Vocation E-learning Funding Session

Funding is available through the Australian National VET E-learning Strategy 2012-2015. Applications close in early November and there will be an on-line information session on how to apply 12.30pm AEDT, 20 October 2011.

Unfortunately the announcement email was poorly formatted and so looked like Spam. Here is the text of the message, with the formatting removed:

National VET E-learning Strategy 2011/12 funding opportunities

Date: Thursday 20 October
Time: 12:30-2:00pm AEDT
URL: http://tinyurl.com/nvelstrategy

Overview

Stimulating improved skills levels for the Australian workforce

Investment in the National Vocational Education and Training E-learning Strategy for 2012-2015 will stimulate innovative approaches to increasing participation in training and improve the skill levels of the Australian workforce.

Funding of $11.5m has been approved for the Strategy in 2011/12 by the Ministerial Council on Tertiary Education and Training for programs:

• capitalising on the roll-out of the National Broadband Network by demonstrating the benefits of the national investment in broadband
• supporting large-scale workforce development in industry through partnerships and comprehensive e-learning advice
• expanding participation and access for individuals through e-learning programs delivering foundation skills and e-literacy.

The National VET E-learning Strategy (which replaces the Australian Flexible Learning Framework) will seek co-investment to promote the growth in broadband-based training; support the adoption of industry-wide e-learning programs; develop e-literacy; and improve access to training.


Session Overview

Join us to hear about the funding opportunites and call for applications by the following Busniess Activities:

1. National Broadband Network (NBN) E-learning Programs - focus on the delivery of training programs using broadband-based information technology to improve training access and outcomes for learners.
2. Partnerships for Participation - opportunities to develop e-learning approaches to improve the e-literacy, foundation skills and employability of individuals experiencing disadvantage.
3. Access to Skills - projects using e-learning strategies to deliver recognised training in priority occupation and skill areas.
4. Regional Businesses Programs – delivering e-learning programs via rurally located business-based partnerships of industry, peak industry bodies, RTOs and community groups responding to local needs.
5. Peak Industry Bodies Programs - five consultancies will be funded to create five workforce development e-learning business plans. Each business plan will focus on one of five priority industry sectors to initiate the Peak Industry Bodies Programs, for 2012. Consultancy proposals are due by 4 pm AEDT Monday 7 November 2011.

Presenters

NBN E-learning Program: Melanie Doriean, NSW Partnerships for Participation: Marlene Manto and Kym Schutz, SA

Access to Skills: Janice Calcei, WA

Regional Businesses Programs: Kerry Manikis, ACT

Peak Industry Bodies Programs: Kerry Manikis, ACT

Details of initial funding in 2011/12 for business, community and individual Registered Training Organisations for delivery of e-learning training programs under the National VET E-learning Strategy are available via
National VET E-learning Strategy 2011/12 funding opportunities

Date: Thursday 20 October
Time: 12:30-2:00pm AEDT
URL: http://tinyurl.com/nvelstrategy

Overview

Stimulating improved skills levels for the Australian workforce

Investment in the National Vocational Education and Training E-learning Strategy for 2012-2015 will stimulate innovative approaches to increasing participation in training and improve the skill levels of the Australian workforce.

Funding of $11.5m has been approved for the Strategy in 2011/12 by the Ministerial Council on Tertiary Education and Training for programs:

• capitalising on the roll-out of the National Broadband Network by demonstrating the benefits of the national investment in broadband
• supporting large-scale workforce development in industry through partnerships and comprehensive e-learning advice
• expanding participation and access for individuals through e-learning programs delivering foundation skills and e-literacy.

The National VET E-learning Strategy (which replaces the Australian Flexible Learning Framework) will seek co-investment to promote the growth in broadband-based training; support the adoption of industry-wide e-learning programs; develop e-literacy; and improve access to training.


Session Overview

Join us to hear about the funding opportunites and call for applications by the following Busniess Activities:

1. National Broadband Network (NBN) E-learning Programs - focus on the delivery of training programs using broadband-based information technology to improve training access and outcomes for learners.
2. Partnerships for Participation - opportunities to develop e-learning approaches to improve the e-literacy, foundation skills and employability of individuals experiencing disadvantage.
3. Access to Skills - projects using e-learning strategies to deliver recognised training in priority occupation and skill areas.
4. Regional Businesses Programs – delivering e-learning programs via rurally located business-based partnerships of industry, peak industry bodies, RTOs and community groups responding to local needs.
5. Peak Industry Bodies Programs - five consultancies will be funded to create five workforce development e-learning business plans. Each business plan will focus on one of five priority industry sectors to initiate the Peak Industry Bodies Programs, for 2012. Consultancy proposals are due by 4 pm AEDT Monday 7 November 2011.

Presenters

NBN E-learning Program: Melanie Doriean, NSW Partnerships for Participation: Marlene Manto and Kym Schutz, SA

Access to Skills: Janice Calcei, WA

Regional Businesses Programs: Kerry Manikis, ACT

Peak Industry Bodies Programs: Kerry Manikis, ACT

Details of initial funding in 2011/12 for business, community and individual Registered Training Organisations for delivery of e-learning training programs under the National VET E-learning Strategy are available via: http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/content/NVELS-funding-opportunites-jan-jun+2012

Mobile Devices for Education

The Canberra Institute of Technology is hosting "ilearn: idevices for education" 6 September 2011. Teachers are ivnivted to bring along their ipads, tablets and smart phones for a free interactive workshop on how to use them for learning.

Professional Development Workshop

iteach | ilearn: idevices for education

September 6^th, Tuesday 8am- 9.30am, B016 Computer lab, B Block ground floor, CIT Southside Campus, Cnr Hindmarsh and Ainsworth, Phillip.

Topic

Mobile devices such as ipads and tablets, smart phones and iphones are here to stay and adult learners are becoming increasingly enamoured of their use as a learning tool.

Bring your device and join this interactive workshop to learn what can be done and share what you and other educators are doing to put smart devices to work for learners. The emphasis of the workshop will be on ipads and iphones but much of what is discussed should apply to tablets and android phones as well.

Cost

Free for Educators

Registration

You need to register your interest in this session by 5^th September. Please email or telephone:

Helen Lynch, ACT Toolbox Champion, Australian Flexible Learning Framework

Phone 02 6207 4031

Email Helen.lynch@cit.edu.au

For more information about other upcoming professional development opportunities for ACT educators please visit the ACT Framework webpage at: http://flexiblelearning.net.au/ACT

Digital Video for Education

The Video Standards Report – 2011 has been released by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework. This report provides recommendations for the formats and settings to use with video for vocational education. The report is intended to help the vocational education sector, but may be of use for higher education and schools as well.

The report's author's have tried to do to much, with a primer on video uses and video technologies, as well as formats and implementation issues. The result is a report which will be hard to understand for those new to digital video and too superficial for those who are. A short summary of recommendations would be better, leaving the primer material to the many good guides to digital video available (some of which are referenced in the report). The introduction strays away from the topic of digital video into the role of the NBN, Korean broadband and mobile devices.

