1 Repcovtempl STR IPTS

Discussions on Learning in Online Networks and Communities

Notes from the validation workshop on the study on Innovations in New ICT-enabled Learning Communities 31 March - 1 April 2009, Seville, Spain

Editor: Kirsti Ala-Mutka

EUR xxxxx EN - 2009 DRAFT FOR WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS The mission of the JRC-IPTS is to provide customer-driven support to the EU policy- making process by developing science-based responses to policy challenges that have both a socio-economic as well as a scientific/technological dimension.

European Commission Joint Research Centre Institute for Prospective Technological Studies

Contact information Address: Edificio Expo. c/ Inca Garcilaso, 3. E-41092 Seville (Spain) E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: +34 954488318 Fax: +34 954488300 http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu http://www.jrc.ec.europa.eu

Legal Notice Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication.

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union

Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the Europa server http://europa.eu/

JRC [PUBSY request]

EUR XXXXX LL ISBN X-XXXX-XXXX-X ISSN 1018-5593 DOI XXXXX

Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged

Printed in Spain 2 Acknowledgements This report gathers together contributions of several people, who were participating the workshop 31.3.-1.4.2009 in Seville. The experts, who were attending the workshop are listed in the Annex 2 of this report. From IPTS, Romina Cachia, Anusca Ferrari, Stefano Kluzer and Kirsti Ala-Mutka were taking notes during the sessions. But also many invited expert participants were twittering with #ipts09 tag, as well as sharing their comments in Cloudworks (http://cloudworks.ac.uk/). Special thanks for Grainne Conole from the UK Open University for setting up the cloudscape and writing many posts and comments there herself. And most of all, thanks to the workshop participants for rich and active discussions during those two days.

3 Table of Contents

Acknowledgements...... 3

Table of Contents...... 4

1 Introduction...... 5

2 Rise of new online spaces and communities for learning...... 6

3 Communities of practice...... 8

4 Case studies on learning communities...... 11

5 Learning in online communities – how, what and when?...... 13

6 Future of learning with ICT-enabled communities and networks...... 16

7 Implications and options for stakeholders...... 18 7.1 Learners...... 18 7.2 Teachers...... 19 7.3 Local decision makers...... 20 7.4 European level...... 20 7.5 Overall...... 22 8 Conclusions...... 23

Annex 1: Workshop Agenda...... 24

Annex 2: Participant list...... 26

4 1 Introduction

Social computing has been growing very fast and, as a result, users now have new opportunities to use internet for collaboration and interaction instead of simply for information searches and individual activities. Recent data captured from December 2007 - December 2008 by Nielsen Online (2009) show that two-thirds of the world’s Internet population visit social networking or blogging sites. These activities account for almost 10% of all internet time, and are overtaking the time used for personal email applications. Furthermore, time spent on social network and blogging sites is growing more than three times the rate of overall Internet growth. Globally these activities already account for one in every 11 online minutes – in Brazil, even one of every four minutes and in the UK, one in every six minutes (Nielsen Online, 2009).

Online collaboration and networking is a significant phenomenon, which has enabled new ways of being part of a community. IPTS has been studying the challenges and opportunities of ICT for learning, innovation and creativity with several research projects as part of its policy support tasks1. For exploring the impacts of social computing on learning, IPTS launched two projects with DG Education and Culture: The Impact of Web2.0 innovations in Education and Training 2, focusing on formal learning, and Innovations in New ICT-facilitated Learning Communities3 exploring collaborative learning in informal settings.

This report is a part of the latter project, where the main research question is: What contributes to the emergence and success of learning in ICT-enabled communities, and how can they promote quality and innovation in lifelong learning and education systems in Europe? The project aimed to review and assess innovative social and pedagogical approaches to learning that are emerging in new ICT-facilitated networking settings. The main goals of the study were to provide an overview and analysis of new learning approaches in communities, investigate the contribution of ICT in enabling new collaboration models in informal settings, analyse the relationship between ICT, learning and innovation, and propose avenues for further research and policy- making. The project composes of following elements4: a) Literature review and analysis on research, data and resources relating to learning in online informal collaborative settings, b) In-depth case studies of 12 communities, c) Validation workshop with experts, discussing (a) and (b) and developing further insights, and d) Synthesis and analysis of the research results, leading into the final report of the project. This document aims to provide an overview of the discussions that took place 31 March – 1 April at IPTS, Seville, Spain, in the validation workshop of the interim results of the project. This report presents the major outcomes of the workshop discussions. It does not provide a synthesis of the results of the different parts of the research project, neither does it summarise all the presentations made at the workshop. Rather, it is a structured account of the discussions and main messages that were raised during the workshop, presented in the order of the workshop sessions.

1 An overview of the IPTS research on ICT for learning: http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/EAP/eLearning.html 2 http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/Learning-2.0.html 3 http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/EAP/LearnCo.html 4 All the research reports of the project will be published on the above mentioned project website. 5 2 Rise of new online spaces and communities for learning

This session aimed to set the context for the workshop by describing the rise of social computing, of different types of online collaborations (networks and communities) emerging, and giving examples of participation motivations and related activities, which also impact on learning. The presentation was based on the review report (Draft version 23.3.2009) Chapter 4: Emerging Online Communities, together with some additional considerations.

The presentation pointed out that social computing is a significant phenomenon, among all age groups of internet users:

According to Preece (2000), an online community consists of: ● People, who interact socially ● A shared purpose that provides a reason for the community ● Policies that guide people’s interactions ● Computer systems to support and mediate social interaction and facilitate a sense of togetherness In networked online spaces, collective actions also follow from individual activities possibly without ‘shared purpose’ or ‘sense of togetherness’, and also these collectives can contribute to learning and are considered worth exploring.

