librarians to teach the new subject Information and Media in schools and the implications to all librarians: Instruction as a positive reference service. 64th IFLA General Conference - August 16 - August 21, 1998. Online. Accessed August 16, 1999.

Hancock, V.E. (1993). Information literacy for lifelong learning. ERIC/IT Diges t. ED 358870. Online. Accessed August 18, 1999.

Hargreaves, A. (1993). Collaboration: A key to leadership for quality in education. The Practising Administrator, 15 (3), 16 - 18.

Hazell, A. (1990). School library and information services in Australia. In M. Nimon and A. Hazell (eds) Promoting Learning: Challenges in Australian Librarianship. Adelaide: Auslib Press. 17 - 22.

Henri, J. & Hay, L. (1994). Beyond the bibliographic paradigm: User education in the information age. 60th IFLA General Conference- Conference Proceedings - August 21 - 27, 1994. Online. Available. Accessed August 16, 1999. Hirose, S. (1992). Critical thinking in community colleges. ERIC Digest. ED 348128. Online. Accessed August 19, 1999.

Hill, J. (1995). Teacher librarians: Leaders and learners in the school learning community. Scan , 14 (3), 47 - 49.

Honeywell Australia (1999). Innovation. Online. http://www.graffic.com.au/innovation/welcome.htm Accessed September 24, 1999.

Hough, M. and Paine, J. (1997). Creating quality learning communities . Melbourne: Macmillan Education Australia.

Lashway, L. (1998). Creating a learning organization. ERIC Database. Online. Accessed August 2, 1999.

Limerick, D. and Cunnington, B. (1993). Managing the new organisation: A blueprint for networks and strategic alliances. Sydney: Business and Professional Publications.

Limerick, D. et al (1994). Transformational change. The Learning Organization. Online. Accessed August 8, 1999.

Lincoln, P. (1987). A view from the inside. In The Learning School . Boston Spa: The British Library. 6 - 28.

Matzdorf, F. et al (1997). Barriers to Organisational Learning in the Chartered Surveying Profession. Barriers to Learning. Online. Accessed August 18, 1999.

Mayer, E. (1992). Putting general education to work: The key competencies report. [Melbourne]: Australian Educational Council and Ministers for Vocational Education, Employment and Training.

Newman, J. (1998). We can't get there from here. Critical Issues in School Reform. Phi Delta Kappa International. Online.
http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/knew9812.htm. Updated Jan 6, 1999. Accessed September 18, 1999.

Nonaka, I. (1988). Creating organisational order out of chaos: Self-renewal in Japanese firms. California Management Review , 30 (3), 57 - 73.

Oberg, D. (1990). the school library program and the culture of the school. Emergency Librarian , 18 (1), pp 9 - 16.

Reigeluth, C.M. (1994). The imperative for systemic change. In C.M. Reigeluth & R.J. Garfinkle (eds) Systemic Change in Education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Educational Technology Publications. Also online.
http://www.php.indiana.edu/~reigelut/2.1.2sys.htm Accessed September 18, 1999.

Rifkin, J. (1995). The end of work: The decline of the global labour force and the dawn of the post market era. New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons.

Santos, A. (c 1999). Characteristics of the learning organisation. Online. Accessed August 18, 1999.

Sauer, C. (1997). Deciding the future of IT failures. In W. Currie & R. Galliers (eds) Rethinking MIS. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Scott, B. (1989). Schools renewal: A strategy to revitalise schools within the New South Wales State Education System. Milsons Point, Sydney: Management Review, NSW Education Portfolio.

Senge, P. et al (1994). The fifth discipline: Strategies and tools for building a learning organisation . New York: Doubleday.

Shields, P. (1989). Concerns-based adoption model. In D. Driscoll (ed.) Implementing change: A cooperative approach. Vancouver, BC: British Columbia Teacher-Librarians' Association. pp36 - 61.

Siitonen, L. (1996). Information literacy: Gaps between concept and applications. 62nd IFLA General Conference - Conference Proceedings - August 25-31, 1996. Online. Accessed July 16, 1999.

Schuyler, G. (1997). A paradigm shift from instruction to learning. ERIC Digest. ED 41496. Online. Accessed September 21, 1999.

Smith, S.C. & Scott, J.J. (1990). Are collaborative schools effective schools? In The collaborative school: A work environment for effective instruction. Eugen, OR: ERIC, 9 - 19.

Swenson, D.X. (1997). Change Drivers . Online. Updated Aug 31, 1977. Accessed September 18, 1999.

Tanner, K. (1997). Do teacher librarians still buy books? School library collection in the electronic age. Paper presented at the ALIA Schools section (Victorian Group) seminar, 28 June, pp 2 - 8.

Tinkler, D. (1996). Information literacy - the effect of new technology on literacy. Ockham's Razor. ABC Radio National Transcript, Sunday 29th September, 1996. Online. Available. Accessed July 14, 1999.

Whitely, A. (1995). The core values model. In Managing change: A core values approach . Melbourne: Macmillan Education. pp 42 - 65.

Wind, J. Y., & Main, J. (1998). Driving Change. New York: Free Press.

Yee, J.A. (1998). Forces motivating institutional reform. ERIC Digest. ED 421179. Online. Accessed Sept 21, 1999.


Updated April 22, 2001. Reformatted and moved to this site December 10, 2006.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Amanda Credaro © 2006.

