Upload
harry-armstrong
View
217
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
22.11.2004H Laugesen
1
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
The ELFE project
Hans LaugesenELFE project coordinator
Educational Policy officer andInternational Secretary in GL, Denmark
22.11.2004H Laugesen
2
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Why ELFE?
A lot of money is spend on ICT in Schools High expectations of what ICT can
achieve Do the students learn more? Technical problems or lack of ICT-training
of teachers is often used as an excuse Do we know how to use ICT pedagogically
to optimise the learning process? Need for exchange of good practices Too often, only the frontrunners are
involved in the exchange of experiences
22.11.2004H Laugesen
3
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Purpose of ELFE
A European project created to achieve a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of using ICT in primary and secondary education
The ELFE project aims at investigating good practice in the use of ICT, which supports the teaching and learning process encourages students to develop new skills and
competences promotes an inclusive education for all students
22.11.2004H Laugesen
4
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Pedagogical questions
Promoting relevance, meaningfulness and engagement in both teaching and learning
Use of ICT to train new competences Virtual lessons as a mean of variation in
normal class lessons: blended face to face ed.
Use of ICT as a catalyst for a Whole School Development
Providing more educational options for students in remote areas
Are there pedagogical and social costs? how do we avoid loosing the low performing
students?
22.11.2004H Laugesen
5
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
ELFE structure
M ain activitiesG o a nd s tud y v is its (15 scho o ls)
E L F E w e b s ite2 con fe re nces
PartnersE T U C E
5 T e a che rs ' U n ion s (D ,D K ,E ,N ,P )P e da g og ica l E xp e rts
Chief Rapporteura c rit ica l frie nd
Political ApproachP e da g og ica l q ue stio ns a nd ob serva tio ns
P o lic y d e b a te in T e a che rs ' U n io nsP o lic y su g ge s tion s to th e C o m m iss ion
ELFEE xch a ng e o f e xpe rien ce
S tu dy tran s fe r to o th er scho o lsc re a te E u ro p ea n d e ba te o n p ed a go g ica l u se o f IC T
22.11.2004H Laugesen
6
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
ELFE partners
ETUCE and 5 ETUCE-organisations: GEW, Germany FNE, Portugal NUT, UK GL, Denmark Utdanningsforbundet, Norway
Researchers: Ulf Fedriksson, Mid Sweden University Gunilla Jedeskog, Linköping Univ., Sweden Elsebeth K. Sorensen, Aalborg University,
Denmark Tjeerd Plomp, Twente Univ., The Netherlands
22.11.2004H Laugesen
7
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Target groups and approach
Target groups: teachers teachers’ unions researchers
School visits: steering group visit to 3 schools in each 5 countries school to school visits (15 schools go and get a visit)
Two conferences: actors with experience meet (22.-23.11.04) teachers’ unions debate ICT-policy proposals (5.-
6.9.05)
Create a Web-based debate at European level
22.11.2004H Laugesen
8
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Visited Schools
English ELFE-schools Prince Albert Infants & Junior School (Birmingham) Hampstead School (Cricklewood, London) Greensward College (Hockley, Essex)
Danish ELFE-schools Langkaer Gymnasium (Århus, Århus County) Middelfart Gymnasium (Middelfart, Funen County) Kalbyrisskolen (a primary and lower secondary school in
Næstved) German ELFE-schools
Hans-Böckler Berufskolleg (Marl) Pestalozzi Grundschule (Marl) Max-Plank Gymnasium (Duisburg)
Norwegian ELFE-schools Hitra videregående skole (Sør-Trøndelag County) Saltdal videregående skole (Saltdal Municipality) Steigen sentralskole (Steigen Municipality)
Portuguese ELFE-schools EBI Vasco da Gama (Lisbon) Escola Secundária Santa Maria Maior (Viana do Castelo) EB 23 Carapinheira
22.11.2004H Laugesen
9
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
School to school visits
Each of the 15 ELFE-schools go once and get a visit once
Each school can send 2 persons Visits will take place during spring 2005 Planned as 4 days/3 nights visits Deadline for return of visit priority
sheet:6th of December 2004
Remember 15 schools to choose from – not 5
22.11.2004H Laugesen
10
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
ELFE web-site
Information on ELFE Progress of the ELFE-project Small reports from school visits and
meetings in Steering Committee Debate forum on
Pedagogical use of ICT in education Contact between schools involved in ELFE Policy debate among teachers unions on
ICT in ed.
Useful links
22.11.2004H Laugesen
12
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Debate-furum at ELFE web-site
22.11.2004H Laugesen
13
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Education-policy questions
Do we have recommendations in the end?: Is there an ideal balance between
virtual lessons and normal lessons? Teachers’ use of ICT: Balance between
frontrunners and a minimum level Which kind of pre-service education and
in-service training is necessary? Physical requirements at schools? Suggestions for relevant indicators
regarding the use of ICT in education? etc.
22.11.2004H Laugesen
14
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Preliminary observations 1
After the Steering Group’s visits to 12 schools: Make ICT-use part of school policy and create a
Whole School Development environment Evident effect of Pedagogical ICT driver licence Create conditions for teachers use of ICT and Have a vision, debate minimum performance,
and leave room for frontrunners Distance education in remote areas or in small
schools means more educ. options and can be combined with a social learning environment
22.11.2004H Laugesen
15
1st E
LFE C
onfe
rence
, B
russ
els
22.-
23
.11
.04
Preliminary observations 2
So far we have not seen any hard-core proofs that the use of ICT is increasing the quality of education
There is a feeling among teachers that the use of ICT contributes to strengthen the students ability to work in an independent way
A risk that the need to train oral skills is forgotten – written dimension increases workload
A risk of less opportunity to have direct face to face discussions in the classrooms
You do not need to loose the low performing students – but be aware not to do so