Open Learning Environments for Personalised Learning
Stefanie Klein and Volker Zimmermann (IMC)
imc information multimedia communication AG, www.im‐c.com
Abstract
Personalisation is a key requirement to motivate learners to use learning technologies and self‐paced content. Whereas most research focuses on the personalisation of content, this paper takes a closer look at the personalisation of the tools and platform technologies for learning and the use of open learning content within that context. When designing a learning environment, most organisations tend to work on their internal business processes and content instead of focussing on what the learners really do with the learning tools the organisation provides to them. Changing the perspective to the users shows that they prefer to create their own technology‐enhanced learning environments and choose to individually adapt contents to their needs – not necessarily within the organisational structures and solutions offered to them. Doing this, a whole set of technologies comes into play: Suddenly the organisational learning management system has to be compatible with a variety of social network platforms, search engines, open web services, blogs or wikis, open content repositories and a high number of other applications. Thus, the challenge for organisations today is: How can they manage the variety of technologies and simultaneously foster the creativity and motivation of their users. This paper proposes a solution for this question by describing an architecture for an open learning environment. It delivers examples and instructions on how to build such a solution step‐by‐step. The presented approach is equally relevant for public institutions, corporation or educational institutions.
Keywords
Personal Learning Environment, Learning Management, Adaptive Learning, e‐Learning, Mashup Technologies, Learning Architecture
1 Introduction
Ever since the times of Sidney Pressey, who was first to use “intelligent” machines for educational purposes in 1926 (Pressey, 1926), and Benjamin Bloom (Bloom, 1984), who argued that the most effective way of teaching is one‐on‐one tutoring, the idea of personalised tutoring has been in the focus of psychological, pedagogical, and didactic theory and practise, particularly with respect to technology‐enhanced learning. Intelligent and adaptive educational systems have attempted to support the learner and the teacher by providing meaningful, relevant, and appropriate educational content. Over the past years, research and development in the area of intelligent and adaptive educational systems has made significant progress and the evolution of such technology – including their psycho‐pedagogical foundations – proceeds continuously. In the context of existing approaches to
intelligent and adaptive learning, adaptivity refers to personalised presentation of contents and adaptive navigation through the contents.
One crucial aspect of personalisation and adaptation to the learners, their preferences and needs is largely untouched by current educational technology: the personalisation of the entire learning environment, its components, tools and functionalities. The broad range of different demands and the dynamics of demands over time ultimately require such innovative approaches to adaptivity and adaptability. Additionally, an appropriate balance between system controlled, self‐controlled, and peer/teacher‐controlled environments contributes to that requirement.
Moreover, there is a significant change – a “perfect storm” (Vice‐Chancellor of the UK Open University) happening in the field of educational technology which is essentially driven by an increased use of learning management systems in corporate as well as higher education environments but also by today’s web 2.0 developments which allow learners more than before to create their own content (e.g. WIKIs).
The pattern is characterised by a shift from "push for learning" (the dominance of organisation‐driven learning models) to "pull for learning" (a learner‐driven demand for informal and lifelong learning, in which learners control what they learn, how they learn it, and with whom).
Simple peer‐to‐peer networks between virtual learning environments (VLE) have not solved these questions in the past. There is a need to enable the learner to combine the services in his/her personal learning environment (either on social network technologies or within collaboration and portal platforms). This implies that in future LMSs have to control the processes in such a way that the learner can adapt and personalise his own scenario in combination with web 2.0 technologies and other learning resources (e.g. open content).
This is of particular relevance in critical lifelong learning transition phases when inhomogeneous groups of learners are treated in a one‐size‐fits‐all way since there is no way to respond to their individual strengths and weaknesses. Even worse, in such transition phases learners are typically required to become accustomed to working with an entirely new VLE.
One of the main questions is how to enable the individual learner as well as groups of learners to adapt the learning environment to their very specific needs and, more importantly, how to enable the system to adapt its functionalities and components to the very specific and individual demands.
And yet, there is a need to go even a step further beyond such novel perspectives on personalisation and adaptation in educational technology. In the future, it is necessary to enable the individual learner or groups of learners to generate new components and functionalities on the basis of existing web based software tools, so‐called web services.
This vision is quite ambitious. On one hand, the technological implementation must allow ‘non‐technicians’ to generate new tools and functionalities. This necessarily implies the
need for research regarding adaptive learner support for service composition and orchestration of adaptive tools (what may be called meta‐responsiveness). While the so‐called “digital natives” are utilising many aspects of technology to support their learning, technologically inexperienced learners, which is by far the largest group, need suitable support. On the other hand, technological research and development must be based on psycho‐pedagogical theories of intelligent and adaptive education, learning psychology, and sound didactic principles and strategies. Moreover, aspects of self‐regulated learning must be explicitly considered in this context.
In this document we will discuss the development of a generic framework, which provides adaptivity and personalisation of the entire learning environment and its functionalities.
From a technical point of view, such a framework does not have to unite all learning tools and technologies in one infrastructure. The vision is to combine the best features of virtual learning environments in one ‘bundle’, i.e. a Responsive Open Learning Environment. A learning management system will act as the anchor for the different components, it must allow the integration of external services via so‐called web services. Vice versa the LMS must be designed in such a way that it allows its services to be integrated into other platforms such as corporate collaboration portals or social network platforms.
2 Background
2.1 Learning Technologies
Taking a look at today’s technologies used to build a virtual learning environment, a large variety of different software systems and components are being used depending on the learning processes organisations aim to support. Figure 1 contains the most important software tools and platform components.
Learning ProcessManagementResourceManagementLearningContent Management Authoring ToolsVirtual ClassroomTraining andEvent ManagementSkill&CompetencyManagementLearning DesignToolsPerformanceManagementTest and AssessmentToolsSocialSoftware Tools(Blogs, WIKIs, RSS,SocialBookmarking)Open ContentRepositoriesandCommunitiesLearningManagementSystem
Figure 1: Technologies within a Personal Learning Environment
Learning Management Systems (LMSs) are the core in a modern virtual learning environment (Grohmann et al., 2007). They take over the role of integrating the different technologies into a common learning environment. LMSs primarily focus on the management of learning and training processes, distributing the learning content, supporting the learning process, and serving as general communication point and interface between learner and teacher (Helic, 2006). Using an LMS, the organisation collects data to enable decisions, to fulfil compliance needs and to manage efficient training processes. No other technology allows a teacher to support learners in such a structured, systematic way, driven by learning objects (Kraemer et al., 2007).
Today’s LMSs offer content management and learning process technologies. Content management functionalities enable an organisation to administer a large scale of different learning objects, to group them into different courses or learning settings. Process management functionalities allow the organisation to manage the workflows and business processes such as booking of courses, notifications to inform learners and teachers about events or learning activities, setting up a syllabus and run training programmes.
Virtual classroom tools support activities of synchronous learning like sharing of workspaces and resources as well as live discussions between participants. Authoring tools allow to create and to publish content using standard technology to integrate the result of the creation process into the platforms (e.g. SCORM). Test and assessment systems allow creating exercises, to integrate them into tests and to run tests in order to proof the knowledge and certify people for a specific knowledge level.
From an organisational perspective there are many additional components which complement a learning environment. Training and event management systems support the management of onsite training events, resource management systems help to optimise the resources needed in training processes, skill and competency management systems allow to administer the skills of an organisation’s workforce and performance management systems help to track and improve the performance of participants.
Collaborative, social and informal learning plays an increasingly important role within a virtual learning environment. WIKIs, blogs, search functionalities, RSS feeds, etc. support learners by helping them to share and create knowledge, either within a course or in a self‐organised form. Social networking systems and open content platforms support the exchange of information, knowledge and learning objects, they interlink people and create networks of common interest. Either these objects are stand‐alone technologies in the web 2.0, integrated through mashups or they are an integral part of an LMS.
A modern Personal Learning Environment (PLE) can be built based on the technology of an LMS using integration technologies. Modern LMSs allow a natural and learner‐centric approach and are characterised by the freeform use of a set of lightweight services and tools. Such a VLE (virtual learning environment) or PLE (personal learning environment) driven approach does not only provide personal spaces, which belong to and are controlled by the user, but also creates a social context by offering means to connect with other people for effective knowledge sharing and collaborative knowledge creation (Chatti et al., 2007).