The report is available in PDF (1 MB) and Word (3.4 MB) formats. As the report is about online education, it would have been better provided as a HTML document, for ease of reading and referencing on-line. I converted the Word version to HTML and here are some excerpts:

Video Standards Report v1.0

E-standards for Training

Table of Contents

• Table of Contents 3
• Introduction 1
• The changing digital environment 2 ...
• Key considerations 4 ...
• Video encoding 5 ...
• Video production for encoding 10 ...
• Encoding parameters 13 ...
• Players/Container formats ...
• Codecs 25 ...
• Streaming servers 31 ...
• Screen recording and sharing 36 ...
• Relevant findings 37 ...
• Recommendations 40 ...
• Appendix 1: Standards recommendation 42
• Appendix 2: Players/container formats and codecs 43
• Appendix 3: Video codec table 45
• Appendix 4: Bit rates 47
• Appendix 5: Screen resolutions 50
• Contacts 51

...

A screen size of 640 x 480 is still a good standard for SD (4:3) video.

For HD video, the dimensions 512 x 288 are a good size. This screen size is half the PAL HD standard of 1024 x 576 (which is good for pixel doubling). The dimensions 512 x 288 are good for a web page, but they are a little too big for mobile phones.

The most common screen size for mobile phones is 320 x 240 (QVGA).

See Appendix 5 (Screen resolutions) for an overview.

23. Fields and frames

Video can be interlaced or progressive.The use of interlacing helps to achieve good visual quality in narrow bandwidth contexts. Fields are alternating half frames that are horizontally "interlaced" (odd and even) lines of the image. This approach was developed as a solution to the issue of the duration of phosphor glow with television cathode ray tubes. Footage shot with interlacing can appear to have a "comb" effect on a computer screen when there is quick horizontal movement. If this effect is evident, make sure the video master is rendered with a deinterlacing filter.

Abbreviated video resolution specifications may include an "i" or a "p". For example, "1080i" refers to 1080 horizontal lines interlaced (drawn odd and then even), whereas "1080p" means the lines are progressive (drawn from 1 to 1080).

24. Frame rate

Video can consist of 25 (PAL), 30 (NTSC) or 60 (HD) fps. Halving the frame rate can reduce the data rate without loss of image quality. PAL, for example, can be reduced to 12.5 fps, although at 12 fps motion may begin to look a little jerky.

Players/Container formats

This section provides a list of common players and plug-ins, along with some information on associated licences, tools, severs and platforms. A final recommendation is provided for each player/plug-in. Information on supported codecs can be found in Appendix 1 (Standards recommendation) and Appendix 2 (Players/container formats and codecs).

An overview of available players can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_media_players

Remember, the licence for a player only pertains to the distribution of the player software. A publisher is constrained by the licensing requirements of any codecs used by content, regardless of the player licence.

25. Windows Media Player

.wmv ...

Recommendation

While Windows Media Player is always available on Windows machines, the complicated breadth of versions, and the fact that it only supports Microsoft"s version of MPEG-4 make it complicated to use to produce cross-platform content.

The WMV format includes its own Digital Rights Management (DRM), which has been subject to much criticism.

Note that Windows 7 ships with an H.264 decoder (licence included in OS fee).

26. Flash video

.flv, .f4v, .f4p, .f4a, .f4b ...

Recommendation

Flash may lose ground as HTML5 becomes more popular, but it currently has an enormous installed base. It can be used in concert with HTML5.

27. QuickTime

.mov, .moov, .mp4, .mp3, etc. ...

Recommendation

QuickTime offers broad codec support and can be confidently installed on PCs. The plug-in supports H.264 in browsers without native support, for example Internet Explorer (pre-9).

28. VLC

...
Recommendation

VLC is highly recommended as a powerful, free video tool. In addition, it is an open-source, cross-platform, all-purpose video player. VLC can transcode to popular formats and play regionalised DVDs.

The VLC plug-in supports H.263 in browsers without native support. Also see Section 11.3 (HTML5 and the video tag).

29. WebM (On2 VP8 / Vorbis)

...
Recommendation

It is difficult to recommend WebM due to the potential technical and licensing issues, plus its uneven support (despite Google"s backing).

30. Ogg (Vorbis / Theora)

...

Recommendation

In comparison to H.264, Ogg"s file size/quality balance is inferior. This format is unlikely to become a broad standard.

31. Real Media

.rm ...

Recommendation

As RealNetwork"s influence continues to wane, its future is unclear. It is difficult to recommend this format with any confidence. However, as a media-streaming solution, it has a strong track record.

32. Silverlight

...
Recommendation

Silverlight is new, it has not been tested and uptake is still limited. It is therefore impossible to recommend Silverlight at the time of writing this report.

33. AVI

...
Recommendation

The AVI container should probably be phased out. It is not recommended.

Codecs

This section gives an overview of the main codecs, including information on associated licences, tools and platforms. See Appendix 1 (Standards recommendation) for a table summary of this information. For an overview of lossy video codecs, see Appendix 3 (Video codec table).

34. H.264 / MPEG-4 AVC (.mp4)

...

Some comparisons

39. 
    

WebM vs H.264

Currently, H.264 and WebM (which share much code) produce the best results with restricted data rate.

The following table and quote come from: http://www.streamingmedia.com/Articles/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=68594&PageNum=4

... Additional comparison data of video codecs can be found at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_codecs

...

Streaming servers

Under some circumstances, a dedicated media-streaming server may be required to deliver audio-visual content. ...

...

Appendix 1: Standards recommendation

Codec overview: most recommended to least recommended

Codec	Licence	Platforms	Web	Tools
H.264	Commercial distribution requires licence	Mac, PC, LINUX, iOS, Android	HTML5 on WebKit, QuickTime plug-in	Major platforms have good commercial tools, which are free
WebM/VP8	Free, but it shares patentable code with H.264	No hardware support for mobile devices	YouTube	Free, but requires an understanding of binaries
Ogg Theora	No limitation	Does not have wide support	Mozilla - Firefox, etc	Free, but requires an understanding of binaries
WMV	Free to use, DRM for content	Windows integration only	Not recommended	Commercial and free bare-bones version
On2	Open source	All platforms	Various versions supported by various plug-ins including WebM	Major platforms have good commercial tools, which are free

Overview: players/container formats and codec support

Player	H.264	WebM/VP8	Ogg Theora	WMV	On2
Windows Media	*	no	no	yes	no
Flash	yes	no	no	no	VP6
QuickTime	yes	*	yes	*	yes
VLC	yes	no	yes	yes	VP3/5/6
Real	yes	yes	yes	no	VP3/5/8
Silverlight	yes	no	no	yes	no

* requires software installation

From: Video Standards Report – 2011, Australian Flexible Learning Framework, May 2011

Vocational e-Learning for Business

Greetings from my office, where I am taking part in the last of a weekly series on-line forums with about 25 people around Australia. This week the topic is "WHERE can I find a training partner to support my business?". This is part of the excellent work by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework, a federal/state government initiative. The events are run on-line using run using the Elluminate product.

