eQuality: a learning cycle for elearning territories eLearning Regions & Cities 2004 La Rochelle May 2004

Why eLearning Regions & Cities 2004?  2002, call for tenders from the EC on Quality for eLearning  EIfEL took the opportunity to build a partnership to explore its vision of the organic link between  learning individuals manage their own learning, knowledge, competencies and continuing professional development  learning organisations provide a framework for organisational knowledge and develop staff competencies  learning cities and learning regions provide a framework for innovation, development and social inclusion

Supporting Excellence in E-Learning  Supporting Excellence in E-Learning (SEEL) explores the link between :  Learning,  Quality,  Innovation and  Development  How to reconcile quality with innovation?  Looking at the territory as a learning entity

What have we achieved?  Regional Benchmaking System  Quality Guidelines  Regional Centres of Excellence  Quality Award  Cooperation with other initiatives  Europe: SEEQUEL, EQO, ReLL, R3L  Canada – Open eQLS

What are eLearning Regions and Cities?  Google says  "learning region" + "learning regions" > 11,000 entries  "learning city" + "learning cities" > 14,000 entries  "digital city" + "digital cities« > 440,000 entries  There are many projects  Germany  72 learning regions projects (  Europe  17 learning regions projects: R3L (ReLL)  Carrying different visions  Extrinsic: the training territory  Intrinsic: the learning territory

What is an eLearning territory?  What does eLearning territory mean?  digital (learning city/region) or learning (digital city/region) ?  It is certainly not a territory providing ‘online training’!  An eLearning territory is a territory that uses knowledge, information and learning technologies (KILT) to  value all its assets, human, cultural, patrimonial, etc.  build partnerships for interactive learning, with public and private actors, organisations and citizens  support lifelong and lifewide learning policies for social inclusion, cultural and economic development

Learning territories technology layers  Infrastructure  Broad band, schools equipment, including trainer training, etc.  Applications  Information Portals, community Portals, …  Services to individuals, organisations and policy makers  Support to networks and associations; business networks  Information on learning provision, skill provision  Value individuals and provide social recognition – e.g. ePortfolio for all, Parthenay, Wales  Support new forms of partnership and ‘interactive learning’ between public an private actors, organisations and citizens  local learning partnerships (LLP): employment agencies, schools and training providers, social services, …  Dashboards, accountability systems

Issues for eLearning Territories  Is technology used to reduce duplication of provision, if yes how? Through a regional/local portal?  How is technology used to reduce duplication and co-ordinate efforts between local, regional and national authorities?  Is technology used to track the response to learning inquiries? (customer service)  Is technology used to facilitate the management/access of learning records?  Is technology used to provide dashboards and increase accountability of decision makers responsible for learning policies?  How is technology used to support the quality assurance of the assessment process?  Have regional/local authorities a QA scheme for their services to the citizens, and learning citizens in particular? A customer chart?  How do the local authorities facilitate local learning networks, learning communities, associations, research dissemination, link between research and SMEs, clusters of learning organisations, etc.  …

The link between learning territories and quality

e.LRC Quality Award categories  Innovative local and regional learning strategies – e.g. innovative vision, cross- sector strategic planning building  Innovative learning products and services for local and regional actors – e.g. regional portal to link learning demand to provision  Quality assurance implementation – e.g. quality label, quality resource centre  Developing learning communities – e.g. encouraging local associations to value human and patrimonial resources  Valuing informal learning – e.g. valuing cultural heritage as a source of learning  Promoting lifelong and life-wide learning – e.g. developing summer courses, evening classes  Social inclusion and accessibility – e.g. providing flexible access to learning to disfranchised groups  Investing in people – providing flexible access to accreditation of competencies  Business-education partnerships – e.g. public-private partnership to twin schools  Accountability and transparency – e.g. regional or thematic observatory

Quality Guidelines  Four flavours  Learning Resources Providers  Learning Delivery  Supporting learners and organisations  Learning Strategy  Based on the experience of BAOL (BLA) Quality Mark

Strategic Framework: Regional Centres of Excellence  Initially: more ‘static’  ‘traditional’ information centre  Access to resources about quality  Perhaps some ‘consulting’  Now: ‘dynamic’, proactive  Helping territories to establish strategic plans  Inter-regional benchmarking  Observatory  Interesting related initiative: France Qualité Publique  France Qualité Publique : a vision of ‘quality’ as a learning cycle for territories – e.g. building a transport policy

Regional Benchmarking The SEEL benchmarking system is based on six principles 1. Formative Approach: the system is designed to support a process of self- assessment in order to help regions to identify strategies and actions that will help improve their performance related to their vision/strategy toward quality in eLearning 2. Region as an evolutionary and learning reality: the benchmarking system has to consider the dynamism of the regional context and has to include an intrinsic principle of flexibility 3. Process that is both focused and manageable: the benchmarking system has to be easy to manage while at the same time it has to be very focused on its purpose. 4. Stakeholders’ perspectives have to be strongly considered before defining criteria and indicators. 5. Context in which it is applied: the benchmarking system must consider the specificity and “maturity” of the context in which it is applied. 6. Collaborative nature of the activity: the process must stimulate collaboration and the exchange of information, ideas and experiences.

Conference objectives  Present the work of the SEEL project  Get feedback  Echange regional experiences  Exploit the work done during 18 months  European network of Excellence Centres  Implement the Guidelines  Organise Benchmarking Systems  Organise the 2005 Quality Award!  Find a host for the 2005 conference!

We want to learn from you! Thank You