Despite their popularity, LMSs are criticised for their focus on supporting learning management, which often results in behavioural approaches to learning (Schulmeister, 2002). But – as explained above – the integration of social learning technology has proven, that this is not applicable anymore.
2.2 Collaboration in Learning Communities
Success stories for the use of learning technologies are often based on large‐scale approaches. New trends in learning, subsumed with the term web 2.0 (O’Reilly, 2005) and known to the public due to large user communities or strong media attention, have already started to influence technology‐enhanced learning (Rollett et al., 2007; Ullrich et al., 2008) through their ability to motivate the learners to participate more actively (Vassileva, 2002; Kamel, Boulos & Wheeler, 2007). Educational experts such as Downes (Downes, 2005) see significant potential for web 2.0 in education. Recently, researchers have been focusing on how to incorporate these new trends into the learning processes and how to harness and web 2.0 concepts to create new experiences for learners. Aiming at a more active
involvement of learners current web 2.0 driven learning technologies focus on the perspective of learners, allowing them to individually design their learning environments, giving them full control over the learning environment, supporting communication and collaboration with others (Moedritscher & Wild, 2008).
Collaborative learning can be a powerful instrument for achieving an active learner involvement (Dillenbourg et al., 1995), e.g. by promoting reflective interactions (Baker & Lund, 1997). However, existing pedagogical frameworks are expert‐driven, which conflicts with the learner‐driven paradigm of web 2.0 (Ullrich et al., 2008).
3 Towards an open learning architecture
When changing the perspective from the organisation to the user, the picture changes as follows: A user creates “his/her own world of learning” based on what he/she will be offered from his organisation, what is available in the web and what input he/she receives from other institutions – such as from a training centre where he/she participates in a course. This perspective is difficult to plan for organisations, there is not one solution to be found, there are many – there are as many as there are learners.
Figure 2 describes this situation by presenting a possible scenario from a user perspective. In this scenario, the corporate learning is managed by an LMS which might contain various tools and technologies as described above. In addition, the company provides a corporate blogsphere for learning and a repository with documents that contains relevant knowledge such as slides, PDF documents, etc. But the user also attends a training course at an external educational institution, which runs its own LMS. So the user has access to this second LMS – which may be a different one than the corporate LMS – and may have to follow a new learning logic or to apply different tools and didactics. Besides these LMS based activities within the company and the educational institution, the user has decided to employ web tools available to the public: search engines to retrieve relevant contents, social networking platform to share experiences or just to chat with other learners. These web tools include an open content repository to share slides and other learning materials.
Figure 2: Example of a user’s learning world
This scenario illustrates how diverse the “real” learning world of a user might be. It is just an example but it reflects the situation that most learners face today.
It is not realistic anymore to assume that organisational learning will take place within one single system – this concept is no longer applicable. In a responsive open learning architecture, the challenge will be to support the “new” world of learning described in our scenario. Learning technologies must be adapted to the needs of users in order to enable organisations to continuously manage and control learning processes while simultaneously offering spaces for creative and flexible social learning.
Therefore, the design of an open learning environment has to adhere to the principles of personalisation with regards to
•
the adaptation of learning processes,
•
an intelligent content selection and sequencing,
•
skill management as well as
•
focussed teaching.
Figure 3 shows an architecture for a responsive open learning environment. This environment has to be customisable by the user him‐/herself. The user is responsible for the selection of appropriate learning services, however, the system should provide recommendations on how to combine these services.
Figure 3: Architecture of a responsive open learning environment
In order to set up such an environment each component – such as LMS, library system, community platform or open content repository ‐ must offer web services or widgets, that allow the component to be integrated into an open platform (e.g. Facebook, iGoogle) or corporate portal (e.g. SAP Netweaver, MS Sharepoint) using the interface technology of the respective portal/platform. The key element in this architecture is a personalisation service or engine that combines these independent services logically by using meta data (competency data, learner preferences).
Taking a closer look at interface technologies the most popular way for the integration of services would be via Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). APIs represent today’s state‐of‐the art interface technology, but as a basic premise for the application of APIs the services to be integrated have to be developed in the same programming language. Thus over the past years more flexible ways to combine services gained importance. Web services based on SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) and REST (Representational State Transfer) architectures attracted specific attention. In SOAP architectures WSDL (Web Service Definition Language) is used as a language to describe interfaces. It enables other services to detect ways in which a given service can be contacted. REST is a more simple way to connect web services, complex requests are encoded in call parameters which need to be agreed upon by the developers of the services being connected.
Unfortunately both SOAP and REST architectures lack in semantics, but semantic data is needed to combine services in an intelligent way. Recently SA‐REST, a very promising standard, has been developed. Its design makes it possible to integrate REST based services with little or no programming efforts required.
Figure 4 shows an example, how an open content repository (SLIDESTAR) and an LMS can be integrated into Facebook using widget technology. We can expect that open learning environments like the one illustrated in our example will be a standard in the future.
Figure 4: Sample Open Learning Environment
Having explained the technical architecture, the remaining question is: how can organisations build such an open learning environment. Our recommendation would be to do this step‐by‐step from “inside to outside”. Figure 5 illustrates the proposed procedure.
Figure 5: Roadmap to an open learning environment
In the first step, an organisation should build an internal learning platform on the basis of an LMS which leads to efficient training processes. This technical basis is needed as it allows to track learners’ progress or to provide internal e‐learning and blended learning programmes. The next step should be to implement various content technologies and content repositories which shall help to create access channels to learning resources. Once this step has been completed, the learners should be offered tools to their own content, to collaborate and share learning experiences. Up to this third step, the learning still takes place internally. Therefore, the fourth step is to open the solution towards social network communities and platforms via widgets and mash‐up technologies.
4 Conclusion
To personalise learning environments we need to have a closer look at the adaptation of learning processes, an intelligent content selection and sequencing, a personalised competence and skill management as well as focussed teaching. Innovative learning environments have to be based on mass‐personalisation approaches enabling every learner to easily design and maintain his/her own personal learning environment (PLE) consisting of an individual mix of preferred learning tools, learning services and resources. Thus, the level of self‐control and responsibility of learners will be strengthened, which is seen as a key motivation aspect and success factor of self‐paced, formally instructed as well as informal/social learning.
5 References
Attwell, G. (2005): What is the significance of Open Source Software for the education and training community? In: Scotto, M. & Succi, G. (Eds.): Proc. Of the First International Conference on Open Source Systems, Genova, 11th‐15th July 2005.
Baker, M., and Lund, K. (1997). Promoting reflective interactions in a CSCL environment. In: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13(3), pp. 175‐193.
Baldi, S., Heier, H., Stanzick, F. (2002): Open Courseware vs. Open Source Software – A Crticial Comparison, ECIS 2002, Gdansk.
Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One‐to‐One Tutoring. Educational Researcher 13 (6):4–16.
Brusilovsky, P. (1999). Adaptive and Intelligent Technologies for Web‐based Education. Künstliche Intelligenz, 4, pp. 19‐25.
Brusilovsky, P. (2001). Adaptive Hypermedia. In: User Modeling and User‐Adapted Interaction, 11(1‐2), pp. 87‐110, Hingham, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Brusilovsky, P., Schwarz, E., and Weber, G. (1996). A Tool for Developing Hypermedia‐Based ITS on WWW. In Proceedings of Workshop "Architectures and Methods for Designing Cost‐Effective and Reusable ITSs" at Third International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 1996), Montreal, Canada.
Boekarts, M.. (1997). Self‐regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers and students. In: Learning and Instruction, 7, pp. 161‐186.
Boekarts, M.. (1999). Self‐regulated learning: where we are today. In: International Journal of Educational Research., 31, pp. 445‐475.
Borkowski, J.G. (1996). Metacognition: theory or chapter heading? In: Learning and Individual Differences, 8, pp. 391–402.
Chatti, M.A., Jarke, M., and Frosch‐Wilke, D. (2007). The future of e‐learning: a shift to knowledge networking and social software. In: International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 3(4/5), pp. 404‐420.
Conlan, O., Hockemeyer, C., Wade, V., and Albert, D. (2002). Metadata Driven Approaches to Facilitate Adaptivity in Personalized eLearning systems. The Journal of Information and Systems in Education, 1, pp. 38–44.