This week Nita Schultz and Brad Beach, are talking about their work on how training organizations can help business with e-learning. They are authors of "The role of RTOs in partnering
with business and industry to embed e-learning", published by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework (31 May 2011).

Brad pointed out that e-learning was a way to make use of industry experts without them spending their time traveling to courses. He also described how the e-learning environment can be used to keep in touch with students and for them to have an alumni after the formal events. I asked Brad about the cost of keeping materials up to date and he responded that good design can allow for updates.

Table of contents

Table of contents i
Executive Summary 1
Literature Review 1
Key Findings 2
Introduction 3
What is e-learning? 4
Literature Review 4
Are you ready for a partnership? 4
Getting down to business 7
Who needs to do what and when? 8
Maintaining the partnership 11
What about the outcomes? 12
Insights from currently funded industry sectors using e-learning 13
Key informants 13
Negotiation of e-learning partnership 18
Implementation of e-learning partnership 20
Maintenance of e-learning partnership 23
Evaluation and review of e-learning outcomes and partnership 27
Key Findings 30
What does an effective business RTO e-learning partnership look like? 30
Is an effective e-learning partnership very different to other business and RTO
partnerships? 30
What action can an RTO take to foster and sustain industry enterprise e-learning
partnerships? 31
References 32
Appendix 1 – Full copy of responses for responses to the maintenance questions ..... 34
Maintenance of e-learning partnership 34
For more information 37
Australian Flexible Learning Framework 37

...

Executive Summary
The 2008-2011 Australian Flexible Learning Framework (Framework) strategy continues to build the capability of VET practitioners in the context of embedding good practice in registered training organisations (RTOs) and
businesses (also known and referred to as employers, enterprises and firms).

This paper considers a range of literature and good practices demonstrated in effective business and RTO e-learning partnerships

Literature Review

The literature review examines a range of Framework publications and the recent National Quality Council publication Working in partnership A guide for RTOs, enterprises and industry groups (Cleary 2010). The research suggests all effective partnerships are underpinned by:

• a demonstrated readiness by the RTO and the business to engage in partnership arrangements and an enthusiasm for e-learning solutions
• negotiations where the expectations of the business and RTO are clearly articulated and roles and responsibilities detailed, documented and signed-off
• supportive social and economic structures
• regular open and honest communications
• appointment of one key contact in the RTO with strong project management skills, high degree of customer focus and delegated authority to quickly make decisions relating to the partnership
• the RTO accommodating the changing business needs by organising training and assessment around business’ workload pressures and using authentic workplace tasks and skills development
• actively engaging business personnel in the training and assessment evaluating the outcomes of the training and assessment and reviewing the partnership.
• Every stage in effective partnerships between RTOs and industry business is premised on building trust and respect, having commitment to a common goal, working together to develop the training program, ongoing dialogue, flexibility in training and assessment arrangements, sharing ideas and developing a common language.

RTO champions and industry champions leading the industry sectors using e-learning were invited to consider the features of effective business and RTO partnerships described in the literature, in the context of their industry sectors. Survey questions and discussion starters drew on the features of effective partnerships described by Cleary (2010); readiness, negotiation, implementation, maintenance, evaluation and review.

The role of RTOs in partnering with business and industry to embed e-learning Commitment, collaboration, trust and respect are words repeatedly used by industry and RTO champions as characteristics of effective partnerships.

Mutual trust and respect built as a result of the collaborative actions of industry, business and the RTO in the e-learning partnership. In the minds of industry e-learning champions, the core ingredients of a trusting and respectful relationship were honesty in all communications, acting with integrity, the RTO showing a keen interest in the business and industry, finding innovative solutions to specific business needs, being responsive and meeting timelines.

RTOs met the businesses’ expectations in preparing for the partnership by reviewing internal capabilities to offer an e-learning solution to meet each business’ specific needs, researching the industry and the business and demonstrating commitment to an e-learning solution. Industry and RTO e-learning champions were unequivocal about the importance of unambiguous, detailed documentation underpinning the implementation, maintenance and evaluation of the partnership. Businesses expect to know what their specific roles and responsibilities are up front and performance measures to be mutually agreed. While businesses want a say in the design and implementation of the learning they do look to the RTO to interpret their needs and offer solutions and in some cases the businesses depended on the RTO to provide that advice.
Industry and RTO champions agreed that collaborative decision making, agreed outcomes, protection of intellectual property, the appointment of key contacts and embedded quality processes are catalysts to effective e-learning partnerships.

Key Findings

The features cited by Cleary (2010) as essential to effective partnerships
were rated as equally important by industry and RTO champions leading the 2008-2011 Framework funded industry sectors using e-learning.

However, the business may need guidance from the RTO to better understand the skills that need to be developed and the available training options for e-learning solutions.

To foster and sustain business e-learning partnerships RTOs need to have an attitude that is highly focused on service to the business, ensuring all communications are answered promptly and fully and by making the effort to build personal relationships with business personnel.

All industry champions interviewed for this paper agreed that respect is earned.

RTOs supporting the currently funded industry sectors have built the respect of the industry sectors and business partners by being action driven, making realistic promises to industry stakeholders and delivering on these promises. RTOs tangibly demonstrating commitment to, and collaboration with the industry sector, build trust and respect that translates into sustained partnerships. This may translate to the RTO becoming the provider of choice for the business partners. ...

From: The role of RTOs in partnering
with business and industry to embed e-learning, Nita Schultz and Brad Beach, Australian Flexible Learning Framework, 31 May 2011

e-learning for workforce development

Today I took part in the second of an weekly series on-line forums with about 25 people around Australia on this week the topic was "HOW can e-learning help with workforce development?". This is part of the excellent work by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework, a federal/state government initiative. The events are run on-line using run using the Elluminate product.

This week, as well as listening to a live-to-air presentation with on-line slides, we also worked through some pre-recorded Flash based slides with audio and answered some questions. This made for a slightly complex setup, especially for an ad-hoc group of participants. The Flash presentation was supposed to appear in the Elluminate window, but I found I had just a blank square (I suspect that Elluminate does not work so well under Linux as MS-Windows). But the trainers had allowed for this and provided a web address so I could open the representative in my web browser separately.

To add to my confusion the live sound from the trainer came through my headset, whereas the prerecorded material came via the speakers in my laptop (perhaps because I have changed the audio settings). Some of the problems other students had with audio breaking up I did not experience, perhaps because I set Elluminate to run at 56 kbps (not propaganda speed) and set Flahs to play at low resolution. This reduces the communications and processing load, but still gives an acceptable presentation.

To enter answers to questions there was a separate workbook, in the form of a word-processing document. This made for slightly disjointed process, as I had to flip between Elluminate, the Web browser and the word processor. But it did have the advantage that I could use the native features of each.