After discussing different types of online spaces and communities and activities in them, the presentation concluded: ● Online spaces are increasing their importance in people’s lives ● Not all online spaces are communities, but they can nevertheless support learning ● Through online communities people can find out, follow and participate much more than was possible before ● Considering participation motivations and supported activities (production, topic, socialization) could help in developing online places and communities for learning ● Communities within organizations vs. open communities can both have specific important features ● It is worth discussing the possible and foreseeable goals and means in educational institutions i) to develop internal communities (learners, teachers), ii) to develop participation in external

6 online spaces and communities, iii) to develop horizontal communities, iv) to differentiate between communities/online spaces the institutions would support. The discussion after the presentation brought up many reactions. It was raised that indeed, community as a terminology is not enough, as there are also looser forms of participation, and perhaps the term 'networks' is useful. There is a difference between online networks and communities of practice. Furthermore, several aspects were pointed out (motivation to learn, participation vs. learning, integration of informal activities into formal):

The major difference between learning in schools and outside is the motivation. Outside school settings people are engaging in learning related activities, because they themselves want and choose to do so. The ethos is completely different, based on pleasure. But we should be careful in assuming that a lot of young people would be interested or have the competences to engage with productive communities. There is also an important distinguishing factor between initial formal education and professionals, as the latter are themselves more often interested in improving their skills. Therefore, motivation is an aspect that should be addressed when thinking about implementing online community approaches in formal setting. However, it may be very difficult to apply engaging and interesting approaches which are currently inviting people to learn skills through activities in World of Warcraft (WoW) to learning linear algebra, which always needs hard work, and is not necessarily fun.

Discussing participation in the communities does not yet describe learning. We would like to have online communities so that students would want to be engaged and enjoy the learning experience on formal courses, but it is not that simple. Being engaged in the activities does not necessarily lead to learning. For example, different levels of participation mean different things – if a lot of people are only reading, what would it mean for learning? Discussing schoolwork online may become simply plagiarizing and getting by easily. Sometimes people just jump doing things because they can, without thinking, planning or reflecting afterwards. It would be important to consider how technologies could help to think instead of only doing. Can technologies and online networks shape things or only mirror what exists already? It is important to think why new models and tools would be useful and beneficial.

It was suggested that if educational systems wish to benefit from the informal networking and the learning effects rising there, they should not create new spaces for collaboration but to coinhabit the several spaces that people already inhabit. However, experts raised concerns that the learning and activities people are participating in the online communities and networks cannot necessarily be combined with organized educational activities. There is a question of 'our' and 'their' spaces, and these borders are not necessarily easy to cross, as students might not like others to 'invade' their space. Experiences are showing that although students may participate in, for example, wikis in their free time, they do not anymore want to 'share their brain' if their activities get assessed and marked. Also, if you change a speaking community to writing (as is the case in online settings), it can change power relations, and what people want to share, as they will become more protective. Personal learning environments could be a tool to create one's own learning environments and to create wider learning communities, with individualised multimembership.

These first discussions already raised topics relating to learning outcomes and factors (Chapter 5 in the review report) and challenges (Chapter 7 in the review report), showing their importance. Those comments have been incorporated to the later sections of this report, in order to support topic-based structuring of presentation.

7 3 Communities of practice

This session composed of a presentation by and discussion with Etienne Wenger on social perspective of learning and communities of practice. Here, both the presentation and the related discussions are summarized in an intertwined manner. More information of Wenger's work can be found at h ttp://www.ewenger.com/

Figure 1 : A social perspective of learning in practice (Source: presentation by Etienne Wenger)

Using the concept of Communities of Practice calls upon a large learning theory, the session started by highlighting  practice as a container for lived knowledge, emphasizing situated nature of learning;  a need to consider 'who are the learners' and how to change their experience to develop their understanding of who they are and how they are placed in society;  learning as experience of being in the world, in self-organizing places where meaningfulness is the driver (vs. organised learning curricula). The learning theories came out before the emergence of the web. It is important to consider how technologies are affecting them and what they bring up. It was suggested that the web has changed the landscape for understanding community and identity. Horizontalisation is emerging in many aspects, in theories, technologies and practices, in parallel. Trends that are shaping technology and community include:  Fabric of connectivity – always on, virtual presence  Modes of engagement – generalised self-expression (e.g. blogs), mass collaboration, creative re-appropriation  Active medium – social computing, semantic web, digital footprint  Reconfigured geographies – homesteading of the web, individualisation of orientation  Modulating polarities – togetherness and separation, interacting and publishing, individual and group  Dealing with multiplicity – competing spaces, multi-membership, thin connections  New communities – multi-space, multi-scale, dynamic boundaries, social learning spaces

8 It is important to consider and study what makes these communities important places for learning. Communities can be set up by emphasizing different aspects, identity, connectivity etc. Often communities emerge bottom-up, as an example it was mentioned that a new community emerged from the Buddhists who wanted to start taking care of that pages relating to their religion are well represented in Wikipedia.

The professional education should realise that the landscape of practices is complex. Body of knowledge is more than a list of topics in a curriculum. It is created through inter-connected practices, which define what 'teaching', 'nursing', or 'mathematics' is. Practices are not implementation of policy but improvisation that takes policy, research and other aspects as inputs. Good workers are not the ones that are good at complying but the ones that are good at engaging. This has been easier to take up by businesses than at schools. Organizations have been looking into CoP approaches as means to addressing knowledge management and being a knowledge organization. Although knowledge management is 10% technology and 90% people, much of the discourse is on the technologies, and it is harder to understand the human dimensions and what this means in terms of connections, collective understanding, etc. Organizations have been trying to create horizontal communities so that people and organizations themselves can learn from each other, develop peer to peer interactions and practices.

There needs to be both core and boundary learning. For example, ideally the education for a nurse or teacher would be to find one's place in that landscape of practices and profession, to find one's identity. Educational practitioners and researchers should think why, and how they should teach algebra to someone who probably will not become mathematician, what it should and does mean to him? A nurse will possibly never be a researcher, but how much research does she need to know in order to appreciate and understand her place in the practice? Education should be about visits to other practices as well, not only acquiring skills to perform certain tasks. Current educational practice puts too much emphasis on the mechanics of learning rather than on meaningfulness and meaning making – what do things mean for the learner and their identity construction.