Creative Commons (2002): Licenses Explained, http://creativecommons.org/learn/licenses/
Dabbagh, N., and Kitsantas, A, (2004). Supporting Self‐Regulation in Student‐Centered Web‐Based Learning Environments. In: International Journal on E‐Learning, 3 (1), pp. 40‐47.
De Bra, P. (1997). Teaching through adaptive hypertext on the WWW. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 3, pp. 163‐180.
De Bra, P., Brusilovsky, P., and Houben, G.‐J. (1999). Adaptive hypermedia: From systems to framework. ACM Computing Surveys, 31(4).
Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M, Blaye, A., and O’Malley, C. (1995). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In E. Spada and P. Reimann (eds.): Learning in Humans and Machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science. Oxford: Elsevier (pp. 189‐211).
Downes, S. (2005). E‐learning 2.0. In: eLearn Magazine, 10(2005), New York: ACM.
Grohmann, G.; Kraemer, W.; Milius, F.; Zimmermann, V. (2007): Modellbasiertes Curriculum‐Design für Learning Management Systeme: Ein Integrationsansatz auf Basis von ARIS und IMS Learning Design. in Oberweis, A. et. al. (Eds.): Tagungsband 8. Internationale Konferenz Wirtschaftsinformatik “eOrganisation: Service‐, Process‐, Market Engineering”. Karlsruhe, pp. 795‐812.
Helic, D. (2006). A Didactics‐Aware Approach to Management of Learning Scenarios in E‐Learning Systems. Graz University of Technology.
Hohl, H., Böcker, H.‐D., and Gunzenhäuser, R. (1996). HYPADAPTER: An adaptive hypertext system for exploratory learning and programming. User Modeling and User‐Adapted Interaction, 6(2‐3), 131‐155.
Kamel Boulos, M.N., and Wheeler, S. (2007). The emerging Web 2.0 social software: an enabling suite of sociable technologies in health and health care education. In: Health Information and Libraries Journal, 24(1), pp. 2‐23.
Kay, J. (2001). Learner control. In: User Modeling and User‐Adapted Interaction, 11, pp. 111‐127.
Kieslinger, B., Fiedler, S., Wild, F., and Sobernig, S. (2006). iCamp: The Educational Web for Higher Education in an Enlarged Europe. In P. Cunningham, and M. Cunningham (eds.): Exploiting the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications, Case Studies. Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 1440‐1448.
Kraemer, W.; Milius, F.; Zimmermann, V. (2007): Von WINFO‐Line zum Corporate Learning Management – Nachhaltiger Transfer wissenschaftlicher Konzepte in wettbewerbsfähige Produkte. in: IM Information Management 20. Special Edition, pp. 50‐67.
Koper, R., Rusman, E., and Sloep, P. (2005). Effective Learning Networks. In: Lifelong Learning in Europe, 1, pp. 18‐27.
Küchler, T.; Pawlowski, J.; Zimmermann, V. (2008): Social Tagging and Open Content: A Concept for the Future of E‐Learning and Knowledge Management? in Gaiser, B.; Hampel, T.; Panke, S. (Eds.): Good Tags – Bad Tags: Social Tagging in der Wissensorganisation, Münster et al. pp. 131‐140.
Lathem, J., Gomadam, K., Sheth, A. (2007). SA‐REST and (S)mashups : Adding Semantics to RESTful Services: In: International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC 2007), pp. 469‐476.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991): Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
McAndrew, P. (2006): Motivations for OpenLearn: the Open University’s Open Content Initiative, OECD experts meeting on Open Educational Resources, 26‐27 Oct. 2006, Barcelona, Spain, http://kn.open.ac.uk/public/document.cfm?docid=8816
Mödritscher, F., Neumann, G., García‐Barrios, V.M., and Wild, F. (2008). A Web Application Mashup Approach for eLearning. In: Proceedings of the OpenACS and .LRN Conference, pp. 105‐110.
OECD (2007): Giving Knowledge For Free: The Emergence Of Open Educational Resources, OECD, Paris.
O’Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0, O’Reilly Media Inc., available at http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what‐is‐web‐20.html (2008‐03‐07).
Pressey, S.L. (1926). A simple apparatus which gives tests and scores ‐ and teaches. School and Society, 23 (586), 373‐376.
Paulsen, M.F. (2003). Experiences with Learning Management Systems in 113 European Institutions. In: Educational Technology & Society, 6(4), pp. 134‐148.
Reload (2006). PLEX: Personal Learning Environment Download Page. Reload, available at http://www.reload.ac.uk/plex/index.html (2008‐03‐31).
Pintrich, P.R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self‐regulated learning. In M. BOEKAERTS, P.R. PINTRICH and M. ZEIDNER (eds), Handbook of Self‐regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self‐regulated learning in college students. In: Educational Psychology Review., 16, pp. 385‐407.
Reimann, P. (2007): Communities of Practice, In: Kinshuk, Pawlowski, J.M., Sampson, D. (Eds.): Handbook on Information Technologies for Education and Training, 2nd Edition, International Handbook on Information Systems Series. Springer, Berlin 2007.
Rollett, H., Lux, M., Strohmaier, M., Dösinger, G., and Tochtermann, K. (2007). The Web 2.0 way of learning with technologies. In: International Journal of Learning Technology, 3(1), pp. 87‐107.
Schulmeister, R. (2002). Grundlagen hypermedialer Lernsysteme. München, Oldenbourg.
Steffens, K. (2006). Self‐Regulated Learning in Technology‐Enhanced Learning Environments: lessons of a European peer review. In: European Journal of Education, 41 (3/4), pp. 353‐379.
Ullrich, C., Borau, K., Shen, R. (2008). Collaboration and Learning in the Social Web of the Future. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Integrated Design and Process Technology (IDPT 2008). (to appear)
Van Harmelen, M. (2006). Personal Learning Environments. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2006), pp. 815‐816.
Vassileva, J. (2002). Motivating Participation in Peer to Peer Communities. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Emergent Societies in the Agent World (ESAW 2002), pp. 141‐155.
Vuorikari, R. (2004), Insight Special Report: Why Europe Needs Free and Open Source Software and Content in Schools, http://ww.eun.org/insight‐pdf/special_reports/Why_Europe_needs_foss_Insight_2004.pdf
Wilson, S., Liber, O., Beauvoir, P., Milligan, C., Johnson, M., and Sharples, P. (2006). Personal Learning Environments: Challenging the dominant design of educational systems. In: Proceedings of the first Joint International Workshop on Professional Learning, Competence Development and Knowledge Management (LOKMOL 2006 and L3NCD 2006), pp. 67‐76.
Winne, P. H.. (2001). Self‐regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. J. Zimmerman and D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self‐regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives, pp. 153‐189. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Zimmerman, B.J. (1998). Academic studying and the development of personal skill: a self‐regulatory perspective. In: Educational Psychologist, 33, pp. 73–86.
Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Attaining self‐regulation: a social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekarts, P.R. intrich and M. Zeidner (eds), Handbook of Self‐regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Zimmermann, V.; Faltin, N. (2006): Integration of Business Process Management Platforms and Learning Technologies: The PROLIX Process‐oriented Learning Life Cycle, in: Proceedings eLearning 2006 Conference, Helsinki.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
K-12 Pearson's Learning Studio and Project Tapestry and
Pearson Learning Studio for University Campuses
Project Tapestry is the first connected learning environment built specifically for K-12 that enables educators to connect the dots between student data, curriculum and achievement, resulting in true personalized learning and measurable increases in student performance. This video details the early successes of two school districts using Project Tapestry today -- Plainedge School District in Massapequa, NY and Independence School District in Independence, MO. For more information visit: Pearsontapestry.com.
All Pearson you Tube Videos
Project Tapestry is the first connected learning environment built specifically for K-12 that enables educators to connect the dots between student data, curriculum and achievement, resulting in true personalized learning and measurable increases in student performance. This video details the early successes of two school districts using Project Tapestry today -- Plainedge School District in Massapequa, NY and Independence School District in Independence, MO. For more information visit: Pearsontapestry.com.