Entering answers into a Learning Management System can be annoying, for example, if I can't get the spell checker to work. It is a pleasure to watch how an experienced on-line trainer handles the complexities of getting a group of people to go through an on-line training module and keep top the timetable.

Here is a summary of my answers to the questions:

• Obstacles to e-leaning in the workplace:Academic prejudice against e-learning. Lack of training with e-learning techniques.
• When and where e-leaning:In formal course times as part of the normal semester works well. Can also be used in an ad-hoc way.
• Travel and the benefits:More the case of not being where the training facility is. That is with mobile staff. Can save administrative time, worrying about getting to and from classes.
• What motivates industry to participate in training: Meeting mandatory qualification requirements.
• Importance of learner support: Being in the IT industry have good technical support. But still have difficulty getting things like Elluminate and the Flash player to work on my Linux computer.
• Learners comfortable with e-learning: Most experienced with IT and relaxed. They will appreciate not having to attend “lectures”. They like it.
• Learners prepared for e-learning:
  
• About 10% drop out in the first few weeks as they cannot cope with having to do work every week.
• Motivation of learners: Get a better job.
• How many learners are there? I expect to have classes of 100 students.
• Learners locations: About one third India, one third China and one third spread across Australia and the rest of the world.
• What particularly motivates learners: Practical exercises relevant to jobs they can get.
• How will the learners benefit: Get a qualification they can use to get a better job.
• Previous training experience influenced attitude to learning: Boring lectures and irrelevant paper based examinations.

Some useful links were also provided:

1. Enabling workforce development: Insights from industries using e-learning report

2. Role of RTOs in partnering with business and industry to embed e-learning
3. Guidelines for supporting e-learners for support
4. Enabling workforce development: Insights from eight industry sectors using e-learning
5. Enabling workforce development: Learning sequence

Overcoming e-learning challenges

Greetings from my office at the ANU in Canberra, where I am taking part in an online forum with about 25 people around Australia on the topic "Explore the practical challenges in using e-learning". This is one of a weekly series run by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework, a federal/state government initiative. This is run using the Elluminate product, over the web.

The good part of this is that people from the vocational education sector demonstrate how to use the technology and that they can use it, for the sessions. They use the facilitates of the technology, such as display of slides, conducting polls of participations, as part of the presentation. What I find annoying is when I am invited to a presentation on e-learning and find it is an old fashioned set of slides with now use of the technology. The Vocational people are showing they know what to do.

The session explored a "Preview: refreshed Practical guide to e-learning" this is available as web pages and down-loadable as PDF:

• SECTION 1 - E-LEARNING OVERVIEW
  • What is e-learning
  • Examples of e-learning in industry
  • Nationally recognised courses
  • E-learning motivators
  • Benefits of e-learning
  • Barriers to e-learning
  • Workforce Development Barriers
  • Types of e-learning
    • Self paced vs. live e-learning
    • Use of a facilitator
    • Blended learning
    • Delivery method
  • Learning systems
    • Choosing a learning system
  • Learning Objects / SCORM
  • Supporting e-learning
    • Skills needed by learners
    • Skills needed by facilitators
  • Costs of e-learning
    • Calculating the cost of e-learning
    • Low cost / free e-learning tools
    • Cost comparison e-learning vs. facilitator led
  • Who is using e-learning
  • How to get started
    • Talk to other people
    • How to find a partner
  • Is e-learning suitable
  • • What's the training problem, and will e-learning solve it?
    • Needs assessment matrix
    • Who are the learners?
    • Is my organisation ready
    • Will e-learning deliver benefits over facilitator-led training
    • When is e-learning most effective and most utilised
    • E-learning suitability checklist
    • Resources for learning more
  • 
    
• SECTION 2 - THE E-LEARNING PROJECT
  • Analyse
  • • Deciding on an e-learning strategy
    • Content and learning styles
    • Establishing and managing the team
    • Effective management
    • Identifying technical needs
    • Dealing with disability / accessibility
    • Funding e-learning
    • Preparing a business case
    • Identifying success factors
    • Other project stages
    • Project plan
    • Am I ready to start
  • Design
  • Develop
  • Implement
  • Evaluate (and maintain)
• SECTION 3 - TRENDS AND FURTHER INFO

Learning University Teaching: Lesson 1

Today was the first of a four day introductory course in university teaching. The course started promptly 10am. There were about 25 students and one teacher in a room equipped with hexagonal tables seating up to six, and an interactive whiteboard.

The course ran until just after the scheduled finishing time at 3pm. While there were morning and afternoon breaks, as well as lunch, this made for a long day. This is a style of intensive education which I don't like to deliver and do not like to attend. At least in this case the four one day sessions are spread over a month, with time for reflection in between.

The course materials were presented in the form of slides on screen, with paper copies handed out. Apparently these are also provided on the ANU's Moodle Learning Management System, but I have not yet been able to access the course web site. There were 76 slides for the day, which is not excessive. There were also ten pages of other materials handed out, as well as a three page reflective learning template to fill in. The form being on paper caused me some problems, as I am not used to writing by hand, but it only required a few sentences. Apparently I will be able to fill this in online, when I have access to the system.

Apart from a white-board and the interactive white-board being used (essentially as a projection screen), there were no gadgets used. It was useful not to have too much technology distracting from the fundamentals. In that spirit I avoided turning on my net-book computer to take notes and noticed far fewer iPads in evidence than the average event I attend.

One of the major issues for me in learning about teaching is the use of technology. It appears that I am the only student in the class who is designing and delivering pure on-line courses. Much of the terminology discussed and issues raised seem irrelevant to me and discussions from a bygone age. This reminds me of the situation about 15 years ago when I started using e-mail seriously: I could not understand why those around me spent so much time complaining about problems with paper based communication and simply stopped using it. This course presented well known, decades old evidence that lectures are a very poor way to teach and discussed how timetabling clashes caused problems for staff and students, so why not simply stop doing this?

However, some issues with learning do not change, as they are about people. The guidance provided in university policies on teaching, with chalk and blackboards or with computers. However, some of the terminology could be made more applicable to the new ways of teaching, by replacing references to "lectures" and "attendance" with more general terms. The principles of education still apply, even if the students do not sit in lectures and do not attend the campus.

The day ended with a discussion of the student survey system used by the ANU. This has a Student Experience of Learning Support (SELT) for course evaluation and a Student Experience of Teaching (SET) for teaching evaluation. The SELT is standardized across all courses, whereas the are different SET questions for different types of teaching (I use the one for on-line courses). Detailed statistical reports are provided to the teacher and at an aggregated level to the university hierarchy. It was useful to have the graphs explained. It was also useful to have it pointed out that the results may be used for selecting staff for promotion (although this is not applicable to Adjunct staff, such as myself). Apparently any student or employee of the university can access the aggregated SELT reports for the university (but my user-id does not permit this).

The first day of this course did not cover a lot of content which I had not seen before. But it was useful to discuss the issues. Assuming I can get access to the course web site, I will continue with the course. One issue I have yet to resolve is what the "negotiated assessment items" are.

