Content uploaded by Pekka Kaemaeraeinen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Pekka Kaemaeraeinen on Dec 06, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
1
Logbook of “Working & Learning” blogs on Learning Layers 2016
by Pekka Kämäräinen
1. Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 1: Catching up
with ITB/Pont team January 20th, 2016
This year I had a longer winter break, so I have started my working year with our EU-funded
Learning Layers (LL) project in the middle of January. As a consequence, my first working
days have been filled with catch-up meetings in the local and regional contexts and as video-
conferences at the level of our European project. I try to sum up the results, challenges and
impressions with a series of blogs. In the first one I give a brief report on the first meeting of
our local LL team involving colleagues from ITB and Pontydysgu. (A more detailed report is
available in the Learning Layers Google Drive document
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lgL4hCjkaRZnrY17E0swQcvxWqR7XvrkmaK2fnUhh_s.)
In our first joint meeting of this year we started with a situation assessment on the piloting
with the Learning Toolbox (LTB). My colleagues had taken some time to test the latest
version and discovered several points that needed improvement. They had reported them
with Trello cards and with an e-mail to the LTB developers – which were well received as
precise feedback that is being taken up. On the whole, we are happy that both Android and
iOS versions are available. Yet, the fundamental challenge is to introduce interactive
communication channels and group functionality. These are the key requirements of the
users in training centres and construction companies. Since our main application partner
Bau-ABC is now hosting short-term continuing vocational training (CVT) schemes in January
and February, there is some time before the apprentices will return, Yet, we (the developers
and we as the facilitators) need to get ready to start active piloting in March. We were happy
to note that we have a German version of LTB Manual (thanks to Jaanika Hirv from TLU)
and an English translation (thanks to Martina Lübbing from Pont). Yet, we need to do more
work with training to support the roll-out. (For this purpose we had scheduled a working
meeting with Bau-ABC for the next day, see my next blog).
Our second major point was the situation assessment, where we stand with the acquisition
of follow-up projects to Learning Layers. Here, several things had happened by the end
of the year and were in process in the beginning of the year. Firstly, the pending final
assessment on the Learning Layers follow-up project in CVT (support for work-related
training and learning of general construction site managers – Geprüfte Polier) is being
prepared. Also, the estimated start time has been announced (provided that the assessment
is positive). Secondly, the recently approved cluster initiative “Bauen 4.0″ (Construction 4.0)
has been approved and the consortium (involving among others Bau-ABC and ITB) has
been invited to submit a set of mutually linked project proposals that focus on digital
transformation in construction sector (including consequences for training). Thirdly, we have
started the preparation of a project proposal for Horizon 2020, Topic “Technologies for
Learning and Skills” (taking into account the work of the ITB-project Kompetenzwerkst@tt
and of Learning Layers). In addition to this, we (ITB) have been invited as partners to some
other proposals that may have a role in the follow-up of the LL project.
2
In addition to this we discussed about participation in forthcoming conferences and (related)
publication plans. Both of these topics will be taken up more systematically in our next
meeting. I think this is enough of our first meeting. On the next day we had a working
meeting with Bau-ABC.
2. Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 2: Catching up
with the fieldwork in Bau-ABC January 20th, 2016
In my previous blog I started a series of reports on the ‘start of the year 2016′ meetings in
with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. The first post reported on the first
meeting of the local LL teams of ITB and Pont in Bremen. This second post reports on our
first working visit to Bau-ABC to discuss the current tasks in our fieldwork. From ITB Ludger
Deitmer and I participated, from Bau-ABC Melanie Campbell and Kerstin Engraf. (A more
detailed report on this meeting is available (in German) in the Learning Layers Google Drive
document https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lgL4hCjkaRZnrY17E0swQcvxWqR7XvrkmaK2fnUhh_s.)
Firstly we took up some issues that were already discussed in the ITB-Pont meeting, in
particular the situation in the development of Learning Toolbox and the timeline for pilot
testing and evaluation. Our conclusion was that it is crucial to get the interactive
communication channel and the group functionality (in addition to some other improvements)
for the pilot version to be tested from March on. The active period for pilot testing in Bau-
ABC will be from March to the end of May. The optimal period for evaluation measures will
be the end of May and beginning of June. This year the summer holiday will start in the
middle of June and and by 24th of July.