All Pearson you Tube Videos
Personalized Learning Supported by British Government
http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/viewarticle2.aspx?contentId=12406
Resources from Teacher Training Resource Bank
Definition
Personalisation is…about putting citizens at the heart of public services and enabling them to have a say in the design and improvement of the organisations that serve them. In education this can be understood as personalised learning – the drive to tailor education to individual need, interest and aptitude so as to fulfil every young person’s potential. DfES (2004)
Commentary
The term entered political discourse in Tony Blair’s speech at the 2003 Labour Party conference, and continues to be debated at all levels within the education system. It is being promoted by the DfES as an approach, or philosophy, rather than a new initiative, embodying elements of what are perceived as best practice in the current climate. In his speech at the North of England Education Conference in January 2004, Miliband, as Minister of State for School Standards, emphasised the point that the drive from Government is to make these practices universal.
The rationale for this could be seen to be based on a perceived need to move on from outmoded teaching and learning practices which view children as being empty vessels waiting to be filled, echoing the “Fordist principles of standardised mass production” (Leadbetter 2004). Changes in society, including the customising of services and knowledge empowerment through information technology, provide the imperative to move on from the deficit model of ‘accounting for individual needs’. There are also the stated aims of giving children and young people the motivation to become independent, e-literate, fulfilled, lifelong learners, and the shared goals of high quality and high equity: “To raise standards by focusing teaching and learning on the aptitudes and interests of pupils and by removing any barriers to learning” (DfES 2004). The DfES rebuts concerns about abandoning excellence for the sake of equity, maintaining that the two are mutually supportive.
Whilst there is limited common understanding of the concept, various underlying pre-conditions appear apparent. According to the range of documents available, it is fundamentally concerned with:
•having high expectations of every child;
•shaping teaching around the way young people learn;
•promoting learning beyond the classroom;
•focusing on developing learning skills and strategies (metacognition);
•providing clear pathways through the education system, whilst retaining a core entitlement;
•planning for a combination of independent and collaborative learning;
•using the learning needs and talents of young people to guide decision making;
•allowing for individual interpretations of the goals and value of education.
Choice is also paramount, but rather than providing choice between institutions, as promoted so strongly in the recent education white paper, personalisation promises more choice about what pupils learn and how they learn it. As Leadbetter (2004) points out in his influential paper for the Innovation Unit, personalisation can provide “a way for users to be treated with respect and consideration when they cannot exercise the sanction of taking their business elsewhere”. Ultimately, he foresees users becoming active participants and co-producers in the education system. At the same time, the role of the teacher, along with other professionals across all services, would adapt to become advisory and facilitatory.
According to the DfES, there are five key components of personalised learning, which need to be embedded in whole school policy and practice to enhance learning outcomes.
•Assessment for learning: teachers and learners identifying areas of strength and learning needs, and setting targets to drive up individual attainment. This feeds into planning and teaching and learning strategies.
•Effective teaching and learning strategies: developing a repertoire of skills to actively engage and stretch learners, building on their prior knowledge and experience, and incorporating individual and group activity. ICT has a central role to play, allowing students to work at their optimum pace, as well as providing greater opportunities for collaboration.
•Curriculum entitlement and choice: personal and flexible learning pathways through the education system, especially at 14-19, to include vocational options as well as academic specialisms.
•School organisation: models which empower pupils, supporting high quality teaching and learning, and pupil welfare. The structure of the day/lessons and workforce reform are key here, as is the role of the learning mentor.
•Strong partnership beyond the school: with parents and carers, local institutions and businesses, integration of children’s services, out-of-hours learning
Although this is presented as a “framework for implementation”, the Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP) expresses concern about the lack of an evidence base for the premise that these five factors will inevitably make the necessary difference, and offers another model, which is more abstract and open to change. This model demonstrates acceptance that external and contextual factors shape learning along with institutions, teachers and learners. Therefore, although curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment and learning remain at the core, other factors (such as political contexts) will impact upon the outcomes.
It could be said that personalised learning also presents us with the ‘big picture’ of education for the 21st century for the first time; various concepts and initiatives which have entered the education debate over the past decade can now be viewed as part of the whole, and therefore acquire new significance; assessment for learning, behaviour for learning, learning skills and strategy training, inclusion, citizenship, pupil voice, Every Child Matters, extended schools, 14-19 provision (even though the Tomlinson recommendations are not being fully implemented). If personalised learning is viewed as the ‘umbrella term’, the logic of the constituent parts becomes apparent as part of a broader philosophy. At the same time, personalisation might appear to challenge the current “accountability frameworks” and “assessment regimes” (Leadbetter 2004); Statutory Assessment Tests (SATs) and the National Curriculum could be seen as cutting across the principles of personalised learning.
Although it is difficult to argue with much of the sentiment underpinning personalised learning, it will be important for educationists from all spheres to maintain a critical distance to it. A number of challenges and risks are identified by the TLRP, as well as Leadbetter. These include the possibility of further accentuating class differences in attainment, as middle class homes tend to be more conducive to “self-provisioning”. Other identified areas of potential difficulty are authenticity (whether it is really about learning, or teaching) and realism (whether it is over-ambitious).
The biggest challenge to the success of this drive is likely to be the response of the profession. Although it is acknowledged within DfES documentation that many schools are already effectively tailoring their curriculum and teaching methods to meet the needs of learners (including, as we have come to expect, numerous examples of “best practice”), teachers may feel that this is one innovation too far. Undoubtedly, personalisation carries with it implications for workload, as well as teacher learning. However, perhaps more importantly, much of the documentation acknowledges a lack of clarity regarding the concept, and several common misconceptions which are likely to induce wariness. Personalised learning does not mean, for example, that pupils are left to their own devices to learn as individuals; collaborative and community learning is encouraged, although independent learning can complement this. Neither does it mean preparing individual lesson plans for 30 children, which is not realistic; although differentiation is linked, this is inevitably teacher-led, rather than pupil-centred. An awareness of multiple intelligences and learning styles is also linked, not as a tool to label pupils, but so that teachers can provide a range of learning experiences and opportunities to engage pupils emotionally, physically and intellectually.
This lack of clarity makes it more important for all those in the education system to contribute to the debate. Teachers are encouraged to become part of the Innovation Community, and to contribute to the “constructive process of refinement”. Indeed, the TLRP warn that, due to the unprecedented Government involvement in education over the last decade, there is a danger that the discussion of personalised learning may lose its focus on learning and slip back into “over-simplified consideration of teaching provision and associated systems”.
Keywords: Personalisation, learning strategies
•The Standards Site on Personalisation (htm ) A large website, providing links to a number of core texts on personalisation (including Miliband’s 2004 speeches, Leadbetter’s Learning about personalisation: How can we put the learner at the heart of the education system?, DfES’ A National Conversation about Personalised Learning, the DfES Innovation Unit and the NCSL booklet Personalised Learning)•Futurelab: Overview (htm ) This article provides a useful overview, written in December 2005, of the dominant concept of ‘personalised learning’, and an introduction to the debate around it.•Futurelab: Personalisation This report outlines challenges and opportunities regarding the role of digital resources in realising the goal of personalised learning. Included within the report is the ‘Learner’s Charter’, setting out what are seen as the entitlements inherent in personalised learning.•TLRP: Personalisation Commentary (pdf ) A commentary by the TLRP, including reports of research projects with particular relevance to personalised learning•British Education Communication Technology Agency (BECTA) Their role and personalisation The changing role of Becta with regard to personalised learning•Personalised Learning and You Article in the DfES Teachernet 'Teacher' magazine•DfES Teachernet 'You Ask Me' (htm ) DfES’ head of personalised learning responds to questions from readers•The Big Picture The website of the Big Picture schools in the United States of America, undoubtedly influential in the Government’s development of the philosophy of personalisation•Feedback (htm ) Use this link to a form to give the TTRB your general views on this article or use the survey above to provide more specific commentsRelated Articles
remainder of articles are by Dfs...
Resources from Teacher Training Resource Bank
Definition
Personalisation is…about putting citizens at the heart of public services and enabling them to have a say in the design and improvement of the organisations that serve them. In education this can be understood as personalised learning – the drive to tailor education to individual need, interest and aptitude so as to fulfil every young person’s potential. DfES (2004)
Commentary
The term entered political discourse in Tony Blair’s speech at the 2003 Labour Party conference, and continues to be debated at all levels within the education system. It is being promoted by the DfES as an approach, or philosophy, rather than a new initiative, embodying elements of what are perceived as best practice in the current climate. In his speech at the North of England Education Conference in January 2004, Miliband, as Minister of State for School Standards, emphasised the point that the drive from Government is to make these practices universal.