While useful, course takes a very time consuming approach to teaching education. This might be enhanced by some templates which incorporate good practices , into which designers could insert their content. Also there does not appear to be a clear business model evident in the course: is it course designers or course delivers the course is aimed at?

Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning

The first exercise for the introduction to university teaching course I am starting next week, is to comment on the university's "Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning", the "Commentary on the Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning" and the "Code of Practice - Supervision in Higher Degrees by Research".

Previously, inspired by a talk by Professor Ian Young, I looked at what policy and plans there were for "flexible modes of learning" and what might be needed in a "Flexible Learning Policy".

Dissemination and Formatting of the Documents

What I noticed first was that the learning code and guide documents are publicly available in the university's Policies Website, not hidden away, which makes them far more useful and like to be read. Also these are relatively brief documents, the teaching practice code is only four A4 pages long. These are official documents of the university, two being "Policy" and the other a "Guideline".

The documents are provided in the form of simply laid out and readable text, in efficiently encoded web pages. One problem is that the headers of the documents are too large, resulting in the body being pushed "below the fold" (that is not visible) on screen. This will become more of a problem as students and staff increasingly adopt smart phones and tablet computers for reading such documents. The reader has to scroll down a long way before they get to the actual useful content of the document. A simple solution would be to move the "Authorisation & Contact Information" and "Related Documents" sections from the top to the bottom of the document, as these will be of little interest to most readers.

Content of the Documents

The document "Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning" is somewhat confusingly prefixed "policy". It would be more usual to have a short policy document and then a longer separate code of practice. An example of this is the ACS Code of Ethics, which is less than a page long and the ACS Code of Professional Conduct and Professional Practice, which expands on this.

One serious flaw in the code, the other two documents and many other university polices, is the lack of references to provide context and authority. It seems unlikely that these policies sprang fully formed into existence. Their origins, what work they draw on and how they have been validated would add to their authority. This is particularly relevant for academic policies, where the students are told to cite sources and properly reference work, to make it scholarly and avoid the appearance of plagiarism.

Twelve Principle of teaching and learning

The code sets down a set of twelve principles. These are listed unnumbered, which makes them difficult to refer to so, here they are numbered:

All those involved in teaching and learning are expected to:

1. Adhere to the ... Code of Conduct as it pertains to teaching and learning practice
2. Value and respect diversity (including, for example, diversity of culture, religious belief, age, race, gender and other personal and group-based attributes)
3. Contribute to an academic environment free from harassment, discrimination and bullying, with access to complaint procedures which will facilitate speedy and just resolutions
4. Adhere to the rules and principles governing academic integrity
5. Contribute to the academic distinctiveness of the University which is characterised by
6. Teaching based in research and scholarship
7. National and international orientation of courses and course content
8. A climate of intellectual rigour
9. A program which blends fundamental, professional and contextual learning
10. High levels of communication between the University, its staff and students
11. Continuous improvement of the University's teaching quality.
12. Recognise the importance of flexible access to lecture content for the purposes of the University's equity targets and teaching objectives.

The first principle refers to the "Code of Conduct". Unfortunately there is no hypertext link to take the reader to this document, nor is there any formal reference to the document. There is a link to "Code of Conduct", in the related documents section and presumably this is the document intended. If so, the correct name of the document should be used.

The university needs to check that its current practices actually conform to the codes set out. As an example, the "Code of Conduct" states:

9. The University will indemnify its staff against liabilities incurred by them while carrying out their duties in good faith for the University.
10. It will stand behind its staff and meet the costs of actions that might be taken against them personally as though the action had been taken against the University, provided that the staff member concerned was acting in good faith.

As an Adjunct Lecturer I am categorised as a member of the staff, however the university requires me to take out and pay for my own indemnity insurance in order to teach. So clearly the university does not indemnify all its staff, presumably only the full time staff. This exception needs to be included in the code.

Principle 4 refers to "rules and principles governing academic integrity". It would be useful if this cited explicitly the "Code of Practice for Student Academic Integrity", referenced at the top of the document.

Principle 12 is overly prescriptive in referring to "lecture content". As an example, while I am terms a "lecturer" I ceased using lectures as my primary mode of teaching last year. This semester I gave only one lecture and do not expect to use lectures for courses in the future. A more general term such as "course content" might therefore be better than "lecture content".

Best Practice Framework for teaching

The term "Best Practice" is nonsense marketing jargon, best avoided is a serious policy document. The term "semester" could also be omitted, as courses can be run over any period.

The framework shows a somewhat dated view of teaching by referring to students being able to "attend ... class times". This will be meaningless to online students and should be replaced with more inclusive language.

The requirement that students should "Select courses for which they have the pre-requisites", is either a tautology or an oxymoron. If students are required to have the "pre-requisites", as is implied by the word, then be definition students will have those pre-requisites. If students are not required to have the "pre-requisites", these are not really pre-requisites. In either case this sentence should be deleted.

The requirement for students to "Accept that the University may be required to limit choices because of available resources" is so general as to be meaningless and should be deleted. The university obviously does not have infinite resources and so must limit choices for students.

The requirement for students to "Attend orientation and induction activities ..." conflicts with principles two and three, as some students will be unable to attend such activities for cultural, religious reasons, or due to family commitments or disability. A requirement to attend may therefore constitute unlawful discrimination. In particular if the student can't attend due to a disability, such a requirement may be unlawful, under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, listed in the document. This particularly applies where the course itself does not require attendance.

Placing a requirement on the student to be in "possession of the required information before the course begins" is misdirected, as it should be for the university to make that information available. Also the concept of "possession" of information is not one likely to be one which will make sense to a student in the 21st century, a term such as "access" might be better.

The activities for the students "during the semester" appear to be based on an outmoded view of education, where students are passive absorbers of information and need to be force fed knowledge. I suggest these obligations be rewritten on the assumption the students are self motivated and the teachers will provide them with assistance to learn.

The obligations for teachers, the University and its Colleges, have fewer problems than those for the students, being essentially a statement of some of the practices in modern educational thinking. However, there are unnecessarily prescriptive and outdated assumptions made as to teaching techniques. As an example, the obligation to "hold lectures in environments where recordings can be made", assumes that lectures are the primary teaching technique.

The Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning should be rewritten to be a much shorter document, on the assumption that ANU follows good teaching practices. The detail on how and what those practices are should be in the guide. References to particular techniques which were used at the university in the past, but may not be in the future, such as "lecture", "attendance" and "examination" should be removed from the code, bur retained in the guide.

Guideline: Commentary on the Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning

The "Guideline: Commentary on the Code of Practice for Teaching and Learning ...", at about 14 pages long is three times as large as the code and less coherently written. It contains a number of problems with the formatting, indicating it may have been prepared in some haste. The document lacks a clear structure.