ZaidLearn - MAKNAZ - The Saudi Repository for Learning Objects

Monday, January 10, 2011

knowledge management in Education

learner generated blogs, wikies , tweets, sound-clouds and FB as part of knowledge creation and sharing
how to expand it ?


ill do an experiment with my student next sem to explore and find what we will get out of it ?

find out about K12 and Aventa Learning online learning options

Schedule a demo

Thanks for your interest in online learning solutions from K¹² and Aventa Learning. To find out more about how online learning can benefit your district, school, teachers, and students, here are some links that will provide you with the information you need:

Blended Learning Whitepaper

Online Credit Recovery Courses: A Path to Graduation (Scholastic)

The Student POV on Online Learning: Are We Listening? (ISTE)

Blending Traditional and Online Learning 101: Best Practices to Get Your School Started (eSN)

 
View it online if you
can't read this email.
Aventa / K12

Dear Enas,

It's a new year. Thinking about new education solutions?

With online learning solutions from K¹² and Aventa Learning, you have innovative new options for:

  • Attracting and/or retaining students
  • Offering a broader range of engaging and rigorous courses
  • Augmenting instructional staff with our highly qualified online teachers
  • Offering services you could not otherwise afford
  • Providing students with flexible scheduling

Want to learn more? It’s easy to schedule a quick one-on-one virtual presentation or small group demonstration at your district or school. Simply send a message to Partners at K¹² to request a meeting, and mention your needs or challenges.

You can also use the links to the left to download information and learn why our products and services are a good solution to help support your goals and objectives.

Whether you are planning to incorporate virtual education now or in the future, our suite of solutions can help you resolve the most challenging issues. Together, we can strengthen the promise of American education.

Best regards,

The K¹² and Aventa Learning Management Team

Aventa Learning is now part of K12 Inc., the nation’s leading provider of online learning for grades K–12.

K12, Inc. |  2300 Corporate Park Drive  |  Herndon, VA 20171 USA
Copyright © 2011 K12 Inc. All rights reserved. K¹²®, as registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and the K¹² Logo and Design, Unleash the xPotential and xPotential are trademarks and service marks of K12 Inc.

K¹², 2300 Corporate Park Drive, Herndon, Virginia 20171.

K¹² and Aventa Learning respect your right to privacy. To remove yourself from our e-mail list at any time, simply unsubscribe.

OARIC2011 - Call for Papers


Call for Papers

Goals

1. To serve as a forum for international and Thai educators, researchers, and practitioners to present their researchers, knowledge, experiences and best practices on educational leadership, knowledge innovation, knowledge bank, technology innovations in education in cultural diversity and knowledge-based society.

2. To develop and establish networks at the local and international levels so as to develop the new knowledge in educational development, new learning environment, knowledge innovations, and cultural diversity.

3. To help academicians, researchers, practitioners, and other professionals have better understandings and appreciate diverse cultures
in order to bring about social and cultural reconciliation.


Venue & Date

Phuket Graceland Resort & Spa Hotel, Patong Beach, Phuket, Thailand
April 25-27,2011

Procedures

Keynote presentation, Panel discussion, Research paper presentation, Poster presentation and exhibition, and Proceedings after the conference.

Keynote Speakers

- Prof. Dr. Margaret Grogan 
- Ms. Pornthip Kanjananiyot
- Prof. Dr. John Wedman
- more is coming... 

Topics in the conference

 Educational Leadership in Knowledge-based Economy and Cultural Diversity

• Knowledge Innovation and Paradigm Shift in Library and Information Science

• Technology Innovation in Education and New Learning Environment

• Leadership in Peace Education

Presentation

- English Abstract                  150-250  words 
- Researcher CV                               50  words 
- Research paper            3,000-6,000  words

Downloads

- Full Paper template
- Poster template
- Documents for Thai participants
   -- รายละเอียดโครงการ
   -- เอกสารขออนุมัติเข้าร่วมการประชุมและเบิกค่าใช้จ่าย
- Conference Brochures
- Map of Phuket Graceland Resort & Spa Hotel

Important Dates

Date Activities
Jan 20, 2011 Deadline for submitting abstract.
Jan 25, 2011 Abstract accept.
Mar 25, 2011 Deadline for submitting full paper.
Mar 31, 2011 Deadline for registration.
Apr 25-27, 2011 Conference period.

Check Your Registration Info. Help!
Registration Fees

Participants

Before
January 31, 2011

After
January 31, 2011

- International participants

- International student participants

- Thai participants

- Thai student participants

US$ 300

US$ 200

4,000 Baht

3,000 Baht

US$ 350

US$ 250

5,000 Baht

3,500 Baht


***
Payment should be made payable to..

----------------------------------
Account Name: OAR INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE 2011
Account Number: 704-246387-6
Bank: Siam Commercial Bank Public Company Limited. (branch- Prince of Songkla University (Pattani Campus) Pattani, 94000 Thailand)
----------------------------------
You can fax a transfer slip to 66-73-333-587 or scan it and send to e-mail: oaric2011@psu.ac.th {jcomments off}

Change your subscription
Unsubscribe


Powered by Joobi

Sunday, January 9, 2011

mansvu just uploaded a video


YouTube help center | e-mail options | report spam

mansvu just uploaded a video:

نظمت كلية العلوم جامعة المنصورة يوم الخميس الموافق 23/12/2010م ورشة عمل حول " السبورة التفاعلية" وقد قام المهندس/ ايهاب البدويهي بتقديم عرض يتضمن ماهية السبورة التفاعلية ومميزاتها وعرض استخداماتها وكيفية توصيلها بأجهزة الحاسب الآلي وكيفية والتعامل معها. وقد حضر ورشة العمل نخبة من أعضاء هيئة التدريس بالكلية.

You can unsubscribe from notifications for this user by visiting My Subscriptions.

© 2011 YouTube, LLC
901 Cherry Ave, San Bruno, CA 94066

Saturday, January 8, 2011

ZaidLearn - Buzzing with Social Curation Tools!

 

Click here to read this mailing online.

Your email updates, powered by FeedBlitz

 
Here are the latest updates for enas220@gmail.com

"ZaidLearn" - 1 new article

  1. Buzzing with Social Curation Tools!
  2. More Recent Articles
  3. Search ZaidLearn
  4. Prior Mailing Archive

Buzzing with Social Curation Tools!



