Google Application for Learning

We promote Google application for learnign and cooperation from the begin of the project. Now Brandon Hall research has issues and report "Using Google for Online Learning". , describing 25 esay-to-use applications.
It would be nice to read them, however, in the framework of the project, it is not worth the requested 190 USD.
What is our experience in using Google for online cooperation and communication?
It is limited. Usually, the proposal get a good feedback, but does not move to daily routines. Which are the reaosons? Why using these new tools is so slow? I would like to think about the following:
1. It is a tool for coopeation.Without cooperation, no need for a tool.
2. The dominating corporate culture does not encourage use of tools for cooperation and communication. I think also that the differences between a donor project and its stakeholders are significant. This makes online cooperation more diffiult.
3. We should live the change. The project was not always consistent and coherent in its message. We lack the man-power. We also need experience and stability, (especially in internet connection)
4. Time horizon: step-by-step, incrementally, we are improving our offer. The next steps will be to introduce to the VET Working Group and Steering committee


Furthermore, the differeAs a donor project, there initiative is greated with is

Participating in the ongoing global revolution in education

Can latest achievement in global education influence VET Kazakhstan? I do not know, but, I think, it makes sense to monitor latest tendencies and 2. reflect on ongoing issues in Kazakhstan.
The ongoing issue in VET Kazakhstan is that several hundrets of new teching materials will be purchased within the the State Investment Program. The question one might raise: how this ongoing process is aligned to the task of modernizing? Can it be made more efficient, cheaper and with a better input on learning outcomes, when we consider new developments?

And here is the new event: Flat world Knowledge, world's first publisher of commercial open-source college textbooks, received $8 million in venture capital. It wants to revolutionize the 8 billion US textbook market. Flat World's textbooks are written by well-paid, world-class authors. The new is the businss model: enter a mass market and charge for what the client is ready to pay. This will give a further push to the Open Source Movement.

What could it mean to VET Kazakhstan? Here is my wish list:
1. Publish the tender and the results on the internet. Today this is not the case. Lack of transparency increases transaction cost.
2. Require to put the content on the Internet as well. This can be done free-of-charge, required minimal efforts
3. Qualify the developers to use free-of-charge interactive web 2.0 elements, for example wikis, for improved peer review, better cooperation and communication.

Potential outcomes: higher-quality textbooks, which have better access by the community

Involved risks: existing tradition in copyrights, access to the internet, subject matter experts are notappropriate qualified for the internet.

Arguments against such an approach are: organizational culture, which avoids sharing and transparent decision-making; vested interests; ignorance; probably the most important factor is lack of knowledge about the possibility of the internet and open content

More success factors for a high-quality educational system

Written from an US-point of view, four more factors, influencing the quality of teaching: 

1. Support new teachers (In Norway new teachers are coached 20% of their time)

2. Time spend outside the classroom for mandate mentoring, preparing, meetings with parents etc.

3. Participation in decision-making, curricula as a broad framework

4. Lifelong learning and further qualification, with a clear incentive and stimulus to take courses.  

See also the report on "Professional Learning in the learning profession" 

Success factor: qualification and motivation of teachers

Identifying success factors when curricula are similiar?

Singapure and West Virginia share basic  curricula, but the educational outcomes differ. Singapure is highly successful.  Why this difference?

1. Only the top third of secondary-school graduates in Singapore can apply for teacher training.

2. Each year, teachers take an additional 100 hours of paid professional development

3. Profession is paid as well as science and engineering careers.

 

Google You Tube university

Apple started, now Google follows up: it started youtube edu a video-university. It is still focused on American universities. But, the idea is clear, it is easy, it does not require captial investment:
set-up an inventive system and promote a similar approach to Kazakh educational institutes.
Expected benefit: promoting a modern approach to teaching and sharing, identifying and disseminating best experienece, provding a diverse and high-quality educational resources to the students, raising awareness for the quality of teaching and deep integration of technology to improve educational outcomes.

Success factor: leadership commitment.
Apple announced today that it is expending its services, covering now all kind of knowledge, from museum trous to college lectures. I checked the service, listing to the lecture from Paul Collier about the Bottom Billion, an exciting book about the potential and the limits of aid in our days. 

Dissemination of social learning

Elliot Masie monitors the dissemination of social Networks and Social technologies for organization learning. The results show a high dynamic. According to the (self-selecting) data, 57 % of organization have collarboration portal, 62 % find vale in these new approaches and 77% support social learning in general. This contrasts with the fact that only 35 % of organizations have social learning projects, e.g.  social learning is often grassroot learning.  Organizational culture is the most important impediment. 

Role of the teacher: shifting from instructor-led training to networked learning

Jay Cross: The first wave of E-Learning failed because it aimed on replacing the human factor in learning within the framework of industrial society: «You cannot remove the humans from learning». While the nature of humans does not change, their behavior might change. New opportunities include learning at a time of need, in the context of work, from people in the know, and through virtual conversation. The teachers become «connectors, wiki gardeners, internal publicists, news anchors, and performance consultants». New digital competencies include

• bringing new members up to speed with the community’s technology

• identifying and spreading good technology practices

• supporting community experimentation

• assuring continuity across technology disruptions

• “keeping the lights on” (including back-ups, permissions, vendor payments, and domain registrations)

To a large extent, these requirements are utopia for secondary education in Kazakhstan. The reality are too often underpaid teachers near pension age, who do have for career and biological reasons other concerns than padagocial experiments. To a large extent, it was and it is their commitment and attitude that the VET system did not collapse. Thanks a lot! However, thinking ahead, there might be no more actual task than thinking about the teacher of the future. The life cycle of a teacher is around 10 years, including developing new univerisites and further education programmes, qualifiying teachers and gaining 2 -3 years of experience until a new teacher achieves becomes effective. This times correlates with internationale experience about the time required for changing a system like secondary education. The decisions which are made today will shape the system of tomorrow.  While it is not an issue of operative management, it is urgent!