Assessment of knowledge as practice (e.g. educational systems validating informal learning from communities of practice) is a very complex issue; we need to understand the paradoxes and contradictions. There are complex inter-relationships between space, time, locality, practice, and boundary crossings between different practices. For example trainee doctor in the hospital learns one practice, but for assessment purposes this would need to be translated into portable 'evidence' that can be ‘validated’ by auditors in another community of practice. Information is always lost in this translation.

There are different modes of identification; the following processes for identity formation were brought up:  Imagination, how do we imagine ourselves and make sense of ourselves in the world around us  Engagement, engaging in experiences that form and refine identity  Alignment, expressing belonging to a community by aligning to the practices and traditions of the community, 'what you do and do not do', 'which research methods you use' etc. Taking communities into hierarchical framework does not disrupt them. Structures reduce innovation, freedom and improvisation leading into reduced engagement. For example teaching practices can be 'colonialised' with overprescriptive curricula. But on the other hand, hierarchical systems of accountability and structures are needed, for example to ensure equal opportunities. There is and always will be tension between horizontal accountability (with peers, community) 9 and vertical hierarchical structures. This needs to be recognized and to be learned to live with. The boundaries between the vertical and horizontal need to ensure knowledge development, but allow people to have their identity in a meaningful way.  Vertical axes is about distribution of resources, accountability for results, external measurements and control, project deadlines and budget;  Horizontal systems for developing knowledge and innovations with peers in practice are very important when the business and activities are about knowledge. Only in industrial systems value is created by strictly following the given design, outside it the value creation comes from peer collaboration, informal discussions which bring up creativity. There is power in both axes and both of them also develop identity, as e.g. certification related power aspects can develop your identity as a person who is qualified to prescribe medicines and work as a certified doctor.

Question of trust is a difficult issue. How to evaluate the trustworthiness and the community and people online? In time, trust can be earned, but can it be fastracked if there are no official certificates? Furthermore, how to be sure about the sustainability of the community, as it can be more easily maintained face-to-face than in online settings? It was argued that the concept of trust is changing and being reconfigured. It is combined with identity, sense of belonging, seeing oneself in the landscape. This also relates to the need of digital fluency, where for example being able to build, follow and benefit from thin connections is playing a role. There is a need to shift from talking about digital basic skills to considering digital fluency, which includes these more advanced skills and competences.

It was asked whether certain modes and levels of participation in the community can be encouraged or required. Now it may be that only a small number of 'participants' actually contribute. It was suggested that the nature of community is to have participants with different roles. More important than categorizing different forms of participation or different communities is to recognize from a larger network the part that is the actual community. Furthermore, it is possible to have communities with loose ties, people who are only slightly identified with the community. What is important is that lurking is defined by one's own identification with the practice, not e.g. with problems relating to geographical location, internet access or other external excluding factors.

10 4 Case studies on learning communities

In this session, Scienter presented an overview of the case studies they have studied in order to analyse pedagogical and organizational innovation in 12 online communities. The research entailed analysis and observation of community interactions and content as well as interviews and surveys with community members and managers. The study is in its final phases and the presentation aimed to give a brief overview of the first results of selected cases.

Figure 2 : 12 online communities studied as cases by Scienter

The case results descriptions are not repeated here, they can be found on the project web page http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/EAP/LearnCo.html. Here, we summarize the specific aspects raised during the presentation and discussions.

Different kinds of tensions between communities and their surroundings can emerge. For example, as the Microbiology forum has gained high appreciation among the practitioners in the field, some companies use it as training for their employees, and the community members see it as negative. Also financial supporters of the community can affect the community activities, such as in GayTV, where they needed to adjust their front page content to take into account the wishes of the advertisers.

Ensuring the quality of the information provided in a community is an important question. For example, microbiology is a highly regulated area and it is important to avoid incorrect information. The cases presented had not revealed specific systems for auditing information and ensuring right advice. However, in some cases there are editors who crosscheck the content before publishing or Wiki approaches where anyone can edit and improve the content, leading into collective quality insurance.

Some communities have started to 'document' the knowledge expressed and created in the community activities and communications, e.g. by summarizing and publishing discussion summaries in a regular newsletter. It was raised that this means separating knowledge from the practice. However, examples show that members want and appreciate this, to 'avoid loss of knowledge' as this allows them to go back to issues for new people to have the information on what was happening before they joined. These newsletters or community magazines can also be

11 distributed outside the network. Documenting summary products makes horizontal knowledge vertical, expressible for outside parties and can become a success factor of the community.

The learning that takes place in the communities studied is essentially collaborative learning and exchange of experiences, as informal learning. It is not new as such, but the use of technology makes a difference and when comparing to formal education, it is very different. The basic differences are in the organisational, social and cultural dimensions. In these cases, the activities were mostly concentrated on forums, which seemed to keep people engaged, and in some cases also videos were stimulating participation. From the learning point of view, results have been mostly perceptions of people, not testing and evaluating their knowledge development and status from an external point of view. However, a research approach or communities where testing knowledge would be involved might be difficult to implement as people may not want to participate. Ethnographic approaches might give more information about the moments of learning.

It was discussed, that it would be interesting to put more effort on the cases to find out how to promote participation and what activities are the main features of successful communities. It is not enough to simply have communities, but to consider what are the success components, what makes the DNA of these communities. As one success factor, it was suggested that shared language among people from different countries is important (CEDDET network). It was hoped that case studies would aim to provide more insight knowledge and cross-case analysis on resourcing, management, transferability, resulting into practical suggestions. Here we can see that something is done, activities are taking place, and something is learnt. By recognizing what it is that works we could try to recognize and bring it from there, finding ways to get people who are disinterested back to getting engaged. What we can already see from the cases is that people go to these spaces for passion, for socialising, to develop or reinforce an identity. While they are there they discover that they are learning. These communities are showing that you do not have to force people to learn.

It was raised that horizontality of activities does not mean naïve democracy, but mutuality of relationships that build an economy of meaning. Leadership for and leadership with others are different things. There is a need to understand the bigger picture of activities. Are filtering, qualifications, trust, measure between active participation and lurkers, or documentation of knowledge determining the Darwinian process of the survival and success of the communities? How long will it take to realise and evaluate successful and viable community models (and which communities need to die), also in economic sense?