Today, we are all facing information overload
, and it is often difficult to find what we are looking for, especially if we are looking for updated collections of resources to support a topic, issue or idea. Major search engines like Google, Bing and Yahoo don't exactly do a great job in assisting either, which might be due to the growing influence and spam of 'Search Engine Optimization (SEO)' gurus, engines and companies. It is amazing how much spam comments I get on this blog alone (10 - 20 spam comments a day!), thanks to SEO strategies. Amazingly annoying!

DELICIOUS = RIP?

As Yahoo is trying hard to kill (sell) off Delicious gently, it is perhaps time to find and explore other alternatives to sort out my management of juicy learning resources and discoveries (URLs). Well, we still have Diigo, Stumble Upon, Digg, and a bunch of other cool social bookmarking tools to use. However, today there is a new wave of social bookmarking tools in the name of 'Social Curation' that are empowered with some really innovative features and tools to discover, manage and share resources. Let's explore!

SOCIAL CURATION
While the buzz word of 2010 was 'Social Media', don't be surprised if 'Curation' or 'Social Curation' (attempted definitions) will be the buzz word for 2011 (signs). Just in the last few months alone, several social curation tools have emerged, including (source):


A social curation community that empowers you in a social way to discover, organize and share the stuff you like on the web.


  • Storify

    Storify demo from Burt Herman on Vimeo.


    Turn what people post on social media into compelling stories. You collect the best photos, video, tweets and more to publish them as simple, beautiful stories that can be embedded anywhere.


  • Scoop.it

    Create your topic-centric media by collecting gems among relevant social media streams, and then publishing it to people sharing the same interest.

  • Curated.by
    A growing collection of topics & interests edited, organized and curated by everyone. Follow the topics you are interested in or create and share your own topics with everyone else.

  • While we are at curation, here are a few really useful content curation (customizable auto-filters) tools to consider:
    • Cadmus
      A real-time service that manages your stream (Twitter, FriendFeed and RSS) by displaying the most relevant content since the last time you checked in. It helps you get caught up on what you have missed.

    • PostRank
      Tap into the intelligence of millions of online users active on the Social Web. PostRank captures real-time data and analysis on any topic, trend, or interest relevant to you or your business.

    • Yahoo Pipes
      A powerful composition tool to aggregate, manipulate, and mashup content from around the web.

    WOW! Which one to use? It really depends upon what you want to collect and how you want to share them. However, if you ask me what I really want, well here is a brief summary of what I really want:
    • Easy-to-Use
      Drag-and-drop and please minimize the clicks and loads... Plain and simple! Works on any mobile device with sizzling simple and user-friendly interfaces.

    • Adding & Organizing Resources
      Besides simplifying adding and organizing discoveries (titles,topics, tags, descriptions, etc.), it should intelligently suggest resources (crawling and filtering out) within the topic (tags) I am using to collect (and even beyond to spark random discoveries).

    • Connecting & Collaborating
      It should enable me easily to connect and collaborate with others on topics, interests or issues, including plucking resources (or pearl branches) from others (giving automated recognitions to original curators), and so on.

    • Visually Stimulating & Intuitive
      Yes, it should be stimulating to the eyes and intuitive to the mind, and obviously be light enough to avoid slow interactions due to possible bandwidth constraints in certain areas, while curating on our mobile devices.

    I could go on, but if these tools above can fulfill these basic needs, then I am willing to ditch Delicious for a new world. Ideally, I would love a large white learning space (in the cloud!), where I could easily dump everything discovered related to a topic, including videos, audio, images, files, sites, quotes, Twitter/Facebook updates, etc. and then organize them in a visually exciting and intuitive way, as easily as it is to scribble on a white piece of paper. And yes, I would be empowered to embed this saucy and visually stimulating interactive collection on my blog (or any site).

    For now Pearltrees looks most promising for my needs, but can it fulfill my dreams :)


    More Recent Articles


    Free Shipping and Free Returns

    Click here to safely unsubscribe now from "ZaidLearn" or change your subscription, view mailing archives or subscribe www.feedblitz.com" src="http://assets.feedblitz.com/images/feedblitz_logo_teeny.gif" border="0" align="middle" height="16" width="51" />

     
    Unsubscribe from all current and future newsletters powered by FeedBlitz
    Your requested content delivery powered by FeedBlitz, LLC, 9 Thoreau Way, Sudbury, MA 01776, USA. +1.978.776.9498

     

    The upcoming issues of eLearning Papers

    The upcoming issues of eLearning Papers

    • Training and work, December 2010 - call for papers closed
    • Open education: Changing Educational Practices, February 2011 - call for papers open
    • Redefining university, April 2011
    • Mixed realities, virtual worlds and gaming, July 2011
    • Social networking, September 2011
    • Corporate training and performance support, December 2011

    The calls for papers will be published on this page.


    Continuous call for papers on free topics (no deadline)

    Besides the specific calls for papers, we consider continuosly free topic papers to be published according to available space in the publication and quality of submissions. Please feel free to contact us for further information and submit your paper by sending it to: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu


    Open Education: Changing Educational Practices (extended deadline 22 January 2011)

    The presence of open education has spread to hundreds of educational institutions across the globe, in particular centres for higher education and adult learning. Starting with important initiatives demanding access to information and spreading quickly into the making available of educational resources, it has became clear that open access is not only an issue of accessibility or availability but also of institutional change and innovation in teaching, studying and learning.

    Open educational resources (OER) fall high on the agenda of educational institutions and policy makers, and they are supported by many stakeholders of the educational sphere. However, their use has not yet reached the critical threshold. This poses an obstacle for developing a seamless provision of quality learning resources and practices for citizens’ lifelong learning biography, due to the fact that the current focus in OER is mainly put on building more access to digital content in the form of repositories and infrastructures. There is little consideration of whether this will support educational practices, open education, and promote quality and innovation in teaching and learning.

