| Trawling through two decades of technology- supported learning in the National
Archive of Educational Computing here in Chelmsford is often a depressing
experience. Time and time again promising initiatives foundered because
of insufficient flexibility in institutional organisation, in curriculum,
in pedagogy and in the time made available for action research. It wasn't
that a revolution was needed before any of the initiatives could work (this
is Britain, after all), simply that the institutional dice were usually
loaded too heavily against change. That is probably why we have no Mode
3 CSEs or Records of Achievement or continuous assessment any more, let
alone the introduction of word processing in the exam room or a UK teacher
network in cyberspace. Today, with our educational institutions under siege
from finance, standards, new expectations, competition and the uneasy fit
between politicians' promises and reality, the opportunities to really allow
teachers, students, managers and parents to be action researchers - exploring
what really does work and what does not too rarely occurs. New initiatives
concentrate too often on finance, too little on learning. For example, faced
with a blank sheet of paper and the invitation to 'think the unthinkable'
with higher education, Sir Ron Dearing is rumoured to have invented an imaginative
way to lumber students who have already given up five years of earnings
with the opportunity to amass new and previously 'unthinkable' debts (a
bit like asking soldiers to pay for their tanks and missiles on higher purchase).
You can imagine the stampede out of teacher education. All of which would
seem a bit depressing but for three hugely significant factors, the coincidence
of which is probably unique in our learning lifetimes. |
First, we are at the beginning of what already looks clearly like a defining
opportunity for change: we have a new government in place pledged to the
widely accepted conclusions of the Stevenson report that openly acknowledges
the need to change systemic barriers (like the examination system) if we
are to move learning forward. This is a government, moreover, that looks
to academia and research for advice. Second, after 20 years of fits and
starts, we do finally seem to be getting some genuinely powerful computers
that really are, as Apple used to say, 'for the rest of us'. And remember,
every other household with school-age children has a computer already, a
home revolution in itself. Finally, the whole country, and arguably much
of the rest of the world, seems to have gone learning mad. 'Education, education
and education' helped win the election. Lifelong learning is on everyone's
lips. Magazines trumpet learning on their covers, while on weekend morning
television they actually explain how the cartoons were made and mathematician
Carol Vorderman is almost a mega-star. This is the Learning Age. If you
do not believe it, try searching for "Spice girls" on the Internet.
It will reveal a meagre 3,000 links, while "pedagogy" registers
a huge 26,437. Taken together, these three factors present a real opportunity
for change, rather than revolution: a committed and radical government,
technology that delivers rather than promises and learning at the heart
of culture as well as the economy. Into this burgeoning arena of potential
comes a small and fortuitous concept: Gordon Brown's notion of a University
for Industry to boost the skills and knowledge of the workforce, but unfettered
by the institutional and systemic barriers that have restrained learning
change in the past. It is fitting that learning professionals, in the widest
possible sense, |
should be the first action researchers and learners to pilot the concept.
A recent report by the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR) argued
that the university should be a 'national learning network', bringing opportunities
for learning to people where and when it is most convenient: in the workplace,
in the home and in local, community-based centres. The IPPR and Ultralab
are jointly managing a pilot project starting in September. It is brave
with pedagogy for once, rather than with finance. The pilot project starts
with the simple hypothesis (indeed, conviction) that an eclectic group of
individuals, sharing a common interest (learning), can both learn from and
with each other, can do it in quite short 'units of delivery' and across
the Internet while maintaining quality and level (in this case post-graduate)
in a way that is tailored to their working, or home, lives. Previous experiments
have suggested that the quality of learning supported in this way can be
sociable, can offer real satisfaction to all participants and will, because
the debate and seminars are spread over time, offer students the chance
to reflect before making a contribution. The result is that the quality
of debate is higher than might be hoped and participation is more democratic
while the 'light touch' tutorial support is a pleasure for all.
'Chances like this come along even less than buses. Get on board
early and see where the journey leads'
By the way, for those still interested in the finance of all this, the
model is so cheap that participation will leave you debt-free. Indeed participation
in the pilot will be absolutely free. We are looking for people to take
part in this exciting initiative. The first pilot lasts for 10 weeks, very
much part time. |
You can fit it into evenings or coffee breaks. Some of the learning professionals
in the project will be practising and experienced. The pilot is also interested
in attracting those who are engaged in commercial training, those who are
newly qualified, those who wish to return to teaching after a break, those
who have recently retired and some parents. Participants need not necessarily
be qualified teachers but may also be from a college, a university, a museum
or gallery, a company or from corporate training. Apart from enthusiasm,
the only other requirements for participation are a computer and easy access
to the Internet and the World Wide Web. The University for Industry concept
is not about building a new university - we have enough already. Nor is
it about capturing all the knowledge in the world on to a CD-ROM or Web
site - there are plenty of such attempts gathering dust in our archive.
It is about exploring genuinely radical new ways to deliver learning while
keeping it pleasurable, affordable and relevant. This initiative will not
founder for want of institutional flexibility; there is no institution,
only people, wires and computers. Nor will it fail from an obsession with
finance; it is cheap and pragmatic already. Nor will it fail for lack of
political will; it grew from political rhetoric. It might be said that politicians'
promises are like buses, you wait ages for one and then a whole lot come
along at once. On closer inspection you find that most of them are like
the buses in my neighbourhood - broken. The University for Industry looks
like being a sound-bite that can break the mould, offering a genuine opportunity
to push through the barriers of organisation and discover a new learning
environment that works. Chances like this come along even less often than
buses. Get on board early and see where the journey leads. The first excursion
starts this September. |