The aspects discussed will be further elaborated when finalising the case study report and overall analysis of the individual cases described in this session. The final case study report prepared by Scienter will be published in summer 2009.

12 5 Learning in online communities – how, what and when? This session covered the main material in the review report that gathered and analysed research literature and other resources on learning that is taking place in online spaces and communities. The presentation gave an overview of how, what and when learning is taking place. The contents were gathered from the different review report chapters: 'How' -- Ways of learning and the Role of ICT (Chapter 5), 'What' -- Learning outcomes (Chapter 6.1), and 'When' -- Success factors (Chapter 6.2) and Challenges (Chapter 7).

Learning in online networks and communities differs from traditional classroom settings in that it gives new opportunities for  Learning through narratives, stories, situated knowledge  Reflection on personal life and identity by comparing with others  Experential learning through doing and participating  Inquiry-based learning through following one's interest through various opportunities The social environment for learning is different from school classes, as there is an opportunity to connect with others anytime of the day, and despite geographical limitations, providing  Active peer support for learning  Environments where novices and experts can communicate and participate together  Opportunities for learning by observing others, following a vast number of different activities and information sources ICT plays a key role in empowering the learners as it enables new ways for accessing, organizing and interacting, therefore enhancing learning and creativity as well as new means for sociability.

Online networks and communities provide opportunities for learning Key Competences (European parliament and the Council, 2006), both topic-specific competences (Mother tongue, Foreign language, Mathematic and scientific competence, Digital Competence) and transversal competences (Social and civic skills, Cultural awareness and expression, Creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship, and Learning to learn skills). Furthermore, these spaces support in new ways identity development both for personal growth and professional development, as well as enriching one's life with connections and opportunities for reflection.

The presentation also discussed barriers, challenges and factors for individual learning in the online collaborative settings. The suitability of the tools for the purpose plays an important role for participation and learning.

13 The presentation concluded that  Technologies are providing new means for different ways of learning, making them more reachable  Online spaces and communities have potential to be a key tool for the desired lifelong learning continuum  Online communities can be used for learning relevant knowledge, skills and competences for future jobs  Collective online spaces provide creative and innovative potential both for individuals’ learning and for institutions  Online learning opportunities provide both new potential for equity and risks for increasing divides  It is a major challenge to find how educational systems could best benefit from this informal online learning by  Preparing lifelong learners during formal education and outside of it  Learning to take advantage of these approaches in education & training  Validating learning outcomes in external settings without changing them  Finding how these communities could help in changing institutions (communities of learning practitioners, researchers, educational actors) Expert comments both continued on themes already started in other sessions and took up new issues, widening the scope of discussion. Some of these comments have been incorporated to the other respective sections. Furthermore, this section takes up comments from the session on the following morning, where the issues of the first day were summarised and discussed.

It was pointed out that learning is often driven by tests, and also teachers are easily thinking mostly about how to make students pass the text – the learning objectives become 'what is on test'. The current assessment practices do not take into account the types of learning that are taking place in informal collaborative settings. Experts argued that we should not try to transfer evaluation factors and measurements from formal education to informal learning. The skills and learning in the online networks are very different, but can be demonstrated in the competent usage and participation in the networks. Validation of skills should come from having been an active and visible member of a certain community. The question is about finding the language, aspects and concepts that would help approaching and talking about learning in these settings. Currently, for example, employers do not necessarily understand that important and good skills can be learned in informal online collaborations, instead, they would like to cut off the employees from the internet networking.

Experts brought up that indeed, new skills and literacies develop through participating in online communities. These can mobilize people and create an attitude for participation and working together for common purpose, providing what previously was supported in local village. For example, Greek bloggers have organized demonstrations through their online collaboration. In online collaboration, people learn transversal competences such as listening to each other, commenting and communicating. It was pointed out that not all learning from online communities could be or is desired to be certified.

There are no clear borders and differentiation between formal and informal worlds of learning. It is about the basis of knowledge, whether the meaning is negotiated among the participants (social construction of knowledge) or imposed from outside. Both these heterarchical and hierarchical forms of knowledge are important. However, it is not only about the nature of the knowledge, but also building upon practice and experience, which is often missing from the 14 formal learning. Learning content in formal learning is learning what we already know, and the informal learning is collaboratively learning what we do not know. Problem-based learning is already going to the right way in bridging the formal and informal aspects. It is important that learners can own their learning in forms of reflection, for example, through portfolios. Educational institutions should provide tools for students to direct and develop learning, instead of trying to own and manage it. However, it might be so that some content is better suited for formal than informal learning.

It was brought up that the review report is currently mostly addressing what a well-rounded person can do, but does not address what a less competent people can do. It is a major challenge to ensure that all of us are able. Going to school supports socialization and participation, and in online collaboration, it is more challenging but important to find ways to identify dropouts and people with difficulties in learning. Can we replace schools with something else that ensures basic skills, socialization, and digital fluency for kids? Lifelong learning models cannot assume that all people are enthusiastic about continuing learning. Furthermore, there are serious challenges relating to digital skills and ensuring digital fluency. Especially privacy aspects need attention, as online activities can leave permanent digital trails, although after 10 years one has developed and changed one's identity and would like to remove the previous visible exploration paths.

There is a risk that current research methods are too much geared to formal education. It is important to consider what are the new pedagogies in online learning, what makes people learn in them? The assumption has now been that learning online is positive and desirable, but how do we know it or can ensure it? The research scope is very large and it should be considered what is in and out of scope. The discussions have been mainly about the boundaries and interfaces, not about the essential changes or whether there are any. Furthermore, it is important to consider where is the offline in all this, the hybridness where also the internet users are living in. We should also look at the liminal in between spaces and consider credentialising the learning there. A lot of effort has been put in creating digital materials and archives, and it is worth considering how different open educational resources could be used for learning activities.