    The purpose of the 23rd issue of eLearning Papers on Open Education is to further our understanding of the way in which open access and open educational resources impact educational practices in organizations, and for learners and other stakeholders, both today and in the future.

    We are calling for contributions on open education with a focus that goes beyond issues relating to OER access, addressing innovative open educational practices (OEP) that transform educational experiences. OEP can be initially understood as practices which support the (re)use and production of quality OER through institutional policies, promote innovative pedagogical models, and respect and empower learners as co-producers on their lifelong learning path. Furthermore, we recognize that our understanding of the impact of openness on educational scenarios, and especially on educational institutions, is still in early stages. For this reason we welcome design papers as well as empirical papers that simulate critical debate and collect data, as well as contribute to the theoretical foundation of this still-young field. We specifically invite contributions which address one or several of the following issues:

    • Open education
    • Open educational practices
    • Quality and innovation through openness
    • From open content to open courses to open institutions
    • Impact of openness to bridging the educational and digital divide
    • Peer-to-peer learning, validation and reviewing in open learning scenarios
    • Assessment in open educational scenarios
    • Culture Change through open education
    • Stimulating and creating incentive for change towards openness in education
    • Digital literacy and practice enhancing openness in education
    The article submission closes on 22 January 2011. The provisional date of publication is February 2011.For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest editor

    The submissions need to comply with the following guidelines:

    • Submission language: English
    • Title: must effectively and creatively communicate the content of the article and may include a subtitle.
    • Executive summary for In-depth section should not exceed 200 words.
    • Executive summary for From the field section should not exceed 50 words.
    • Keywords: up to five relevant keywords need to be included.
    • In-depth full texts: articles should range from 4,000 to 6,000 words.
    • From the field texts: texts should not exceed 1,200 words.
    • Conclusions: special importance is given to the representation of the conclusions, which should be clearly stated both in the summary and at the end of the article.
    • References: All the references must be adequately cited and listed.
    • Author profile: author name, institution, position and e-mail address must accompany each submission.
    • Images: Please send high resolution JPEG files

    See the complete guidelines at: http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide


    Training and work (deadline extended 15 October 2010)

    In order to offer a better response to reader’s expectations, we have extended the deadline for submissions until 15 October. Find below a more detailed request for this Call for Papers

    According to some estimates, more than 80% of all learning occurs on the job rather than in tertiary and post-tertiary education. Currently, the Lisbon Council estimates that over two thirds of human capital from work is accumulated on the job rather than in education. In order to stay relevant and contribute to the human capital of future workers, learning will need to be tightly integrated into organizational work processes and become an integral part of workers' and managers' everyday activities.

    One of the hindering factors of e-learning systems has the lack of interfaces that are compatible with business information systems. This impairs aligning learning with business processes and affects the speed at which organizations can improve the competencies of their employees in accordance with continuous changes in business requirements. To solve this problem, open and standards-based service-oriented applications are used today in order to connect business process management systems with learning repositories, market places and mobile and location-based technologies, and to provide ambient content management and ambient learning networks. These new learning systems will understand the skills and competencies required by new business processes and match them with learning experiences in a way that will be transparent to the user. Therefore, 3rd generation e-learning systems will be able to offer ubiquitous, nomadic and mobile learning experiences and rich media content, while supporting users’ personal knowledge development plans.

    Today, the leading companies in the consumer gaming market are located in the USA and India. Europe has traditionally been strong in solving complex business scenarios, developing integrated business software and inventing new application software for business processes. It is anticipated that an important market segment of learning technologies will be collaborative business-oriented learning games and learning management for assessing results. Typical application areas could be the training of standard operating procedures within companies or the simulation of people's professional behavior, e.g. when serving or interacting with customers. Key technologies for this market are authoring systems that allow a faster production of business learning games and simulations, learning management platforms that allow collaboration among users while playing, as well as progress monitoring and the certification of learning results.

    Embedding learning into technologies, processes and media products will create new ways for us to learn and will open new markets for learning technology. In the case of knowledge workers, for instance, learning has to be embedded into the business process and software must be used within this process. It thus makes sense to establish links between various interdisciplinary research domains from the fields of information technology, cognition and engineering.Papers can be more specifically aimed at exploring the following themes:

    • Semantic Web Convergence and Interoperability
    • Generating Learning Content from Information Sources and the Web
    • Integrating Media and Learning Management for Mobile and Instant Learning
    • Business Learning Games and Simulation
    • Embedded Learning, Performance Support and Collaboration
    • Online Validation and Qualification
    • Computer and Internet Certificates
    • Informal and Non-formal Learning
    • Competence-based learning and e-Learning
    • Virtual World in Training

    The article submission closes on 15 OCTOBER 2010. The provisional date of publication is December 2010. For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest Editor

    • Dietmar Albrecht, Head of Human Resources Development Strategy, Volkswagen Coaching GmbH 

    The submissions need to comply with the following guidelines: 

    • Submission language: English
    • Executive summary: Every submission must include an executive summary of 250-320 words.
    • Keywords: 3-6 descriptive keywords need to be included
    • Full texts: Full texts must have 2,000-6,000 words and must be divided into chapters with indicative subtitles.
    • References: All the references must be adequately cited and listed. 
    • Author profile: The authors must publish their profile with full details in the elearningeuropa portal  

    See the complete guidelines at: www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide   


    Innovation in Lifelong Learning (deadline 28 June 2010)

    Learning and Innovation go hand in hand. Learning is characterized by a change in behaviour, while innovation involves a change in the thought process. Both imply a change for the better.