Unlike the code, the guideline contains numerous references to other documents, with hypertext links. Unfortunately the references do not appear to have been done in accordance with any accepted referencing style, such as Havard. URI (web addresses) are including in the body of the document. In most chases the URIs are hypertext links to the documents, but not all. In most cases the URI follows the name of document, but not all, with some URIs on their own and no explanation as to what they are for.

While the document outlines what students should do, it does not detail what assistance is provided to help them with this. As an example, the University's policies about plagiarism are stated, little guidance is provided to students in order to achieve this. The assumption seems to be that plagiarism is a rare occurrence of something which the student will naturally know how to avoid. However, the reality is this is a topic which many students have difficulty with. About one third of my my postgraduate students need practice with how to reference properly and about one in ten requires individual personal tuition. The policy on "Code of Practice for Student Academic Integrity", could be improved by including some references indicating where the content of the policy was derived from.

The requirement to "Appropriately prepare and complete in a timely manner all assessment items" . In may cases there are optional assessment items, where the student has a choice of which to do. If there is something essential for the student to do, then the assessment should be arranged so that the student cannot pass the course without doing that item.

Similarly, if there is a time limit on assessment it should be enforced. Statements about "Students who do not submit assessable work on time cannot expect the same response regime as their peers" are not appropriate and do not treat students with the respect they deserve.

The guidelines would benefit from being rewritten, with a clearer structure, references to an accepted standard. It would also help to explicitly state the learning philosophy which the university uses, which I expect would be based on assuming students are motivated and honest and the university staff are there to help them achieve their potential.

Foundations of University Teaching

Having been on the periphery of teaching at the tertiary level for a decade, I though it was time to learn about it more formally. So I start an introductory course on university teaching next week.

This is with much trepidation, as my last effort at teaching education did not go well: see my "Reflections of an Online Student".

Reload Tool For Creating Learning Objects

Helen Lynch, ACT Toolbox Champion, from Canberra Institute of Technology gave a webinar today on "Learning objects: Create, reuse and deploy for better teaching and learning online!" using the VET Reload Tool and use this with the as LORN and Toolbox Repositories of the vocational sector. This was of interest beyond the VET sector, as universities use the same tools, such as Moodle, which the objects can be used in.

I downloaded the "VET Reload Tool" before the presentation and found to my surprise that I could run the installation program under Linux. The tool itself is written in Java, but has a Microsoft Windows installer, which runs using the "Wine" utility under Linux.

I had to to run the tool was to find the "reload-editor.jar" file in the installed folder and run it with Java. This works fine under Linux, even though it was installed using a Windows install program, as it is just a Java program.

I saved the Moodle book version of my Green ICT Strategies course notes from the ANU course COMP7310, as an IMS content package. Then I tried to open this with Reload. The software was able to unzip the files in the IMS package and put them in a folder, but then reported:

Could not open file: Green_Technology_Strategies.zip
Error loading schema file

I then installed the unmodified Eclipse-based RELOAD Editor from the JISC project in the UK. This worked fine and was able to open my green ICT course notes. It appears that the modification of the meta-data for the Australian VET version of the tool has made it incompatible with the ANU's Moodle installation.

But while I could run the tool, I was not sure what use it was. Reload seemed to be just a XML editor. You could open the IMS package, navigate the folders in it, add and remove files and edit the XML based metadata. But this is not a WYSIWYG editor. The average educator I thought would find this very user friendly.

Helen's excellent presentation put this in context. Reload is not very exciting tool on its own. But it lets you assemble a lesson from set of documents, such as web pages, WP files, PDF and videos. These are zipped them into a "learning object", along with some metadata. The object can then be put in a repository, or a LMS (such as Moodle) and played by the student.

If the course designer can cope with the primitive interface of the the VET Reload Tool (like a text editor for decades ago), they can create, or modify learning objects with a reasonably quickly and easily. You can enter metadata and insert or remove files, while using your usual tools for creating and editing the content of the individual files.

This tool would have some benefits as it runs on a desktop computer, without needing a server. But for corporate applications at an institution, something like AContent would make more sense. AContent can be run on a server and accessed with a browser, without needing to install software and allows the files to be stored safely on the corporate server.

What was instructive was the high quality of the presentation and the branding of the materials presented, also the way the VET sector has a repository they share for learning objects. This is something the tertiary sector could learn from.

Learning objects webinar

The Australian Flexible Learning Framework.will host a webinar on "e-Gems: Learning objects: Create, reuse and deploy for better teaching and learning online!", by Helen Lynch,Canberra Institute of Technology, 12.30pm, 11 May 2011.

e-Gems: Learning objects: Create, reuse and deploy for better teaching and learning online!

The 11 May e-Gems session will show practitioners how to create, reuse and deploy learning objects using the VET Reload Tool (open source software that can be used with Moodle, Blackboard, Connected Learning Community or Studywiz on a Mac or PC).

Learn how to assemble existing resources, eg word documents, digital photographs, html pages, video and PDF files, into a learning object.

Alternatively, find out how to add or remove pages from an existing learning object downloaded from an online repository such as LORN or the Toolbox Repository.

The session also looks at the importance of learning design in resource assembly.

It will be presented by Helen Lynch, who has worked as an educator and e-learning enthusiast in the vocational education and training and university sectors in NSW, carrying out flexible learning research and developing e-learning solutions for training organisations.

Currently the ACT Toolbox Champion, Helen is based at the Canberra Institute of Technology. Helen holds post graduate qualifications in educational management, online education and Indigenous education and is studying a doctorate at the University of Southern Queensland researching learning object reuse.

Details:
Date: Wednesday 11 May 2011
Time: 12.30pm – 1.30pm AEST
URL: http://tinyurl.com/egems11-reload

The e-Gems series of online seminars are presented by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework.

E-portfolios 2.0

The Australian Flexible Learning Framework has arranged for Dr Keith Pratt, (Fielding Graduate University, USA) to present on "Reflection and Projection for E-portfolios 2.0", in a free online event, 11am, 30 September 2010:

Group Facilitator, Carole McCulloch has set an e-portfolios challenge for you before the meeting-

• Try developing a sample eportfolio for yourself in a Google Site to share at this month's meeting
  
• Follow thes e simple instructions from Dr Helen Barrett:
  • ePortfolio Step by Step Process
  • Creating an Interactive Portfolio with Google Site

Digital Education Revolution Skills

Professor SV Raghavan and Senator Conroy both talked on the benefits of broadband for education at the World Computer Congress 2010 in Brisbane this week. But will teachers know what to do with broadband?

More work is needed on tools and skills for teachers to use the fibre. I can say this sort of thing now I am an award winning online educator. ;-)

While the federal government has done good work on educating teachers with projects such as Edna and the Australian Flexible Learning Framework, the investment is relatively small compared to that being spent on computer hardware and networking.

Recently I have been taking part in an online discussion in the LinkedIn Group: Higher Education Teaching and Learning, of how to present materials to students. What was worrying was that many teachers were replicating poor paper based education in the digital domain. Faced with the problem of students not reading long wordy documents on paper, they put them online, producing long wordy PDF documents. When the students did not read those, the teachers gave the students to hour long lectures on what was in the documents which the students (sensibly) had not read.