Discussing participants and online communities requires having a look at the different personalities and cultures of learning. It is not possible to generalize communities, neither public educational systems, as there are many specificities in different environments. Furthermore, we need to place the discussion in the broader perspective. The research is concentrating on the social networks, but there is a wider digital world where people are living, and the social computing phenomenon should be put into the broader landscape. Furthermore, it was suggested that something is going on in the world, bringing up social solidarity and the need to create senses of communities – which is now taking place online instead of local villages. All this is part of a bigger picture, relating also to the social and economic changes in Europe and in the world.

15 6 Future of learning with ICT-enabled communities and networks To encourage discussions on the workshop topics, the participants were divided into four groups to consider learning and ICT-enabled communities in a given future setting in 2020. The main objective of the exercise was to raise additional topics, concerns and challenges to be taken into account in the upcoming policy implications discussion.

Group 1 considered settings where there exists one major widely used integrating application platform and systems to certify learning outcomes acquired in various ways. They saw personal ePortfolios complemented with reputation management tools having an important role, and being provided by the system. Certifications would come from the references of third parties, e.g. plumbers recommended by neighbours and other customers would be appreciated more than official certificates. Some kind of balance between portfolios and given certifications would emerge, but the role of the certifications of universities would change. If deciding to pursue a university certificate, people would consciously look for highly respected institutions. A major risk and danger in this future would be that everybody might have access to a lot of data collected and provided about you and your activities, and there are risks in relying strongly on peer reviews. Furthermore, the fact that one major power would collect and own a lot of data would give to it opportunities to do assessments, bias results and activities etc without people being aware of it. Scarcity and being different would increase value, possibly creating elitism.

Group 2 considered settings with one major online system for internet users, but the power of certification remaining by the organized training providers. They considered this scenario quite unlikely, because niches are emerging supporting differentiation, and new communities are emerging to meet new urgent needs. Furthermore, they suggested that instead of dominating platforms, there would rather exist standards for easy integration (assumably universally adopted by the platforms and applications). They pointed out that it is difficult to discuss desirability of certain future settings based on our values, as the future generations may have different values. In their discussions they had considered that in this kind of future, the role of universities would be changing from current type of certification providers into becoming authenticating authorities for communities and personal portfolios, guaranteeing transparency, credibility, relevance and quality. Furthermore, they discussed that funding and commercialism are issues that need to be considered about communities. Communities can be supported through funding to provide desired services, and not all communities are altruistic but need this support to thrive, as otherwise they would die.

16 Group 3 considered settings where there are several dispersed communities, and ways for certifying learning outcomes obtained in different ways. They considered this as a very likely scenario, since many elements already exist, such as Open Educational Resources to enable getting knowledge and skills with resources provided freely available. In this future, small companies can give certifications of specific skills. They also suggested that universities would have shared courses where people could participate and receive the certificate from several universities. Certifications would remain important when hiring people but are typically combined with internet searches about the applicant. Companies could start by hiring a person and look for a job for him, instead of describing a job and looking for a person for the job. This future brings up the threat of becoming excluded from the recommendation system, if you do not get the first recommendation to get in. For this purpose, certifications are needed and handy. Skills and facilities for managing digital identity become very important in this scenario. Furthermore, it is essential that legislation is developed to require platform owners to allow people to regulate and at least erase their data.

Group 4 considered settings where there are several dispersed communities in the internet, but the power of certification remains traditionally by the educational institutions. They considered this as a rather likely future, although pointing out also that it is difficult to think anything drastically different for 2020, as it is already quite close. They perceived that in any case, this future would end up with a few major platforms, maybe 3 or 4 or them, and communities would not be disconnected as there would be members linking them together. The certification and curricula development would essentially be based on competences instead of content, and universities would have moved into multinational degrees with international comparability. It has been realised that it is important not to underestimate the basic skills of literacy and numeracy. Furthermore, is is important not to aim at only developing competences for labour market but also developing identity – currently schools are not doing either of them very well. Challenges relate to developing certification systems that allow mobility, take into account differences between formal and informal learning and cultural differences. Curricula planning should be more democratic, involving more stakeholders, members of CoPs, normal citizens and systematic communities between educational institutions and industry.

Overall, the issues raised in the group presentations and expert reactions emphasised the role and concerns relating to power, autonomy of learners and communities, liability of actors and platforms and concerns relating to privacy and data management. However, it was raised that discussions are still remaining in the box, not imagining something different, not thinking big enough. We should think about what are the objectives of a learning society, whether it is to make people happy or to contribute to the GDP. What should be the main objectives and competences to be learned – engagement, mobilization and problem-solving? Furthermore, it is important to consider how the knowledge artefacts need to and can travel between different communities and practices.

17 7 Implications and options for stakeholders On the second day of the workshop, it was decided to combine the last sessions together to have a joint discussion on the policy challenges and suggestions for different stakeholders. The objective was not to go wide in thinking and discussion but to take a pragmatic approach in thinking what could be passed on to people who are not working at the edges but need to consider these issues in their normal daily life. What statements could be taken forward, things that are easy to understand and could make an impact on the future?

It was reminded that the major strategic challenges for European Co-operation in Education and Training for Lisbon objectives are about promoting quality and efficiency, equity, creativity and innovation (entrepreneurial mindset), lifelong learning with physical and virtual mobility. We should already start initial thinking about what comes after 2010. ICT for learning is a transversal issue, still important and enabling innovation.

This year is the Year of Creativity and Innovation. It is important to keep in mind the knowledge triangle of research, innovation and education, and that these are not only about higher education, but should be encouraged as early as possible. The Key Competences for lifelong learning are important to consider, especially the transversal competences. It is important to start already early on in the education with cross-curricula competences, such as out-of-box thinking, problem-solving, risk-taking, but it is true that it is not easy to put them in qualifications.

The debate on new skills for new jobs is important and ongoing. It is important to look at what is changing. In which sense jobs are changing and what should the youngsters know? Mentality change is needed in education.