    The 21st issue of eLearning Papers proposes a broad approach to the theme of Innovation in Lifelong Learning. We are not only interested in research on innovation within formal education; this issue aims to reveal the potential of those innovations that are shaping informal learning in our everyday environments or in the workplace.

    In addition to considering how innovation transforms our current educational practice, we are also interested in discovering how educational practice can support innovation in the greater socio-economic system. This is especially relevant in the context of adult education and training. Adult learners and corporate learners apply their new knowledge at their work organisation and in their work processes. Their learning benefits the organisation, which may introduce changes or become more competitive as a result of the learning and innovation acquired by employees that participated in training/education

    Higher education institutions increasingly include courses on entrepreneurship and innovation in their curricula. Such programmes have the potential to have a wide impact on innovation, emphasizing the role of higher education in generating innovation in a regional socio-economic system.

    Submissions might address the following issues:

    1. Policies about new social scenarios of lifelong learning
    2. New social skills and competencies for lifelong learning
    3. Challenges related to the pedagogical design of lifelong learning content
    4. Simulations and games as part of lifelong learning content
    5. Community practices of lifelong learning
    6. The role of the different actors and applications involved in lifelong learning in everyday contexts (the learner, the teacher, online platforms, the institutional environment, and so on)
    7. Creative coalitions that redefine innovation systems in higher education and working life
    8. Networks in lifelong learning
    9. Different innovative learning concepts and practices in lifelong learning
    10. Sustainable innovation supported by conceptualized lifelong learning

    The article submission closes on 28 JUNE 2010. The provisional date of publication is September 2010. For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest Editor

    • Seija Kulkki, Center for Knowledge and Innovation Research, Helsinki School of Economics.

    The submissions need to comply with the following guidelines:

    • Submission language: English
    • Executive summary: Every submission must include an executive summary of 250-320 words.
    • Keywords: 3-6 descriptive keywords need to be included
    • Full texts: Full texts must have 2,000-6,000 words and must be divided into chapters with indicative subtitles.
    • References: All the references must be adequately cited and listed.
    • Author profile: The authors must publish their profile with full details in the elearningeuropa portal

    See the complete guidelines at: www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide


    Technology Enhanced Learning in Science Education (deadline 3 May 2010)

    Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have opened new ways of learning science. With ICT tools, for example, learners have now access to enhanced hands-on experiments and empirical data such as simulations and virtual reality environments in several areas of physics, chemistry, biology and nano-science. These developments have changed the context of learning natural sciences in the initial education, as well as during vocational education and professional training. Moreover, by supporting collaborative learning and providing tools to outline and test hypothesis, ICT facilitate new pedagogical approaches, including problem-based and inquiry learning. The recent emergence of mobile learning creates the possibility to include on-the-field approaches and to lower barriers between formal and informal learning, thereby opening new avenues to lifelong learning of science.

    This special issue of eLearning Papers will examine how ICT can enhance science education, from the perspectives of the learner and the teacher-trainer. Among the issues to be addressed are the following themes, reflecting the current trends of innovation, research and development:

    • Computer tools and environments for scaffolding inquiry, design, problem and project-based learning
    • Mobile tools for collecting field data
    • Intelligent games for learning science
    • Simulation and virtual phenomena representation
    • Tools to support scientific argumentation
    • User modelling and intelligent support

    Based on the new technologies and the technology enhanced research-based knowledge now available, which strategies and pedagogical approaches best benefit from the use of ICT? Which is the impact of technology-based science education on curricula and assessment? How can teacher training take recent ICT innovations into account?

    We are looking for articles and practical case descriptions with real life examples about how ICT have been already used for science education.

    The submissions need to comply with the following guidelines:

    • Submission language: English
    • Executive summary: Every submission must include an executive summary of 250-320 words.
    • Keywords: 3-6 descriptive keywords need to be included
    • Full texts: Full texts must have 2,000-6,000 words and must be divided into chapters with indicative subtitles.
    • References: All the references must be adequately cited and listed.
    • Author profile: The authors must publish their profile with full details in the elearningeuropa portal

    See the complete guidelines at: www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide

    The article submission closes on 3 MAY 2010. The provisional date of publication is July 2010. For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest editors:

    • Nicolas Balacheff, CNRS, Laboratoire d’Informatique de Grenoble, France
    • Sibel Erduran, University of Bristol, United Kingdom

    CLOSED CALLS FOR PAPERS

    Technology Enhanced Learning against social exclusion (deadline: 26 January 2010)

    Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) are already part of our everyday life and key enablers for many activities, such as working environments, daily communications and relationships, handling of administrative affairs, etc. However, it is still necessary to encourage eInclusion, to promote ICT in order to enhance social inclusion in the knowledge society and to boost barrier-free technologies usable by all citizens.

    In 2006, the Riga Declaration set a number of targets to promote an inclusive knowledge society for all European citizens. This was followed by an awareness and dissemination campaign in 2008 under the slogan: "eInclusion, be part of it!". The year 2010 has been declared the European Year against Poverty and Social Exclusion, and among its objectives are:

    • Promoting inclusive labour markets;
    • Eradicating disadvantages in education and training;
    • Accessibility to adequate resources and services;
    • Promoting social inclusion of immigrants and minorities.

    Education and training have an important role to play in the activities that enhance eInclusion, for example through the promotion of digital literacy, e-skills, integration and cultural diversity. This also brings considerable challenges, such as issues around accessibility, the promotion of education and training among excluded groups, and the development of new pedagogic models and methods for inclusive learning.

    This special issue of eLearning Papers will examine how Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) can help individuals and institutions to fight against poverty and social exclusion. Three ways of social inclusion, made possible by TEL, will be considered in this issue:

    • Material inclusion: fight against poverty and the digital divide, contribute to “education for all”;
    • Physical inclusion: help disabled and geographically isolated populations to be “mobile”;
    • (Inter-)cultural inclusion: integration of minorities (Rroms), refugees and migrants, boost inter-generational relations, fight against discriminations.