This week during the World Computer Congress in Brisbane I talked to a university professor who was having problems with email. They were keeping copies of all messages from students and book collaborators in the university mail system. As a result their mail box was clogged with copies of draft papers and books.

Universities provide tools for efficiently handling documents in learning management systems and e-portfolios. However, the system administrators may be too quick to remove all data from the system at the end of a course. This then requires the teachers and students to manually store duplicate copies of materials elsewhere. Multiplied thousands of times across schools, TAFEs and universities, this is a waste of teacher and student effort. Also the students will be learning poor e-literacy skills which they will then take with them into the workforce. I will be discussing some of this at the Canberra MoodlePosium, 7-8 October 2010.

The ANU asked me to prepare a 6 week e-learning course on electronic document management to be offered from early next year. This would incorporate material on electronic document management and web design courses I previously presented in ANU face to face courses.

One problem I had with this was making it interesting. When this material is part of a larger course the student has to do it, to complete the course. A standalone EDM course might appeal to a few records managers and librarians, but then they are more likely to want to do specialist courses designed just for them. What I might do is call the course "Working in the Cloud" and present it for all information professionals (including educators) needing to support efficient online work practices. That would explore efficiency both from the point of view of getting the work done and efficient technical use of the online resources.

E-learning Grants of $75,000 Available

The government funded Australian Flexible Learning Framework is offering Industry Integration of E-learning grants of up to $75,000 for industry to develop e-learning with registered training organisations (RTO). The idea is to have employers, industry and professional associations working with a TAFE or other RTO on e-learning design. There are 2010-2011 Industry Guidelines with more details. Also there is state based E-learning Innovations funding.

ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010 ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010

The ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010 (Melbourne, 3 to 4 November 2010), has issued a call for papers on the use of electronic portfolios in the vocational education and training (VET), higher education (HE) and adult and community education (ACE) sectors. Abstracts for Full papers, Works in Progress reports, Case Studies and Posters are due 4 June 2010

ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010

Submission for proposals

The theme of the ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010 is Widening participation - engaging the learner (see: http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/e-portfolios-australia).

Submission of proposal:

The ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010 Organising Committee invites the submission of proposals for:

• Full papers or Works in progress reports (peer-reviewed); full papers or works in progress reports of research findings and progress;
• Case studies (abstract only); discussions of key directions and findings of action research or current practice and ;
• Posters (abstract only): highly visual media communicating information about an innovation, tool, process or development.

Session duration:

• Paper presentations and Case studies: 25 minutes
• Posters: Posters will be displayed for the duration of the conference. There will be an hour allocated in the programme when poster presenters will be available near their posters to interact with conference participants.

Proposal themes:

Papers, reports, case studies and posters should relate to one or more of the following sub-themes:

• Key government educational initiatives:
  • Quality outcomes and standards;
  • Learner mobility and transitions between educational sectors; and
  • Supporting learners accessing the Compact for Young Australians and Retrenched Workers initiatives;
  • Learner study experiences, retention and course completions.

• Responsive learning and assessment practices:
  • Learning outcomes and reflective skills;
  • Recognition of prior learning (RPL), workplace learning and assessment processes;
  • Assessing graduate attributes and employability skills;
  • Discipline-specific initiatives;
  • Work-integrated learning, fieldwork and practicum experiences.

• Career pathways and lifelong learning:
  • Continuing professional development (CPD) leading to professional standards, reaccreditation and/or workforce development;
  • Gaining employment
  • Supporting non-traditional learners
  • Improved partnerships with industry;
• Implementing e-portfolios - successes and sustainability:
  • E-portfolios in the Web 2.0 environment
  • Technical standards supporting e-portfolios
  • Challenges and opportunities in e-portfolio implementation
  • Accessibility and e-portfolios
  • Sustainability and e-portfolios
  • Communities of practice
  
  

Papers, reports, case studies and posters not falling under these sub-themes may also be submitted for consideration, but should justify how the proposal complements the 'Widening Participation' conference theme.

Guidelines for Proposals:

Full Papers and Work in Progress reports are proposed by submission of an abstract (up to 400 words), and the full text of the paper which must be no more than 4,000 words including, appendices and references. As a general guide, a full paper should include an introduction, literature review and methodology, results, discussion and conclusions. Full papers are subject to double blind peer-review as required by DEEWR. Authors of successful submissions will be able to make minor corrections to the paper before final submission.

Case Studies are proposed by submission of an abstract (up to 400 words). Abstracts are subject to review by the ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010 Organising Committee.

Poster Presentations are proposed through submission of an abstract (up to 400 words). Posters are subject to review by the ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010 Organising Committee. Display versions should be sized between A3 -minimum and AO - maximum. You are not required to submit your 'Display' version; simply bring it with you to the Conference. Presenters are required to be in attendance with their poster during the allocated formal presentation period, to explain, discuss and to answer viewers' questions. While every effort will be made to ensure the safe handling of posters, the conference committee takes no responsibility for loss or damage of posters.

Paper submission process:

Please submit papers and abstracts to studenteportfolio@qut.edu.au by the due date as detailed below.

Due dates:

Abstracts (for Full papers and Works in Progress reports, Case Studies and Posters) - 4 June 2010

Author notification of acceptance - 2 July 2010

Full papers (final version) due - 2 August 2010

Review feedback notification - 6 September 2010

Final submission - 4 October 2010

Paper submission enquiries:

Please forward all enquires about the submission process to: studenteportfolio@qut.edu.au

From: Call for Papers, for ePortfolios Australia Conference 2010

E-portfolios for Vocational Education

The Australian Flexible Learning Framework have announced some very small grants for E-portfolio Implementation Trials in 2010 ($25,000 in total for three trials). Also there are: VET E-portfolio Data Protection Assessment, Verification of Learner Information Investigation, and the VET E-portfolios Roadmap.

It should be noted that these are vocational training initiatives funded by a consortium of the federal and state governments for TAFEs and other Registeed Training Organisations (RTOs). There are also e-portfolio initiatives within the higher education sector, funded by the federal government. So university courses already make use of e-portfolios, such as the ANU Engineering Internship (ENGN3200), where this makes up 20% of the assesment.

Australian E-portfolio Plan

A "VET E-portfolio Roadmap: A strategic roadmap for e-portfolios to support lifelong learning" (640 kbytes PDF, 16 June 2009) has been released by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework. This provides a useful 26 page overview of what electronic portfolios are, how they are useful in education and how they can be applied in Australia. Unfortunately AFLF published the plan as a difficult to read PDF document, rather than web format (excerpts appended).