The discussions of the workshop in the previous sessions had already been close to these topics. Regarding learning taking place in online spaces and communities, it seems clear that Education and Training in Europe should  Acknowledge the world people are living in outside and after school  Prepare students for this world  Find ways for institutions to have interfaces with and benefit from these learning settings The participants were asked to consider messages for different target groups: learners, teachers, local decision makers and European policy makers.

7.1 Learners All the discussions and statements were aiming at improving conditions and outcomes of learners and learning, even though aimed at other stakeholders groups, that should support them. However, some considerations were brought up directly related to the activities of learners and students.

Listening to the learners. It was pointed out that the voice of the learner should be represented in policy considerations, and this is not happening at the moment. There are student associations, professional societies, consumer associations that could be used for consulting and individual learners could be involved in many ways, through forums, student groups etc. As an example, Learnovation is organizing an open forum in Brussels 27 May to discuss with stakeholders what innovation and creativity means for learners in different contexts.

18 Difficulty of applying informal tools to education. It was reminded that it may be difficult to push students who use a technology for leisure to use it for given educational activities. Assessment component will complicate the picture, as students will want to know and take into account how their activities are assessed. There may be heavy counterproductive trends in trying to combine these approaches. Another challenge pointed out for learners was the question of language. The goal is to empower learners but they are restricted to spaces and communities on the languages they can use.

Addressing low-skilled learners. It seems that learning communities could work for people in and after higher education, but it is not sure if they would work for people with less skills. It is important to consider also these learners – how to cater for low vocational paths. Schools may scare these people and they are likely to become unemployed, relying on their own devices. There should be ways of learning which suit their learning preferences. It is important to improve digital fluency and make them become self-directed learners also on low vocational level. Overall, it is important to develop learners' skills for self-regulated learning, as these are essential in both formal and informal settings. It was pointed out that there is evidence that ICT can enhance these skills.5

7.2 Teachers Awareness of new opportunities for teaching. It was emphasized that teachers are key persons in making changes happen. It is important to rethink their training, everyday practices and support and reinforce their networks. Teachers need to be aware of the informal learning communities, because their learners and themselves may benefit from them. Teachers should engage students with these communities and nurture learners' skills to recognize and meaningfully participate in these communities.

Developing teacher training and professional development. There is a need for different kind of teacher training. Teachers' professional development should fully take into account what they will find in the classrooms: students who are digital 24/7. They should not be prepared only for what happens in the classroom but what takes place outside of it. Teachers need to move away from the figure of the teachers as holders of knowledge to become people who facilitate and support learning. Theories should be taken up more in the teacher training, allowing teachers to build their practices on theories. New knowledge could be built through projects during training. For example, Danish professional training is very much based on teachers undertaking small innovation projects, and the majority of the teachers are involved. Furthermore, it is important to combine formal with informal, and support teachers becoming members of communities themselves for development of practices and support. Both local and online communities are important.

Connecting formal learning tasks with practice and life. Teachers need to allow and support learners to learn through experimenting. As a practical change in the current educational practices, it was discussed that learners could be encouraged to use networks and various resources through rethinking the meaning, objectives and forms of homework. Homework tasks could be more aimed at not preparing learners for the classroom but for what they need to learn to do, enhancing critical reflection on the activities they do when completing tasks outside school environment. This would also allow paying attention to the dimension of 'practice', beyond the knowledge component. However, it is essential to change the assessment and exams; otherwise the learning systems and tasks cannot be changed.

5 See, for example, TACONET-KALEIDOSCOPE conference proceedings 2007 and the special issue of European Journal of Education vol 41, Issue 3-4 in 2006. 19 Developing ownership of new practices. It is important that the teachers themselves participate in developing the new practices and pedagogies. They need to be owners in these as well as in new definitions of learning content. In New York, they have an experimental state school with Game- based learning, and the teacher training is experimental as well, to help them experience and learn the new pedagogies. More experimentation in teacher training is needed in Europe as well.

7.3 Local decision makers Importance of both local and European levels. Local aspect is important in developing new practices and promoting change, as on that level they know what works well in their environment. Educational policy makers should know European frameworks and issues at European level, but know and respect the local contexts. Each country has its own educational context and settings, and innovations often happen at the local level.

Empowering actors. Experts suggested that if innovation is hoped for, it is important not to impose rigid frameworks but to give freedom and not control spaces. Too controlled and strict regulations and policies hold back innovation. Light regulation that allows innovation but in a managed way, avoiding recklessness, works in companies. Teachers should be allowed to experiment, have space for innovation, to have academic freedom for experimenting and learning from the experiments. In Netherlands, they have a grass-root approach where teachers got some money for experimenting their ideas and the requirement to report back later about the success. This ended up with a large diversity of projects, some silly ones, others very clever. Innovation through experimentation always implies some risk and losing money, which should be recognised. Furthermore, not only schools and teachers but empowerment of civil servants is needed.

Support through local and international networks. There should be networks that allow local support but also connecting at national and European level. eTwinning is an important networking example with already 60000 teachers, and it would be worth to consider how it could be enforced and expanded. There all the teachers signing up are connected with each other. Experts commented that eTwinning is like a stealth approach for introducing and creating innovations and new educational practices through the collaboration of teachers.

Importance of change and innovation management. Furthermore, it was reminded that good managers are essential. It is not yet understood what these good management practices are, and research is needed on how these things are managed. In order to support implementation, taking up and upscaling of good ideas, it is important to improve basic management.

7.4 European level Importance of pedagogy. It was pointed out that pedagogy is still important, even though a lot of attention is put on new technologies. New pedagogies are needed in the context of emerging technologies, to find methods of success on how to reach the learner and how to listen to the learners more. New pedagogical concepts for the classrooms are needed and examples for teachers and trainers on how to apply these tools. For example, practices on how to take up Montessori pedagogy in digital environments. The main object of the new approaches pedagogies should not be to enforce informal into formal, but to recognize its value, and make people as competent as possible.