Secondly we noted the situation with the new projects and in the preparation of new
proposals. Considering the new project on continuing vocational training (CVT) we
discussed the need of some bridging measures already in the context of the ongoing LL
project (see the next point on User Survey). Concerning the cluster-initiative “Bauen 4.0″ we
noted that colleagues from Bau-ABC cannot attend in the first meeting (on the coming
Friday) but ITB will be represented and discuss some joint project ideas that were agreed
earlier. We also agreed to cooperate with the preparation of a proposal for Horizon 2020,
Topic “Technologies for Learning and Skills”. As a specific possibility for Bau-ABC we
discussed the funding program of the German Ministry of Education (BMBF) to support
digitisation of intermediate training centres. We agreed to get back to this once Bau-ABC
has internally agreed on its priorities (in the light of two alternative funding priorities).
Thirdly, we discussed the continuation of the User Survey (on mobile technologies and
web apps/tools as support for learning). In this context the Bau-ABC colleagues emphasised
the urgency to collect data from the participants of the continuing vocational training (CVT)
schemes that are present in Bau-ABC during the January and February months. We
checked the questionnaire that had been developed last year and agreed to use it (with one
minor amendment). We also agreed that it is useful to start again a User Survey with
apprentices when they come in March.
Fourthly, we discussed the continuation of the training campaign based on “Theme
Rooms”. In general, this had been viewed positively, but continuity would have been
needed to sustain the learning gains. However, due to the heavy workload provided by the
CVT schemes, it was not possible to start immediately in January. Therefore, we concluded
that we should also carry out a mini-survey on the use of digital media and web tools/apps
among Bau-ABC trainers (Lehrwerkmeister). Based on the results we could then see the
need for some ‘refreshing the basic skills’ sessions. These should take place in February
3
before starting a new full cycle of Theme Rooms in March. When preparing the next cycle of
Theme Rooms we should also introduce Learning Toolbox (LTB) to the Bau-ABC trainers
who are engaged as tutors of the Theme Rooms.
In addition we discussed an interesting new initiative to develop mobile apps and web
resources for construction sector – in particular for the well-builders (Brunnenbauer). This
topic merits a blog of its own a little later (once the start-of-the-year meetings have been
reported). Finally, we discussed shortly our preparation for the LL project consortium
meeting. On this topic we got new information from the video conference of the Work
Package Leaders of the LL project (that took place when we were having our meeting).
I guess this is enough on this meeting. The next challenge is to summarise the results of the
WP Leaders’ video conference (and to draw conclusions for the construction pilot).
3. Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 3: Preparation of
the consortium meeting in Innsbruck January 20th, 2016
In my two previous blogs I started a series of reports on the ‘start of the year 2016′ meetings
in with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. In the first post I reported on the
meeting of the LL teams of ITB and Pont, and in the second post on our working meeting in
Bau-ABC. In this third post I give an account on the video conference in which the Work
Package Leaders of the LL project discussed the preparation of our next consortium meeting
in Innsbruck (2.2.-5.2.2016).
Below I try follow the reconstruct the discussion based on the recording of the meeting (in
which I could not participate). I try to put an emphasis on the thematic blocks (and on the
specific accents) that were set for the preparation of future activities. I do not try to give a
comprehensive report but rather limit myself to the points that we should take up in the
construction pilot team.
1) The integrated deliverable of the LL project of the Year 4
The idea of a single integrated deliverable was already discussed at the end of the Y3
Review meeting and it was agreed with great enthusiasm in the consortium. For our further
work it is of importance that this deliverable is interpreted as the “Layers package of
exploitables” (a comprehensive package of useful objects/resources to support exploitation
of results). Now this idea is taking shape in different thematic blocks (see below).