    Which strategies and pedagogical approaches can be applied through the use of technologies in order to contribute to these three categories? What is the role of, for example, foreign languages and/or intercultural education/citizenship in these approaches? Our hypothesis is that through technologies people can find new ways of reflecting on the notions of inclusion/exclusion and gain a feeling of being included and integrated. We are looking for articles and practical case descriptions with real life examples about how ICT have been already used for social inclusion in any of the three ways above mentioned.

    The article submission closes on 26 January 2010. The provisional date of publication is the end of April 2010. See the author guidelines at: http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide

    Guest editors:

    • Fred Dervin, University of Turku,
    • Finland Christine Develotte, INRP, Lyon, France

    New Learning for a New Society (deadline: 14 December 2009)

    Several recent forward-looking international reports about new technologies in education, such as the Horizon Report 2009 [1] and New Generation Learning [2], coincide to present a consolidation of new socio-digital learning environments within a couple of years. These environments are based on the establishment and regular use of advanced socio-technological concepts, such as cloud computing, integrated solutions for mobiles, full connectivity and “personal web”.

    All this is accompanied with the fast development of the Web 2.0 and 3.0 technologies (also known as “semantic web”) and even beyond: we are going towards the Web 4.0, which will represent a qualitative leap towards a new concept of a self-manageable “spider web”. This web will build new connections and links in an intelligent, contextual and geolocalised way, taking into account the needs of individuals and groups. New technologies will also facilitate and enhance learning experiences, further reducing scarcity of information and communication opportunities.

    The changing context of the socio-digital environment, based on relations and lifelong learning without physical or time limits, is where we need to plan the new ideals, tendencies and focuses of e-learning, and carry out analysis, reflection and innovative pedagogy.

    The new learning context is characterised by webs, connectivity, self-oriented students and online learning communities, creation of shared knowledge and constant and omnipresent interactivity. In this context, exercising creativity and innovation takes us closer and closer to the true “ubiquitous learning environment”.

    For the next issue of eLearning Papers we welcome articles which analyse these new environments, concepts and strategies of learning through social computing in the framework of the new knowledge society and the web.

    Submissions may include vision papers based on literature research, and empirical research related to both learning in the corporate and in the regular education sector. If you are unsure whether your research topic is valid for this issue, please contact the editorial team. We offer the following aspects as examples, which do not exclude any other relevant topics.

    1. Policies about the new social computing scenarios of learning
    2. Tendencies and development of the e-learning offer
    3. New social computing skills and competencies for and through learning
    4. Efficiency and effectiveness of the new e-learning offers
    5. Sustainability of the new e-learning offers
    6. Quality and equity of the new learning environments
    7. The strengths and weaknesses of an ubiquitous learning environment
    8. Independency and dependency of the new social computing networks
    9. Trends and examples of augmented and mixed reality for learning

    The submissions need to comply with the following guidelines:

    • Submission language: English
    • Executive summary: Every submission must include an executive summary of 250-320 words.
    • Keywords: 3-6 descriptive keywords need to be included
    • Full texts: Full texts must have 2,000-6,000 words and must be divided into chapters with indicative subtitles.
    • References: All the references must be adequately cited and listed.
    • Author profile: The authors must publish their profile with full details in the elearningeuropa portal

    See the complete guidelines at: http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide

    The article submission closes on 14 December 2009. The provisional date of publication is the end of February 2010. For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest Editors:

    • Jordi Riera i Romaní, Professor of Pedagogy and researcher, University of Ramon Llull, Spain
    • Wim Veen, Professor of Education & Technology, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands

    [1] Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R. (2009). Informe Horizon. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Traducción al español de The 2009 Horizon Report.
    [2] BECTA: Next Generation Learning - The Implementation Plan for 2009-2012: Technology Strategy for Further Education, Skills and Regeneration - June 2009.


    Call for papers: eLearning content (deadline: 15 September 2009)

    The landscape of e-learning content is undergoing continuous change. The development of digital media is providing radical new opportunities for learning content providers as well as learners. The increasing bandwidth of telecommunications enables the unforeseen use of media wealth (video clips, audio clips, simulations, etc.) in e-learning content provision. Digital libraries and other resource bases liberate learning providers and users from the use of physical libraries with restricted access.

    The boundaries between learning providers and learners are also altering in relation to e-learning content: learners are entering the nucleus of content production. The fascinating examples of Wikipedia, YouTube and MySpace among others show the power and potential of peer production and user-created content in learning. Alternative ways of designing and distributing learning content have also created new e-learning models. One example is iTunes U, which is based on the use of audio and video courses stemming from elite universities and educational institutions. Learning content also originates from a broader variety of actors; for example, third sector organisations, museums and news companies can be important providers of learning content.

    However, although the attractive technological opportunities are providing new opportunities for e-learning, good e-learning still has to be properly designed, implemented and supported. There are still important aspects of thorough pedagogical and instructional design to be respected. The interactivity of e-learning content does not just happen; it must be planned, implemented and supported. Access to learning remains a key challenge, now and in the future.