Rethinking curricula and assessment. It was emphasized several times during the discussions that there is a need to rethink assessment. More emphasis should be given to formative assessment, approaches to monitor and support learning activities and support competence cased 20 approaches. Educational systems and policies promote the other type of assessments, promoting outcomes and summative assessment, with all discussion on comparative degrees and competences. Experts raised concerns relating to the rubric offered by the European Qualifications Framework, as constraining learning outcomes and innovation in learning and education. However, it was pointed out that EQF is quite flexible, allows introducing practice element when creating evaluation for knowledge, skills, and competences. It can also take into account both formal and informal learning, and therefore, is already a big chance from current practices. There needs to be ways for people to document and formalise their learning and career achievements.

Inertia for innovations. It was argued that in the institutions and formal education there is actually a trend away from innovation and towards risk aversion. People often claim that they cannot be innovative because of rules, of teachers' unions etc. However, it was pointed out that rules and guidelines are not always only constraints, but they can also be used for introducing innovation, such as different learning quality tools and approaches. It was suggested that when looking for creativity and innovation in learning, the types of learning looked and discussed in this workshop are very important. We need to support innovation in the formal system, and at the same time promote innovation outside it. Experts raised that we should not only concentrate on radical but also on incremental change. This is especially important when targeting stakeholders, for whom incremental changes might be more possible to take up and implement.

Promoting experimentation. It was pointed out that there is a real danger of creating policies for an environment where policies are not paid attention to. There should be academic freedom instead of an all-embracing policy that dictates how innovation should take place. Furthermore, there is not "the" method, as there is great diversity and no simple right answers. People should have a chance to try and experiment, recognise failure early and fast, learn from it and make another experiment. These experiments should become documented, and common platforms could be used (for example ePractice6 and eLearning7 portals) to share and build knowledge from them. Experts hoped that in addition to small scale experiments and trials, there would also be some larger scale integrated solutions, such as the experimental game-based school in New York mentioned in the discussions.

Measurements and regulations. Some concrete regulatory aspects were taken up in the discussions. As the most important aspect for the European Commission to take up, it was suggested that there needs to be regulation on data ownership and managing one's own data on online platforms. Furthermore, managing and ensuring intellectual property rights of online and digital content are problematic and need further development. From the viewpoint in progressing in educational strategies, it was suggested that there is a need for preparing indicators and monitoring progress, and take into account the opportunities of virtual collaboration in these. For example, in addition to physical mobility, it is expected that virtual collaboration and virtual mobility will be taken into account in the new Lifelong learning program. As an objective for further research, it was suggested that there should be incentives for self-organizing learning, both for people and organizations. Experts suggested that similar to the framework for internet traffic and interoperability of systems enabled by common technical standards (TCP/IP), there should be framework to enable self-organized learning capacity.

7.5 Overall Linking with stakeholders. The discussions emphasized that there should be more interconnections between institutions and stakeholders. It is important that the role of learners

6 http://www.epractice.eu/ 7 http://www.elearningeuropa.info/ 21 and stakeholders is understood and enhanced. Furthermore, we should not only think about member states, etc. but also, for example, the inertia of parents and teachers' unions. It was pointed out that stakeholders are very different, some of them are conservative, and others are not. Furthermore, in the organizations there may be tendency for innovations among actors, but the representatives are conservative. It was also suggested that if you want a genuine innovation, you do not ask for advice from existing stakeholders, as they may not be able to think out of the box sufficiently. The representatives of new learners do not exist, and they are very diverse. New approaches are needed to go towards the representatives of learners, which have their own trajectories and do not necessarily have systems for representation.

Lifelong learning as combination of formal and informal. The nature and role of lifelong learning were discussed, as it is a difficult issue to be supported and promoted. It was pointed out that the way lifelong learning is currently organised, adopts the institutional roles of initial education. A suggestion was raised that in order to really support lifelong learning, we should ignore the current educational systems. However, opposing opinions pointed out that we cannot ignore what goes on in the official education system. The plans to support lifelong learning need to consider the institutional system. The formal learning and informal learning are different worlds, and methodologies are needed for both. The important issue is to realise that the mechanisms are different. It was suggested that the preconditions for successful lifelong professional development is learning from the day you are born, flexibility in time and space, pedagogical flexibility and content flexibility. These can be supported in learning communities. Lifelong learning should be about orchestrating, guiding learners to manage their learning careers both as individuals and professionals. The capacity to manage one's learning career is extremely important and a possibility to get guidance from professionals becomes essential.

Encouraging discussion and increasing awareness. Experts pointed out that the current economic crisis opens an opportunity to start a debate in the society about the meaning of learning and education. Power of the state is shifting and it would be a good moment for an overall awareness campaign about the importance and opportunities of lifelong learning in new ways. There is an ongoing debate on the decline of community and upsurge of social networks, there may be a relationship between these and web2.0. We should not ignore the affordances of what new ICT allows us to do, and awareness of these opportunities should be promoted.

22 8 Conclusions Overall, the workshop discussions contributed to the research by emphasizing aspects that the invited experts considered most important. Furthermore, new topics and considerations were introduced. Some of the points that were raised during the different sessions are listed below:  It needs to be recognized that structures, policies and assessment are posing hierarchical systems that may hinder horizontal collaboration, innovations and new knowledge creation. This tension is not resolvable, and both hierarchical and heterarchical systems are needed. It is important to learn to deal with the tension in the best possible ways.  There are no clear boundaries between formal and informal learning, both of them are taking place at the same time and also can support each other. However, aiming to formalize informal activities may change people's motivation and behaviour, therefore changing the learning results. Formal assessment methods do not suit well informal learning.  New skills and competences, especially transversal competences seem to be nurtured and developed in online spaces. People are motivated through their passion and learn to get engaged, work with others and listen to others. Shaping one's identity through individual learning trajectories is important and online communities support new ways for it.  We should not romantize online learning communities. They may not suit for learning all types of competences neither provide support for all types of learners. Online it is possible to simply just do activities without thinking and learning. Schools and ensuring basic skills for children are still very much needed, and not all online participation leads to learning.  Lifelong learning in online communities may suit people with higher education and skills and the ones interested in professional development, but low-skilled learners may not be able or interested to learn and engage in them. It is important to ensure that all people are able and emphasise digital fluency for all learners and citizens.  For developing innovation in education, it is important to raise awareness of new opportunities through ICT, listen to stakeholders, and support experimenting on local level by individual actors, sharing the results afterwards. There will be no general overall solution, diverse situations need to be considered and different practices experimented and developed.  Formal educational institutions cannot ignore informal learning and the digital world their students are living in. Institutions need to prepare people for participating in them, tap into existing communities to learn lessons from them, and engage students in productive learning communities and allow them to enhance the formal learning experience with informal elements and real-life connections.