The rationale for this could be seen to be based on a perceived need to move on from outmoded teaching and learning practices which view children as being empty vessels waiting to be filled, echoing the “Fordist principles of standardised mass production” (Leadbetter 2004). Changes in society, including the customising of services and knowledge empowerment through information technology, provide the imperative to move on from the deficit model of ‘accounting for individual needs’. There are also the stated aims of giving children and young people the motivation to become independent, e-literate, fulfilled, lifelong learners, and the shared goals of high quality and high equity: “To raise standards by focusing teaching and learning on the aptitudes and interests of pupils and by removing any barriers to learning” (DfES 2004). The DfES rebuts concerns about abandoning excellence for the sake of equity, maintaining that the two are mutually supportive.
Whilst there is limited common understanding of the concept, various underlying pre-conditions appear apparent. According to the range of documents available, it is fundamentally concerned with:
- Putting the learner at the centre of the system;
•having high expectations of every child;
•shaping teaching around the way young people learn;
•promoting learning beyond the classroom;
•focusing on developing learning skills and strategies (metacognition);
•providing clear pathways through the education system, whilst retaining a core entitlement;
•planning for a combination of independent and collaborative learning;
•using the learning needs and talents of young people to guide decision making;
•allowing for individual interpretations of the goals and value of education.
Choice is also paramount, but rather than providing choice between institutions, as promoted so strongly in the recent education white paper, personalisation promises more choice about what pupils learn and how they learn it. As Leadbetter (2004) points out in his influential paper for the Innovation Unit, personalisation can provide “a way for users to be treated with respect and consideration when they cannot exercise the sanction of taking their business elsewhere”. Ultimately, he foresees users becoming active participants and co-producers in the education system. At the same time, the role of the teacher, along with other professionals across all services, would adapt to become advisory and facilitatory.
According to the DfES, there are five key components of personalised learning, which need to be embedded in whole school policy and practice to enhance learning outcomes.
•Assessment for learning: teachers and learners identifying areas of strength and learning needs, and setting targets to drive up individual attainment. This feeds into planning and teaching and learning strategies.
•Effective teaching and learning strategies: developing a repertoire of skills to actively engage and stretch learners, building on their prior knowledge and experience, and incorporating individual and group activity. ICT has a central role to play, allowing students to work at their optimum pace, as well as providing greater opportunities for collaboration.
•Curriculum entitlement and choice: personal and flexible learning pathways through the education system, especially at 14-19, to include vocational options as well as academic specialisms.
•School organisation: models which empower pupils, supporting high quality teaching and learning, and pupil welfare. The structure of the day/lessons and workforce reform are key here, as is the role of the learning mentor.
•Strong partnership beyond the school: with parents and carers, local institutions and businesses, integration of children’s services, out-of-hours learning
Although this is presented as a “framework for implementation”, the Teaching and Learning Research Programme (TLRP) expresses concern about the lack of an evidence base for the premise that these five factors will inevitably make the necessary difference, and offers another model, which is more abstract and open to change. This model demonstrates acceptance that external and contextual factors shape learning along with institutions, teachers and learners. Therefore, although curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment and learning remain at the core, other factors (such as political contexts) will impact upon the outcomes.
It could be said that personalised learning also presents us with the ‘big picture’ of education for the 21st century for the first time; various concepts and initiatives which have entered the education debate over the past decade can now be viewed as part of the whole, and therefore acquire new significance; assessment for learning, behaviour for learning, learning skills and strategy training, inclusion, citizenship, pupil voice, Every Child Matters, extended schools, 14-19 provision (even though the Tomlinson recommendations are not being fully implemented). If personalised learning is viewed as the ‘umbrella term’, the logic of the constituent parts becomes apparent as part of a broader philosophy. At the same time, personalisation might appear to challenge the current “accountability frameworks” and “assessment regimes” (Leadbetter 2004); Statutory Assessment Tests (SATs) and the National Curriculum could be seen as cutting across the principles of personalised learning.
Although it is difficult to argue with much of the sentiment underpinning personalised learning, it will be important for educationists from all spheres to maintain a critical distance to it. A number of challenges and risks are identified by the TLRP, as well as Leadbetter. These include the possibility of further accentuating class differences in attainment, as middle class homes tend to be more conducive to “self-provisioning”. Other identified areas of potential difficulty are authenticity (whether it is really about learning, or teaching) and realism (whether it is over-ambitious).
The biggest challenge to the success of this drive is likely to be the response of the profession. Although it is acknowledged within DfES documentation that many schools are already effectively tailoring their curriculum and teaching methods to meet the needs of learners (including, as we have come to expect, numerous examples of “best practice”), teachers may feel that this is one innovation too far. Undoubtedly, personalisation carries with it implications for workload, as well as teacher learning. However, perhaps more importantly, much of the documentation acknowledges a lack of clarity regarding the concept, and several common misconceptions which are likely to induce wariness. Personalised learning does not mean, for example, that pupils are left to their own devices to learn as individuals; collaborative and community learning is encouraged, although independent learning can complement this. Neither does it mean preparing individual lesson plans for 30 children, which is not realistic; although differentiation is linked, this is inevitably teacher-led, rather than pupil-centred. An awareness of multiple intelligences and learning styles is also linked, not as a tool to label pupils, but so that teachers can provide a range of learning experiences and opportunities to engage pupils emotionally, physically and intellectually.
This lack of clarity makes it more important for all those in the education system to contribute to the debate. Teachers are encouraged to become part of the Innovation Community, and to contribute to the “constructive process of refinement”. Indeed, the TLRP warn that, due to the unprecedented Government involvement in education over the last decade, there is a danger that the discussion of personalised learning may lose its focus on learning and slip back into “over-simplified consideration of teaching provision and associated systems”.
Keywords: Personalisation, learning strategies
•The Standards Site on Personalisation (htm ) A large website, providing links to a number of core texts on personalisation (including Miliband’s 2004 speeches, Leadbetter’s Learning about personalisation: How can we put the learner at the heart of the education system?, DfES’ A National Conversation about Personalised Learning, the DfES Innovation Unit and the NCSL booklet Personalised Learning)•Futurelab: Overview (htm ) This article provides a useful overview, written in December 2005, of the dominant concept of ‘personalised learning’, and an introduction to the debate around it.•Futurelab: Personalisation This report outlines challenges and opportunities regarding the role of digital resources in realising the goal of personalised learning. Included within the report is the ‘Learner’s Charter’, setting out what are seen as the entitlements inherent in personalised learning.•TLRP: Personalisation Commentary (pdf ) A commentary by the TLRP, including reports of research projects with particular relevance to personalised learning•British Education Communication Technology Agency (BECTA) Their role and personalisation The changing role of Becta with regard to personalised learning•Personalised Learning and You Article in the DfES Teachernet 'Teacher' magazine•DfES Teachernet 'You Ask Me' (htm ) DfES’ head of personalised learning responds to questions from readers•The Big Picture The website of the Big Picture schools in the United States of America, undoubtedly influential in the Government’s development of the philosophy of personalisation•Feedback (htm ) Use this link to a form to give the TTRB your general views on this article or use the survey above to provide more specific commentsRelated Articles
remainder of articles are by Dfs...
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Nigel Shadbolt (From Online information)
Biography
Nigel Shadbolt
Professor, Artificial Intelligence and Deputy Head
School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, UK
Nigel Shadbolt is Professor of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Deputy Head (Research) of the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. He is a Founding Director of the Web Science Research Initiative, a joint endeavour between the University of Southampton and MIT.
He has recently been given a special role by the Prime Minister to help transform public access to Government information. He will be working closely with Sir Tim Berners-Lee to form a panel of technical and delivery experts to oversee the implementation of key recommendations, including overseeing the creation of a single online point of access for public UK datasets.
In its 50th Anniversary year 2006-07, Nigel was President of the British Computer Society. He is a Fellow of both the Royal Academy of Engineering and the British Computer Society.
Between 2000-07, he was the Director of the £7.5m EPSRC Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration in Advanced Knowledge Technologies (AKT). AKT was particularly influential in establishing the viability and value of web-based semantic technologies. He has recently been awarded a further £2.3m by the EPSRC to build on this work.