    For the following issue of eLearning Papers, we welcome articles and papers that address practical experiences in the planning, design, implementation and continuous improvement of e-learning content. Although not limited to the following aspects, we look forward to receiving papers and articles addressing the following issues:

    1. Interactivity of e-learning content
    2. Evaluation and quality assurance of e-learning content
    3. Challenges relating to the pedagogical design of e-learning content
    4. Designing, planning and implementing access to e-learning content
    5. Innovative design of e-learning content
    6. Peer production of e-learning content
    7. Simulations and games as part of e-learning content
    8. The challenges of e-learning content intellectual property rights

    The submissions need to comply with the following guidelines:

    • Submission language: English
    • Title: The title should be no longer than 15 words.
    • Executive summary: Every submission must include an executive summary of 250-320 words. The abstract shall present the main points of the paper and the author’s conclusions.
    • Keywords: 3-6 descriptive keywords need to be included
    • Full texts: Full texts must be of 2,000-6,000 words divided into chapters with indicative subtitles. The text may be enriched with non-textual data, such as pictures, tables and figures. Graphs and images must be included in the article.
    • References: All the references must be adequately cited and listed
    • Author profile: The authors must provide their profile with full details (incl. a photo) to be published in the elearningeuropa portal

    See the complete guidelines at:
    http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide

    The provisional date of publication is the end of November 2009.
    For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest Editor:

    • Ari-Matti Auvinen, Senior Partner, HCI Productions Oy, Helsinki, Finland.

    Open topics (Deadline: 15 June 2009)

    eLearning Papers launches a call for papers on open topics. We are looking for interesting and inspiring articles which will be published in September's issue. The deadline for article submission is 15 June 2009. Practical experiences on European projects are especially welcome.

    The scope of the eLearning Papers reflects the four interest areas of elearningeuropa.info: schools, higher education, training and work and learning and society. All eLearning related themes are accepted as topics. The following subjects are provided as an example and are not restrictive in any way:

    For further questions and to submit your article: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu


    The New Learning Generation (Deadline 30 March 2009)

    Children and adolescents in modern societies are growing up in a world where digital technologies are ubiquitous. The widespread use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and online services by youngsters in their everyday life, for leisure, entertainment and social interaction is also impacting on their learning needs, requirements and expectations. There is evidence that the internet is being used by youngsters also for education and learning purposes, often outside the classroom. This gives rise to a "new learning generation" (also labeled New Millennium Learners by OECD/CERI) and to new ways of learning which are enabled but not determined by the possibilities offered by ICT.

    This special issue on the "new learning generation" and on "new ways of learning" enabled by ICT seeks to bring together evidence, practice and/or theories on the key elements of this emerging new learning landscape.

    The topic can be approached in many different ways. Nevertheless, the following could be used as a guideline:

    • Possible questions to be addressed:
    • What are the similarities and differences with current and previous learner generations and learning styles?
    • What is the role of ICT applications (social computing, social media, web 2.0, learning 2.0, mobile learning, and game-based learning) in the new learning?
    • Where is the learning in the "new" learning? Is it new?
    • Is learning becoming more efficient, equitable, innovative, and creative?
    • What are the implications of the new learner generation for lifelong learning?

    Themes or issues that can be taken up:

    • New learning cultures
    • Learning theories
    • The role of the learner, the teacher, the classroom, the school environment, the everyday life context outside school
    • Learning outcomes, assessment, certification
    • Collaboration, networking, personalization, innovation, creativity
    • Self-regulated and self-directed learning

    Please consult the eLearning Papers website for writer guidelines:
    http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide

    The deadline for article submissions is 30 March 2009
    Provisional publishing date is June 2009

    For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Invited Editor: Yves Punie, Institute for Prospective Technological Studies, European Commission, Seville.


    Innovation and creativity (Deadline: 12 January 2009)

    There are numerous definitions of innovation. It is understood in many different ways in scientific and professional discourses, not to mention the colloquial use and over-use of the term in business, media and politics. Similar exploitation applies to the term ‘creativity’. Globalization of knowledge, and the subsequent dissemination of concepts and best practices, are turning the working and learning cultures more innovative. On a European scale, competitiveness cannot be reached without competence development throughout the educational systems and working life. This requires a committed change towards passionate learning. We need and welcome a continuous debate over the concepts and the phenomena which link learning, ICT development and innovation.

    To encourage creativity, the concept of innovation should be traced back to economy, technology and sociology, from where it has spread across other fields of research and professional practice. A common criterion for calling any phenomenon “innovation” is that it has to have some novelty and economic exploitability. Creativity stemming from psychology has a clear humanistic not-for-profit connotation.

    There is, however, a double bind between these concepts. There is no innovation without creativity and creativity will not be fully benefited unless the fruits of creative activities can also be spread and exploited through business and other societal interaction mechanisms. Therefore, putting these concepts together under the loop could create fertile juxtapositions and clashes which we would like to solicit in this special issue of eLearning Papers dedicated to “Creativity and Innovation”. Particularly when addressing such an exciting polarity, we would not want to be restrictive in defining subthemes. Nevertheless the following might help to narrow down your foci:

    1. Open innovation and learning
    2. Creative coalitions redefining innovation systems in higher education and working life
    3. Empowering peer networks in knowledge creation, sharing and exploitation
    4. Towards true knowledge economies and increased productivity through networking and innovative working life practices
    5. Different innovative learning concepts and practices
    6. Sustainable innovation supported by conceptualized learning
    7. Global value networks and technology enhanced learning

    The extended deadline for article submissions is January 19, 2009.
    Provisional publishing date is April 28, 2009.
    For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest Editor: Markku Markkula, Director of the Lifelong Learning Institute Dipoli at the Helsinki University of Technology

    Supported by the Learnovation Project Consortium


    Digital Literacy: the evolution of the 21st century Literacies (Deadline: 10 November 2008)

    Call for contributions to enhance the European learning communities’ approach to the 21st century Literacies’ Agenda – for policies and practice

    In the beginning of the 21st century, we are experiencing an interesting evolution of the demand for learning by individuals, societies and education authorities. Economic globalization and the emergence of what has been identified as the Knowledge Society go, hand-in-hand, with a gradually changing set of key competencies, thus feeding the dialogue about academic and policy implementation of what some thinkers and stakeholders already have named as the Literacies of the 21st century.

    The so called Paradigm Shift in the education model is related to a re-orientation of Lifelong Learning to a holistic view of learning as a critical factor of social development, both of the society at large and of the individual as a social actor. It is also related to a shift in the emphasis from learning as a process of reproduction to transformative learning.