2) Documentation of the impact of project with “Layers scorecards”
Tobias Ley had already in December presented a practical solution for documenting impact
with the help of ‘scorecards’ that can be used in different field activities. The basic card has
three main fields for describing a) the situation before the LL project, b) the contribution of
the LL project and c) the situation after the project. In addition, the card has smaller fields for
specifying different aspects of the impact. During the final year the project can collect
booklets of scorecards within different activities and highlight ‘evidence of the month’. (See
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7vXuqBBjr9PX1RxUkpmZUt5Zkk/view .) This tool will be
developed further in the Innsbruck meeting.
3) Collection of ‘training materials’ to support the roll-out of LL tools
Pablo Franzolini and Kai Pata presented the idea, how to include the component of ‘training
materials’ into the deliverables. Already during the Y3 Pablo has supported the healthcare
pilot team in preparing video material for webinars (with special emphasis on filming from
different angles and making the presentations more lively). Whilst the use of webinars and
videos have so far been rather tool-centered, the idea is now to shift the emphasis from
4
single tools to combined use of tools in order to meet context-specific needs. (In this respect
the demonstrations in the Y3 Review meeting were rehearsals for such materials.) As was
mentioned in the discussion, we need to consider, when and how we can produce such
material for different pilot sectors and spin-off initiatives.
4) Bringing together different evaluation agendas
The discussion on the evaluation activities – led by Ronald Maier and Stefan Thalmann –
was inspired by the key question: “How to document changes in the patterns of learning in
the context of work in the pilot sectors (including the role of web tools/apps and mobile
technologies?” It became evident that the more conceptual and context-oriented inquiries
need to be supported by technical data collection (whenever it is possible) and these
aspects need to linked to each other. In a similar way positive and negative findings
regarding changes vs. obstacles to changes need to be discussed from the perspective of
promoting innovations and marketing products and services.
5) Further discussion on Dev-Ops model, Design patterns and Design-based research
One of the recommendations of the Y3 Review meeting was to enrich the Dev-Ops model
with more elements of user engagement (that were presented in the sectoral reports). As a
partial response to this, the meeting discussed the plan to prepare a comprehensive
presentation on the Dev-Ops model, on Design patterns and on the LL approach(es) to
Design-based research. It was agreed that the Confer Tool should be used to support this
work. This work will be led by Ralf Klamma and John Cook.
6) Integrative group picture of parallel (mutually coordinated) exploitation initiatives
Already from the beginning of the year Gilbert Peffer and Raymond Elferink have organised
bilateral or trilateral conversations with LL partners to create a comprehensive model of
exploitation activities. The aim is to compress the pictures given by different exploitation
stories and to create more transparency between different initiatives. In this way different
partners can find their roles and possibilities in a joint group picture. And with the help of this
model the partners can trace the changes from current project partnership to future
partnerships (in follow-up projects) or future business relations (in commercial exploitation
activities). Alongside this work the clarification of IPR issues will be continued as a sub-
theme of defining these partnership or business relations.
…
I think this as much as I can report on this meeting. At the moment we (the ITB-team) are
preparing ourselves for the bilateral/trilateral exploitation talks with Gilbert (and Raymond).
We are looking forward to this useful milestone in the set of the ‘start-of-the-year meetings’.
5
4. Start of year 2016 with Learning Layers – Part 4: Working with
the LL exploitation model January 22nd, 2016
In my three previous blogs I wrote a series of reports on the ‘start of the year 2016′ meetings
in with our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. In the first post I reported on the
meetings of the ‘local’ LL teams of ITB, Pont, and Bau-ABC (in Bremen and Rostrup). In the
third post summarised a video conference that discussed a set of themes for our next
consortium meeting in Innsbruck (2.2.-5.2.2016). In this fourth post I report on the video
conference of the ITB team with our LL colleagues Gilbert Peffer and Raymond Elferink on
the Exploitation model for the LL project. In my previous blog I had already given the
following characterisation of the work of Gilbert and Raymond with this model:
“… Gilbert Peffer and Raymond Elferink have organised bilateral or trilateral conversations
with LL partners to create a comprehensive model of exploitation activities. The aim is to
compress the pictures given by different exploitation stories and to create more transparency
between different initiatives. In this way different partners can find their roles and possibilities
in a joint group picture. And with the help of this model the partners can trace the changes
from current project partnership to future partnerships (in follow-up projects) or future
business relations (in commercial exploitation activities).”