He has been involved in a wide range of entrepreneurial activities. In 2006 he was one of three founding Directors and Chief Technology Officer of Garlik Ltd, a company specialising in consumer products and services to put people and their families in control of their own digital information. In 2008 Garlik was awarded Technology Pioneer status by the Davos World Economic Forum and won the prestigious UK national BT Flagship IT Award.
He is the co-author of "The Spy in the Coffee Machine" and has an interest in issues to do with privacy and trust in the Digital age.
Email: jl3@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Nigel Shadbolt
Professor, Artificial Intelligence and Deputy Head
School of Electronics and Computer Science, University of Southampton, UK
Nigel Shadbolt is Professor of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Deputy Head (Research) of the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. He is a Founding Director of the Web Science Research Initiative, a joint endeavour between the University of Southampton and MIT.
He has recently been given a special role by the Prime Minister to help transform public access to Government information. He will be working closely with Sir Tim Berners-Lee to form a panel of technical and delivery experts to oversee the implementation of key recommendations, including overseeing the creation of a single online point of access for public UK datasets.
In its 50th Anniversary year 2006-07, Nigel was President of the British Computer Society. He is a Fellow of both the Royal Academy of Engineering and the British Computer Society.
Between 2000-07, he was the Director of the £7.5m EPSRC Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration in Advanced Knowledge Technologies (AKT). AKT was particularly influential in establishing the viability and value of web-based semantic technologies. He has recently been awarded a further £2.3m by the EPSRC to build on this work.
He has been involved in a wide range of entrepreneurial activities. In 2006 he was one of three founding Directors and Chief Technology Officer of Garlik Ltd, a company specialising in consumer products and services to put people and their families in control of their own digital information. In 2008 Garlik was awarded Technology Pioneer status by the Davos World Economic Forum and won the prestigious UK national BT Flagship IT Award.
He is the co-author of "The Spy in the Coffee Machine" and has an interest in issues to do with privacy and trust in the Digital age.
Email: jl3@ecs.soton.ac.uk
Sonia Clayton (from search Toolbox people for e-learning
Sonia Clayton (President & CEO) formed VIP in October 2001, when her friends, colleagues and former team members were laid off from their jobs due to the economic downturn of 2001 and the aftershock of September 11th. Clayton's former team members, a team formed by PhD's, Business Administrators, graphic and instructional designers, and Systems Engineers, made up 100% of the initial VIP team.
"That is when all of us got together and decided to create VIP. Not a regular consulting company, but a 'Wal-Mart concept' in the Consulting Industry, based on quality, consistency, and reasonable cost. Unity is power and we had unity among us." The objective of the company was to provide reasonably priced IT Business Solutions, but Clayton's real business was PEOPLE. In reality, VIP has become more than just the acronym for Virtual Intelligence Providers LLC. The VIP acronym also reflects Sonia's business philosophy and practice of treating her clients and her consultants as "very important people."
Clayton drew on her years of direct sales experience to get the company off the ground. Knowing the importance of motivated and happy team members, she called them "Consultants," and from her first day in business she has treated them the way she wants to be treated. "The way I gain my team members and my clients trust is by treating them with honesty, dignity and respect. That is something every client and team member deserves regardless of rank. This group is full of energy, talent and creativity. I know they have potential, and I urge them to do their best. That is why we have been good friends for a long time. How people are treated at VIP is more important to me than Profits and Losses."
As a first time entrepreneur, Clayton borrowed $5,000 to create the organization. IT consulting companies had already saturated the IT market. However, rather than competing directly with those firms, Clayton wanted to create a true alternative solution for her clients.
"At VIP we believe in the principles of low cost, high value, quality, and outstanding technical and customer services. We all work together. We create and find technical and cost effective, satisfying solutions for our customers. We work with great partners, building innovative and
affordable project tools and solutions. We keep high standards for quality and performance by maintaining trained and seasoned professionals on our staff, dedicated to strategizing and delivering high performance results.
That's the "secret recipe." Our low-overhead policy allows us to maintain affordable billing rates. We have lowered the cost of ERP consulting services for many organizations in the USA and in Latin America. We will give the IT world an opportunity to see what it's like to cut cost and still have a great implementation, a positive sense of accomplishment, and a true professional services consulting partner. We're proud of what we've accomplished, and we've only just begun.
"Being successful in business is not a matter of taking advantage of people who need your products or services. On the contrary, it is a matter of giving them value, care and attention, for a fair price, when they need it most." Clayton said.
Setting the tone of her company personally with hard work, Clayton maintains a cheerful, positive attitude. She makes sure negativism is out of her environment, while promoting an "I can do" attitude. She helps her consultants build confidence by empowering them to do their best.
"Now in the third quarter of 2005, we have grown from 1 to 55 consultants, and serve several global corporations, most of which are in the oil and gas industry. Our international reach extends from our home base right here in Houston, Texas, USA, northward to Canada, eastward across the Atlantic to Spain and includes South American countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, México, Perú and Venezuela. Among our clients are SAP Andina in Latin America, Shell International, Shell Lubricants — Pennzoil, IBM, Waste Management Corporation, Valero Energy, Premcor Refineries, Baker Hughes International, Toyota/Lexus, CEMEX, Nexen Canadian Petroleum, Hayes Lemmerz International, Weatherford International, and Continental Airlines, as well as four other major airline carriers".
Today, Virtual Intelligence Providers, LLC serves over 60 corporations. SAP documentation and training development has become the area of expertise of the company. Now, with over 5 years of industry experience and success, VIP has received several awards to include: Emerging 10 Company (E-10 Award by HMBC), Top Monority Business 2005, Houston 500 company and Sonia Clayton, herself, was recognized as "One Amaizing Woman" by the National Association of Women Business Owners, in November 2005.
Sonia Clayton holds a B.S. in Business Administratio and Human Resources Management. She is an SAP Human Resources Consultant and an SAP Change Management Expert.
"That is when all of us got together and decided to create VIP. Not a regular consulting company, but a 'Wal-Mart concept' in the Consulting Industry, based on quality, consistency, and reasonable cost. Unity is power and we had unity among us." The objective of the company was to provide reasonably priced IT Business Solutions, but Clayton's real business was PEOPLE. In reality, VIP has become more than just the acronym for Virtual Intelligence Providers LLC. The VIP acronym also reflects Sonia's business philosophy and practice of treating her clients and her consultants as "very important people."
Clayton drew on her years of direct sales experience to get the company off the ground. Knowing the importance of motivated and happy team members, she called them "Consultants," and from her first day in business she has treated them the way she wants to be treated. "The way I gain my team members and my clients trust is by treating them with honesty, dignity and respect. That is something every client and team member deserves regardless of rank. This group is full of energy, talent and creativity. I know they have potential, and I urge them to do their best. That is why we have been good friends for a long time. How people are treated at VIP is more important to me than Profits and Losses."
As a first time entrepreneur, Clayton borrowed $5,000 to create the organization. IT consulting companies had already saturated the IT market. However, rather than competing directly with those firms, Clayton wanted to create a true alternative solution for her clients.
"At VIP we believe in the principles of low cost, high value, quality, and outstanding technical and customer services. We all work together. We create and find technical and cost effective, satisfying solutions for our customers. We work with great partners, building innovative and
affordable project tools and solutions. We keep high standards for quality and performance by maintaining trained and seasoned professionals on our staff, dedicated to strategizing and delivering high performance results.
That's the "secret recipe." Our low-overhead policy allows us to maintain affordable billing rates. We have lowered the cost of ERP consulting services for many organizations in the USA and in Latin America. We will give the IT world an opportunity to see what it's like to cut cost and still have a great implementation, a positive sense of accomplishment, and a true professional services consulting partner. We're proud of what we've accomplished, and we've only just begun.
"Being successful in business is not a matter of taking advantage of people who need your products or services. On the contrary, it is a matter of giving them value, care and attention, for a fair price, when they need it most." Clayton said.
Setting the tone of her company personally with hard work, Clayton maintains a cheerful, positive attitude. She makes sure negativism is out of her environment, while promoting an "I can do" attitude. She helps her consultants build confidence by empowering them to do their best.