The final report of the project aims to synthesise together the messages coming from the literature (review report prepared for the workshop), case studies (case study report to be published in summer 2009, and the workshop discussions (this report). Of specific interests for the final work will be to consider the interfaces between educational institutions and online learning networks, in order to suggest options for enhancing innovation to support lifelong learning by tapping into what has been learned about these informal learning settings.

23 Annex 1: Workshop Agenda Learning Communities Innovations in new ICT-enabled learning communities

Validation Workshop 31.3.-1.4.2009

DAY 1 – TUESDAY, 31 MARCH 2009

09:15 Arrival at IPTS

09:30-10:00 Opening, Welcome, Introduction of the Participants Yves Punie, IPTS

10:00-11:15 Session 1: Emergence of new online communities Presentation by Kirsti Ala-Mutka, IPTS (30') Chair: Yves Punie, IPTS 11:15-11:45 Coffee break 11:45-13:00 Session 2: Communities of practice: the art of learning together Presentation by Etienne Wenger (30') Chair: Brian Holmes, EACEA 13:00-14:00 Lunch 14:00-15:15 Session 3: Case studies on new learning communities Presentation by Claudio Dondi, Scienter (30') Chair: Clara Centeno, IPTS 15:15-15:30 Break, coffee and tea available 15:30-16:45 Session 4: Learning in online communities – what, how and when? Presentation by Kirsti Ala-Mutka, IPTS (30') Chair: Yves Punie, IPTS 16:45-17:00 Break, coffee and tea available 17:00-18:00 Session 5: Future of learning communities? Group activity

18:00 Close of first day

21.00 Dinner (To be covered by Daily Allowance)

24 DAY 2 – WEDNESDAY, 1 APRIL 2009

09:00-10:00 Session 6: What have we discussed this far? Summary of the first day, Yves Punie Groups present their results from the previous day Chair: Yves Punie 10:00-11:00 Session 7: Risks and challenges for learning in online communities Chair: David Broster, IPTS 11:00-11:30 Coffee break 11:30-12:30 Session 8: New Skills for New Jobs in new learning communities? -- policy implications and options Chair: Lieve van den Brande, DG EAC 12:30-13.00 Closing conclusions and discussion Yves Punie and Kirsti Ala-Mutka

13:00 End of Workshop

13.00 Lunch (To be covered by Daily Allowance)

VENUE Institute for Prospective Technological Studies (IPTS) Room 116 (second floor), Edificio EXPO, C/ Inca Garcilaso, s/n, E - 41092 Sevilla – Spain (+34.95.448.8269)

25 Annex 2: Participant list

FINAL PARTICIPANTS LIST Validation Workshop: Innovations in new ICT – Enabled learning communities, Seville, 31 March – 1 April 2009

Stefania Aceto David Istance Scienter OECD/CERI Italy France

Graham Attwell Mart Laanpere Pontydysgu Tallinn University UK Estonia

Christina Balari Berner Lindström CEDDET University of Gothenburg Spain Sweden

Stephen Bradley Riel Miller Elsevier Science & Technology XperidoX UK France

Melissa Cole Martin Owen Brunel University Medrus - Smalti Technology UK UK

Gráinne Conole Fouli Papageorgiou The Open University Prisma Centre for Development Studies UK Greece

Paul Coyne Martin Rehm Emerald Group Publishing Limited UNICEF & E-Learning UK The Netherlands

Jim Devine Thomas Ryberg Dun Laoghaire Institute of Art | Design | Aalborg University Technology's (IADT) Denmark Ireland Peter B. Sloep Claudio Dondi CELSTEC Scienter The Netherlands Italy Karl Steffens Ulf-Daniel Ehlers University of Köln University of Duisburg-Essen Germany Germany

26 Riina Vuorikari EUN Belgium

Etienne Wenger USA

EC MEMBERS______

Kirsti Ala-Mutka JRC, IPTS, European Commission

David Broster JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Romina Cachia JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Clara Centeno Mediavilla JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Anusca Ferrari JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Brian Holmes EACEA

Stefano Kluzer JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Gianluca Misuraca JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Yves Punie JRC, IPTS, European Commission

Eugenio Riviere Gomez DG EAC B2

Lieve van den Brande DG EAC A1

Rogelio Segovia DG EAC B1

Friedrich Scheuermann JRC, IPSC, European Commission

27 European Commission

EUR ….. EN – Joint Research Centre – Institute for Prospective Technological Studies Title: …. Author(s): … Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 2009 EUR – Scientific and Technical Research series – ISSN 1018-5593 ISBN X-XXXX-XXXX-X DOI XXXXX

Abstract

This document aims to provide an overview of the discussion that took place 31 March – 1 April at IPTS, Seville, Spain, in the validation workshop of the interim results of the project. This report presents the major outcomes of the workshop discussions. It does not provide a synthesis of the results of the different parts of the research project, neither does it summarise all the presentations made at the workshop. Rather, it is a structured account of the discussions and main messages that were raised during the workshop.

How to obtain EU publications

Our priced publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu), where you can place an order with the sales agent of your choice.

The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents. You can obtain their contact details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.

The mission of the Joint Research Centre is to provide customer-driven scientific A -

and technical support for the conception, development, implementation and B monitoring of European Union policies. As a service of the European Commission, B - the Joint Research Centre functions as a reference centre of science and technology X X for the Union. Close to the policy-making process, it serves the common interest of X X

the Member States, while being independent of special interests, whether private or X - national. L L -