    The skillful, thoughtful and benefiting handling and use of information (and media stuff) by the individual and the communities has led to the adoption of the concept of Information Literacy, alternatively termed as Media Literacy and more recently as Digital Literacy.

    We are facing a demanding exercise of re-defining the Competencies or Literacies in a lifelong learning perspective that correspond to the societal and conceptual structures of the emerging Knowledge Society. The Competencies – or the new Literacies – are being conceived as the pillars of Knowledge building and Skills development, not to mention their impact on the structuring of the School Education system (K-12) paradigm in the 21th century.

    Whether or not we deal with a paradigm shift, we certainly need to face the increasing Policy inter-dependence between Education and Social Inclusion. In other words, the new Equity Challenge implies that we have to re-engineer our learning systems, from delivering massive education towards engaging people in massive knowledge experiences, by up-grading their Learning-to-learn Competency, whereby Digital Literacy takes a pivotal meaning. Download the full introduction text here

    We invite the members of the European and international research and practice community to submit papers which could – indicatively and not exhaustively - address the following themes:

    • Digital Literacy, Information Literacy and Media Literacy: defining competencies and skills
    • Digital Literacy as a Key Competency: positioning in the set of other (basic/key) Competencies
    • Digital Literacy and School Curriculum
    • The Learning-to-learn Competency development agenda: the relation to Digital Literacy
    • The Social (e)inclusion agenda in the lifelong learning perspective
    • Digital Literacy, eSkills and Professional Development
    • eSkills and the Learning Organization
    • Digital literacy and critical thinking

    The deadline for article submissions is November 10, 2008.
    Provisional publishing date is February 25, 2009.
    For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Guest Editor: Dr Nikitas Kastis, President, MENON Network & Director, Lambrakis Foundation


    Training and work (Deadline: 18 August 2008)

    In the context of economic globalization and development of an information society, we observe, in all economic areas, a recurring questioning of activities and employment associated to a transformation of competences related to technological evolution, company structure changes and an accelerated renewal of knowledge.

    Consequently, lifelong learning becomes an essential method for permanently adapting qualifications, with a view for individuals to engage in learning and build a sustainable career and, in parallel, for companies to find human resources needed within the framework of the evolution of their activities. This issue of continuous adaptation of the relationship between learning and employment generates heterogeneous applications for training and a need for tools, both internal and external to companies, which can satisfy individuals as well as the masses of applicants.

    Lifelong learning needs to develop flexible learning tools that can be adapted to each specific request (modularity, capitalizable units, shaping with various types of training and of learners…), but also to develop integrated solutions (competence assessment, skills and learning validation ...), in order to consider all formal, informal and non-formal learning when assessing and following-up training needs.

    Use of ICT is an essential contribution to the learning environment as it places the individual in the midst of the training process while at the same time creates real multi-actor learning communities and helps to establish active, innovative and enriched pedagogy.

    Employees’ competence acquired in vocational and personal contexts is a reference for company productivity evolution. With this in mind, it is important to define qualifications in a broader sense than academic programmes.

    Faced with this determining stake in terms of economic dynamism and social cohesion, the eLearning Papers invite contributions on the general subject "Training and work" with a view to presenting reflections, innovating solutions and good practices.

    Possible questions to be addressed

    • How is learning and training in companies changing?
    • How do lifelong learning and working life adapt to each other?
    • What new partnerships are there for professional training?
    • How are organisations changing into learning organisations?
    • How are informal learning and Web 2.0 affecting everyday work?

    Papers can be more specifically directed at the following themes:

    1. Online Validation and Qualification
    2. Computer and Internet Certificates
    3. Informal and Non-formal Learning
    4. Competence-based learning and e-Learning
    5. Virtual World in Training
    6. Training Communities
    7. Collaborative working
    8. New partnership for Learning
    9. Transforming organizations (Distance learning, In-company training, blended system…)

    Please consult the eLearning Papers website for writer guidelines:
    http://www.elearningpapers.eu/index.php?page=collab_guide


    The deadline for article submissions is August 18 2008.
    Authors will be notified by September.
    Provisional publishing date is November 28 2008.

    For further information and to submit your article, please contact: jimena.marquez@elearningpapers.eu

    Invited Editor:
    Alain Nicolas, Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University (France)
    Alain.nicolas@uvsq.fr

     


    Open Educational Resources (Deadline: 6 July 2008)

    Open Educational Resources (OER) are learning and teaching materials that are offered freely to anyone under licenses that allow to use, modify and distribute the items. But that's not all. Through the world-wide movement of OER, magnified with user-generated content and underlying Web 2.0 technologies, the advantages and opportunities are numerous for teachers, authors, eLearning practitioners, developers and content providers, researchers and decision-makers, and last but not least: the learners.

    Different models to develop, use and make OER content available have evolved. Examples vary from leading educational institutions that have made their content available for users who otherwise would be deprived of it, to communities of educators who collaboratively create content and share it. Moreover, new effective technical architectures are now in place to enable better discovery of Open Educational Resources across learning repositories on the international level, which allows users to access larger and more varied collections. Also, easy-to-use ways to acquire re-mix and mash-up user-generated content are around, examples of which are seen in the educational context too.

    With this issue, we want to support the establishment of a new kind of ecology of Technology Enhanced Learning that focuses on Open Educational Resources as a chance to make a real difference in education and lifelong learning. We want to give a possibility to share OER-related practices and experiences that support people in acquiring the competences, knowledge and skills they need as individuals in the political, economic, social and cultural life of a modern society.

    Against this background, the eLearning Papers invites contributions in the area of Open Educational Resources. The papers should focus on one or more of the following themes:

    • Lessons learned and best practices of OER projects, tools and in