"Now in the third quarter of 2005, we have grown from 1 to 55 consultants, and serve several global corporations, most of which are in the oil and gas industry. Our international reach extends from our home base right here in Houston, Texas, USA, northward to Canada, eastward across the Atlantic to Spain and includes South American countries such as Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, México, Perú and Venezuela. Among our clients are SAP Andina in Latin America, Shell International, Shell Lubricants — Pennzoil, IBM, Waste Management Corporation, Valero Energy, Premcor Refineries, Baker Hughes International, Toyota/Lexus, CEMEX, Nexen Canadian Petroleum, Hayes Lemmerz International, Weatherford International, and Continental Airlines, as well as four other major airline carriers".
Today, Virtual Intelligence Providers, LLC serves over 60 corporations. SAP documentation and training development has become the area of expertise of the company. Now, with over 5 years of industry experience and success, VIP has received several awards to include: Emerging 10 Company (E-10 Award by HMBC), Top Monority Business 2005, Houston 500 company and Sonia Clayton, herself, was recognized as "One Amaizing Woman" by the National Association of Women Business Owners, in November 2005.
Sonia Clayton holds a B.S. in Business Administratio and Human Resources Management. She is an SAP Human Resources Consultant and an SAP Change Management Expert.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Marketing Your Institution with Google AdWords
http://higheredmarketing.com.au/downloads/Recruiting2.0.pdf
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Kevin Jarrett
My hero and model is Kevin Jarrett of Northfield, New Jersey (member# 524)
I came across Kevin while searching for "free LMS". He is the webmaster of NCS Tech of Northfield Community School in Northfield, New Jersey.
He has his own website (produced with Joomla):
http://www.kevin-jarrett.net/
He also runs the NCS-TECH website where I first came across him:
http://www.ncs-tech.org/?p=1304
Finally, if you want any more info about Kevin, you can go to
http://edubloggerdir.blogspot.com/2009/01/kevin-jarrett.html
I came across Kevin while searching for "free LMS". He is the webmaster of NCS Tech of Northfield Community School in Northfield, New Jersey.
He has his own website (produced with Joomla):
http://www.kevin-jarrett.net/
He also runs the NCS-TECH website where I first came across him:
http://www.ncs-tech.org/?p=1304
Finally, if you want any more info about Kevin, you can go to
http://edubloggerdir.blogspot.com/2009/01/kevin-jarrett.html
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
My wordpress blog
pleksa.wordpress.com
Personal Learning Environments in KSA
linked to my gmail
p/w as Yahoo mail
(in the profile Im Fulan Detal)
To search wordpress by keywords:
http://en.search.wordpress.com/
Your new Wordpress.com blog has been successfully set up.
You can log in with the following information:
Username: pleksa
Password: *
at http://wordpress.com
Some useful links:
Widgets:- http://support.wordpress.com/widgets/rss-links-widget/
Write a new post: http://pleksa.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post-new.php
Change your blog's settings: http://pleksa.wordpress.com/wp-admin/options-general.php
Choose another theme: http://pleksa.wordpress.com/wp-admin/themes.php
See what others are writing about: http://wordpress.com/tags/
If you're just getting started, there are tons of helpful resources available and easily searched for on our support site and forums.
http://support.wordpress.com/getting-started/
More Frequently Asked Questions: http://support.wordpress.com
We hope you dig your new blog. If you have any questions or comments, please let us know!
http://support.wordpress.com/contact/
Your WordPress.com API key allows you to use services like Akismet @ http://akismet.com/
API Key: 26c0597624b5
Personal Learning Environments in KSA
linked to my gmail
p/w as Yahoo mail
(in the profile Im Fulan Detal)
To search wordpress by keywords:
http://en.search.wordpress.com/
Your new Wordpress.com blog has been successfully set up.
You can log in with the following information:
Username: pleksa
Password: *
at http://wordpress.com
Some useful links:
Widgets:- http://support.wordpress.com/widgets/rss-links-widget/
Write a new post: http://pleksa.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post-new.php
Change your blog's settings: http://pleksa.wordpress.com/wp-admin/options-general.php
Choose another theme: http://pleksa.wordpress.com/wp-admin/themes.php
See what others are writing about: http://wordpress.com/tags/
If you're just getting started, there are tons of helpful resources available and easily searched for on our support site and forums.
http://support.wordpress.com/getting-started/
More Frequently Asked Questions: http://support.wordpress.com
We hope you dig your new blog. If you have any questions or comments, please let us know!
http://support.wordpress.com/contact/
Your WordPress.com API key allows you to use services like Akismet @ http://akismet.com/
API Key: 26c0597624b5
CV for polishing
CHRISTOPHER N. STANLEY
Employee Development Consultant and Learning Technologies Specialist
12 Calle Cañuelo, 41220 Burguillos, Sevilla, Spain
tel. +34-672734928 mobile +966(0)509110674
e-mail cnstanley@yahoo.com
A talented multilingual human resources development professional with over twelve years as an organizational catalyst/learning consultant and an outstanding track record of producing extraordinary results for the largest integrated oil company in the world. Strong expertise in developing and implementing industrial strategic plans. An important part of the team that brought about half a million tracked e-learning course completions in less than three years. A motivational speaker with a passion for promoting continuous improvement and a motivated and energetic self-starter with excellent creative, analytical, marketing and organizational skills.
Work Experience
SAUDI ARAMCO, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia 1991 to August 2009
Learning Consultant, Corporate Integrated Learning Services (CILS) Jan. 2006 –Aug 2009
[CILS maintains one of the premier corporate e-learning web sites in the world: http://e-learning.aramco.com.sa which has experienced over 32% annual average growth in course completions over the past three years. My major role there was to mediate between the technical team that keeps the website maintained and corporate customers whilst driving and facilitating the acquisition of new content.]
• Devised and executed pedagogically sound and cost effective learning solutions for customers. Developed and reviewed texts of courseware contracts.
• Co-ordinated pilot programs using current cutting-edge learning technologies and methods. Initiated and managed the first phases of the customized “Arabic for Medical Personnel” and “Petrochemicals in Your Life” e-learning courses.
• Liaised with the technical competencies development team to ensure that new e-learning acquisitions were aligned with the requirements of competency maps.
• Promoted and supported an e-learning and self-development culture through workshops and exhibitions and by participating in internal forums and committees.
• Communicated the vision of the learning organization through marketing campaigns and presentations.
• Liaised with professionals in all business lines involved with the task of developing continuous performance improvement systems.
• Implemented excellence in customer service in the e-learning unit.
• Researched global pedagogical and technical best practices that lead to excellence in organizational learning.
• Maintained an extensive network of e-learning service provider contacts.
Group Leader, Libraries & Learning Centers Jan. 2004 – Dec. 2005
[The group provides services to over twenty-five learning/training resource operations in the Training & Career Development organization. My major role there was to maintain the momentum of the company’s 2001 Self-Development Initiative, emphasizing the importance of self development as a major business driver in preparing the workforce for the future.]
• Supervised the main training library and four learning centers that service upwards of 5,000 employees annually.
• Mentored and coached learning and information service providers to function at a high level. Designed and delivered a course to train partner center facilitators.
• Managed contracts with providers of online journal services.
• Designed and implemented a customer relationship management system
Technical Advisor and Team Leader, Corporate Learning Centers Feb. 1997 – Dec. 2003
• Co-ordinated services necessary to maintain the impetus of the company’s first foray into technology-based learning including providing quality management of the physical aspects of learning centers and choosing, acquiring and distributing resources (primarily videos and CD-ROMs).
• Forged and maintained relationships with project partners that led to a 220% increase of both the numbers of learning centers and recorded learning hours during the period 1999-2002.
• Designed, directed and implemented a promotional video for the 2001 Self Development Awareness Campaign and was recognized by the Saudi Aramco C.E.O. as a Distinguished Contributor to that campaign.
Trainer of Computer and Business Skills, Dhahran North Training Center. 1994 – 97
Taught word processing, spreadsheet and database applications. Gave workshops on using graphics and desktop publishing.
Advanced English (English as a Foreign Language [EFL]) Skills Trainer, Dhahran North Training Center. 1991 – 94
Taught English at all levels, specializing in communicative skills.
Prior to 1991, I gained extensive international teaching, training, management and assessment experience in Saudi Arabia, South America, England and Germany. Posts held included Director of Studies and Director of Curriculum Development of two English language training operations.
Academic Credentials and Relevant Certificates
• Graduate Diploma in Artificial Intelligence Kingston Polytechnic, UK
• Postgraduate Certificate in Education University of Leicester, UK
• Bachelor of Arts in Modern Languages University College London, UK
• Certificate in Applied Linguistics and the Teaching of English University of Essex, UK
• SCORM School 201 Academic ADL Co-Lab, U.S.A.