AFLF is a state and federal funded body to support e-learning and has issued a call for participation in a VET E-portfolios Showcase in October 2009. Unfortunately the VET and higher education sectors are not coordinating their e-learning initiatives in Australia, with the federal government funding the wasted duplicated effort resulting from this. This is mostly the fault of the universities, who have difficulty accepting that the TAFEs are more advanced in e-learning than the universities are. This is dispite some reports recommended cooperation, such as QUT's "AeP ePortfolio Project - Final Project Report" (August 2008) which said something similar from the university point of view. This creates problems for organisations, such as ACS, which are involved in both vocational and masters level postgraduate education.

Contents
Section 1: Introduction 1
What is an e-portfolio? 2
Why are e-portfolios important to VET learners? 2
What is an e-portfolio system? 3
Activities or processes for a VET e-portfolio system 4
A reference model for VET e-portfolio systems 4
Section 2: VET E-portfolio Roadmap goals 6
Section 3: VET E-portfolio Roadmap key outputs 8
3.1 National guidelines for VET managers of learner information 8
3.2 Functional specifi cations for e-portfolio system implementers and developers 9
3.3 Strategies for embedding e-portfolios into VET 9
Section 4: VET E-portfolio Roadmap implementation strategy 10
Roadmap implementation strategy 10
Section 5: Getting involved 14
The role of jurisdictions and RTOs 14
For more information 15
Appendix 1: Summary of the VET E-portfolio Roadmap 16
Appendix 2: Key national policy drivers 19
Appendix 3: Defi nition of e-portfolio system services 21 ...

Appendix 1: Summary of the VET E-portfolio Roadmap

Portability
Goal 1: Enable portable e-portfolios and associated content to effectively support learner transitions and lifelong learning.

Requirements: A learner should be able to access and develop their e-portfolio throughout their lifelong learning journey. This will require them to be able to move their e-portfolio between various e-portfolio systems.

Strategy: A technical method for associating competencies, employability skills and other relevant frameworks/classifi cations to e-portfolio content/evidence will be investigated and recommended for the VET sector.

Import/export functional requirements for e-portfolio systems will be recommended and agreed nationally.

The use of a VET person profi le to facilitate the portability of e-portfolios which is interoperable with specifi cations such as auEduPerson8 specifi cation will be investigated.

Verification
This roadmap was commissioned by the Australian Flexible Learning Framework’s national E-portfolio business activity1
in 2008 to assist in the development of work to suppsaining system.

Goal 2: Enable electronic verifi cation of educational qualifi cations, membership of professional associations or trade/occupational licensing information.

Requirements: The ability to electronically verify evidence will help to streamline applications for employment, course admissions and recognition of prior learning processes.

Strategy: Existing systems for validating claims including Qualsearch9, Purple Passport10 and Digitary11 will be evaluated for their potential suitability in an Australian VET context. The Australian Graduation Statement for Higher Education and European Diploma Supplement will also be considered as part of this investigation.

Privacy
Goal 3: Ensure that personal data is protected and under the control of the e-portfolio owner.

Requirements: There are legal requirements for privacy which, along with agreements on ownership of content, need to be clearly articulated and addressed in e-portfolio implementations.

Strategy: Generic legal advice will be sought regarding privacy issues and the roles and responsibilities associated with the delivery of e-portfolio services.

Information and advice on privacy and ownership policies will be researched and guidelines for RTOs and developers of e-portfolio systems. This information will be based on best and emerging
practice in this area and use-cases illustrating common issues and scenarios will be provided.

Ownership
Goal 4: Ensure key stakeholders, including e-portfolio owners (learners) and organisations hosting e-portfolios systems, understand their copyright and intellectual property (IP)
obligations.

Requirements: Copyright and IP considerations can affect the access and usage rights for a range of different types of e-portfolio content.

Strategy: Guidelines concerning the management of copyright and IP in e-portfolio implementation will be developed for the VET sector. In particular:

• guidelines on licensing of materials and usage of third party materials
• guidelines on appropriae content.

The E-portfolio business activity will monitor relevant developments such as Creative Commons Australia, in particular ccLearn initiatives.12

Access control
Goal 5: Enable effective authentication methods for third parties seeking access to sensitive personal information.

Requirements: Effective digital security facilitates learners’ privacy rights under law, allowing only authorised access to protected content and services.

Strategy: A set of representative VET use-cases for identity, authentication and access control will be developed based on further stakeholder consultations. Although focused on e-portfolios, an identity framework for the VET sector will need to be broader in scope.

A trial of a user-centric identity framework approach such as OpenID or Information Cards will be undertaken.

The sector will also need to engage in related activities such as the higher education sector, auEduPerson and the work of the schools sector in developing a localised version of the SIF data model13 to form a common agreement on data attributes for students. (see actions under Portability above).

Guidance and support for RTOs implementing e-portfolio systems will be provided.

Infrastructure
Goal 6: Advocate the availability of suffi cient web connectivity, appropriate access devices, and suffi cient digital infrastructure.
Requirements: Access to appropriate infrastructure is required to support widespread adoption of e-portfolios within the sector.

Strategy: Infrastructure requirements for learners, e-portfolios and e-portfolio systems to support lifelong learning will be communicated to RTOs, jurisdictions and federal government (including the Digital Education Revolution initiative) and other relevant stakeholders.

Storage
Goal 7: Establish a shared understanding of storage issues and requirements for e-portfolios in VET.

Requirements: Storage agreements need to take into account that some e-portfolio content will be stored in the e-portfolio system, whilst some content will be stored in other systems or on the
internet.

Strategy: Guidance on storage of digital content for e-portfolios will be developed and agreed upon. This guidance will be informed by a number of key resources including higher education
sector’s Australian E-portfolio Project’s e-portfolio toolkit14 and JISC e-portfolio15 resources. It will be aimed at balancing the needs of learners, RTOs and the requirement for longevity of
e-portfolios.

Guidelines on supporting the longevity requirements for e-portfolios will be developed.

Embedding
Goal 8: Establish a strategic approach to developing effective e-portfolio practice.

Requirements: The uptake of e-portfolios as a teaching, learning and recognition tool needs to be accompanied through professional development, adequate business structures and support.

Strategy: The Framework’s E-portfolio business activity will play a central role in supporting the establishment and facilitation of communities of practice to provide assistance, dissemination of
information and a mentoring role for new users.

The business activity will also seek FLAG16 and AICTEC17 support to advocate the establishment of a cross sectoral working/reference group that focuses on issues such as policy, professional learning, standards and advocacy at national level to support a standards-based approach to e-portfolios across the sectors.

Transitions
Goal 9: Promote e-portfolio good practice which supports learner transitions and key national policy drivers such as RPL (recognition of prior learning) and fast-tracking apprenticeships.

Requirements: E-portfolios provide a means for presenting a variety of evidence from formal and informal learning environments which have been acquired through workplace and life-wide experiences.

Strategy: Pilot projects within the VET sector will be encouraged to further develop an understanding of the technical and policy requirements of learner transitions.

The COAG RPL community will be engaged to ensure e-portfolios support RPL processes. ...

From: "VET E-portfolio Roadmap: A strategic roadmap for e-portfolios to support lifelong learning", Australian Flexible Learning Framework, 16 June 2009