• Certificate in Online Learning Tools and Techniques University of Wisconsin, U.S.A
Nationality British
Civil Status Married, one son (12 years old)
Date of Birth February 16th, 1949
Employee Development Consultant and Learning Technologies Specialist
12 Calle Cañuelo, 41220 Burguillos, Sevilla, Spain
tel. +34-672734928 mobile +966(0)509110674
e-mail cnstanley@yahoo.com
A talented multilingual human resources development professional with over twelve years as an organizational catalyst/learning consultant and an outstanding track record of producing extraordinary results for the largest integrated oil company in the world. Strong expertise in developing and implementing industrial strategic plans. An important part of the team that brought about half a million tracked e-learning course completions in less than three years. A motivational speaker with a passion for promoting continuous improvement and a motivated and energetic self-starter with excellent creative, analytical, marketing and organizational skills.
Work Experience
SAUDI ARAMCO, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia 1991 to August 2009
Learning Consultant, Corporate Integrated Learning Services (CILS) Jan. 2006 –Aug 2009
[CILS maintains one of the premier corporate e-learning web sites in the world: http://e-learning.aramco.com.sa which has experienced over 32% annual average growth in course completions over the past three years. My major role there was to mediate between the technical team that keeps the website maintained and corporate customers whilst driving and facilitating the acquisition of new content.]
• Devised and executed pedagogically sound and cost effective learning solutions for customers. Developed and reviewed texts of courseware contracts.
• Co-ordinated pilot programs using current cutting-edge learning technologies and methods. Initiated and managed the first phases of the customized “Arabic for Medical Personnel” and “Petrochemicals in Your Life” e-learning courses.
• Liaised with the technical competencies development team to ensure that new e-learning acquisitions were aligned with the requirements of competency maps.
• Promoted and supported an e-learning and self-development culture through workshops and exhibitions and by participating in internal forums and committees.
• Communicated the vision of the learning organization through marketing campaigns and presentations.
• Liaised with professionals in all business lines involved with the task of developing continuous performance improvement systems.
• Implemented excellence in customer service in the e-learning unit.
• Researched global pedagogical and technical best practices that lead to excellence in organizational learning.
• Maintained an extensive network of e-learning service provider contacts.
Group Leader, Libraries & Learning Centers Jan. 2004 – Dec. 2005
[The group provides services to over twenty-five learning/training resource operations in the Training & Career Development organization. My major role there was to maintain the momentum of the company’s 2001 Self-Development Initiative, emphasizing the importance of self development as a major business driver in preparing the workforce for the future.]
• Supervised the main training library and four learning centers that service upwards of 5,000 employees annually.
• Mentored and coached learning and information service providers to function at a high level. Designed and delivered a course to train partner center facilitators.
• Managed contracts with providers of online journal services.
• Designed and implemented a customer relationship management system
Technical Advisor and Team Leader, Corporate Learning Centers Feb. 1997 – Dec. 2003
• Co-ordinated services necessary to maintain the impetus of the company’s first foray into technology-based learning including providing quality management of the physical aspects of learning centers and choosing, acquiring and distributing resources (primarily videos and CD-ROMs).
• Forged and maintained relationships with project partners that led to a 220% increase of both the numbers of learning centers and recorded learning hours during the period 1999-2002.
• Designed, directed and implemented a promotional video for the 2001 Self Development Awareness Campaign and was recognized by the Saudi Aramco C.E.O. as a Distinguished Contributor to that campaign.
Trainer of Computer and Business Skills, Dhahran North Training Center. 1994 – 97
Taught word processing, spreadsheet and database applications. Gave workshops on using graphics and desktop publishing.
Advanced English (English as a Foreign Language [EFL]) Skills Trainer, Dhahran North Training Center. 1991 – 94
Taught English at all levels, specializing in communicative skills.
Prior to 1991, I gained extensive international teaching, training, management and assessment experience in Saudi Arabia, South America, England and Germany. Posts held included Director of Studies and Director of Curriculum Development of two English language training operations.
Academic Credentials and Relevant Certificates
• Graduate Diploma in Artificial Intelligence Kingston Polytechnic, UK
• Postgraduate Certificate in Education University of Leicester, UK
• Bachelor of Arts in Modern Languages University College London, UK
• Certificate in Applied Linguistics and the Teaching of English University of Essex, UK
• SCORM School 201 Academic ADL Co-Lab, U.S.A.
• Certificate in Online Learning Tools and Techniques University of Wisconsin, U.S.A
Nationality British
Civil Status Married, one son (12 years old)
Date of Birth February 16th, 1949
LinkedIn profiles:
Database administrator: http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=3421140&trk=EML_nus_dig_conn-A8
Dan Bachele: http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=47245240&authToken=I25I&authType=name&trk=pymk
Out of blue:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewRecs=&key=39704867&goback=%2Emid_1461378675#rec12117028
Sharonda: http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=34667759&fromSearch=1&authToken=X7Nd&authType=name&report%2Esuccess=62WUlrnddR6bgwSqXhj6sMCTLzs-Mtpi3fLJWbNsWtuooxKwgTL8r5xsvgkbozKwEkXBakadko
Bob Turrel:-
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=2256907&authToken=Y_sl&authType=name
Adil Hameed:- AI Expert
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=4860911&authToken=CWHO&authType=OUT_OF_NETWORK&locale=en_US&srchindex=5&pvs=ps&goback=%2Epsr_*1_%22Artificial+Intelligence%22_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_Y_es_41220_*1_*1_*2_*2_*2_Y_Y_*1_Distance*4Relevance
Marian Lancaster:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=49202256&authToken=gxwh&authType=name&goback=%2Econ%2Eanb_141578_*2%2Eanh_141578
Tamara McCulloch (Action Research Model )
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=12013562&authToken=n22x&authType=name
Dan Bachele: http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=47245240&authToken=I25I&authType=name&trk=pymk
Out of blue:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewRecs=&key=39704867&goback=%2Emid_1461378675#rec12117028
Sharonda: http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=34667759&fromSearch=1&authToken=X7Nd&authType=name&report%2Esuccess=62WUlrnddR6bgwSqXhj6sMCTLzs-Mtpi3fLJWbNsWtuooxKwgTL8r5xsvgkbozKwEkXBakadko
Bob Turrel:-
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=2256907&authToken=Y_sl&authType=name
Adil Hameed:- AI Expert
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=4860911&authToken=CWHO&authType=OUT_OF_NETWORK&locale=en_US&srchindex=5&pvs=ps&goback=%2Epsr_*1_%22Artificial+Intelligence%22_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_*1_Y_es_41220_*1_*1_*2_*2_*2_Y_Y_*1_Distance*4Relevance
Marian Lancaster:
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=49202256&authToken=gxwh&authType=name&goback=%2Econ%2Eanb_141578_*2%2Eanh_141578
Tamara McCulloch (Action Research Model )
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=12013562&authToken=n22x&authType=name
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Development of An e-Portfolio
Examples: http://cterfile.ed.uiuc.edu/mahara/view/view.php?id=327
http://cterfile.ed.uiuc.edu/mahara/view/view.php?id=2
From Research Assistant at City University Learning Development Centre:
http://www.pebblelearning.co.uk/eportfolio/Ajmal/files/webfoliopage103221.html
(interesting CV): http://www.pebblelearning.co.uk/eportfolio/Ajmal/files/Webfolio%20AS%20CV.pdf
Examples from National Art Education Education:
http://naea.digication.com/portfolio/directory.digi
All Schools using Digication:
http://naea.digication.com/portfolio/directory_schools.digi
Nic's proposal:
http://cterfile.ed.uiuc.edu/mahara/view/view.php?id=2
From Research Assistant at City University Learning Development Centre:
http://www.pebblelearning.co.uk/eportfolio/Ajmal/files/webfoliopage103221.html
(interesting CV): http://www.pebblelearning.co.uk/eportfolio/Ajmal/files/Webfolio%20AS%20CV.pdf
Examples from National Art Education Education:
http://naea.digication.com/portfolio/directory.digi
All Schools using Digication:
http://naea.digication.com/portfolio/directory_schools.digi
Nic's proposal:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)