Below I have copied the current draft of the Exploitation model:
In our discussion in the video conference and after it we started a process of sensemaking,
how to fit our exploitation initiatives into this landscape and how to grasp the zones of
possible activities that we had not yet thought of. Here I try to interpret different areas of the
exploitation model from this perspective:
6
a) The (peripheral) support area
Two fields in the model can be characterised as a (peripheral) support area for emerging
follow-up activities with different intensity of support measures:
a1) “The Learning Layers Association” can be seen as a light-weight form to continue the
cooperation across project consortium as an interest group that promotes the tools and
ideas of the LL project in new contexts. For this purpose the interest group cam organise
joint search conferences or workshops with new potential application partners. (Here the
contacts of the LL partners at OEB with the UNHCR might serve as a clue for looking
partners for such search conferences.)
a2) “The Learning Layers Cooperative” can be seen as a more committed service alliance
– grouping of LL partners that are ready to support new initiatives with technical advice and
facilitation in project creation. (Such cooperation has already been practiced between
different partners to give shape for spin-off projects.)
b) The Research & Development area
The importance of this area is obvious, since we need to continue with R&D projects to
develop the products and services of the LL project to more mature stage. Here we need to
have a more differentiated look at the R&D agendas to pursue. Without going into details of
specific initiatives it is worth taking into consideration the following type of R&D activities:
b1) Comprehensive follow-up projects (Horizon 2020 etc) that focus on further
development of integrative toolsets for/with specific application partners – engaging different
kinds of expertise from the LL project but linking it to new contexts.
b2) Specific R&D projects (e.g. within cluster initiatives) that link the further development of
LL tools and similar toolsets to technical innovation programs.
Here the model emphasises that the R&D area needs to involve the application partners and
the commercial partners as well (in order to take the products and services further).
c) The commercial exploitation area
We have already become aware of the fact that software development in research context
may have different working patterns/perspectives than software development as customer
service. This is reflected in the ‘commercial exploitation area’ by differentiating between
three kinds of organisational entities:
c1) New enterprises (social/commercial) that dedicate themselves on further development
of LL tools, software and services as their core business.
c2) Existing partners (private/public organisations) that continue working on the basis of
their business models or institutional frameworks.
Here the model suggests that if new entreprises emerge, preferential ‘giving back’
partnership relations should be agreed in the founding processes. (Also, new enterprises
need advisory boards.)
c3) Third party organisations (SMEs, training providers, service providers, cluster
organisations) need to be involved with appropriate partnership agreements.
Altogether, the model was shaped with an idea of an “Entrepreneurial symbiosis’. I am
looking forward to our next phase of working with this model in our project consortium
meeting in Innsbruck.
7
5. LL Consortium meeting in Innsbruck – Part One: Event with
Austrian clusters February 7th, 2016
Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its consortium meeting in
Innsbruck. Before the project meeting the hosts from UIBK had arranged a special event to
present LL tools for guests from Austrian clusters and networks. In this first post I will focus
on this ‘warm-up’ event. In the subsequent posts I will discuss the general results of the
meeting and the specific results of exploitation sessions (from the perspective of
construction pilot).
The event and the setup
As indicated above, the hosts from UIBK had prepared a stakeholder event to present the LL
toolsets and services (work in progress). The participants represented Standortagentur
Tirol (a Tyrolean cluster organisation, Ausbilderforum Tirol (a Tyrolean forum of trainers in
vocational education and training (VET)) and vocational teacher education programs from
Pädagogische Hochschule Tirol and University of Innsbruck (Wirtschaftspädagogik).
The meeting room was arranged as four round tables and the event was organised as a
‘world café’. Firstly Ronald Maier gave a brief introduction into the LL project and into the
tools/toolsets to be presented. In each table the participants got a 10-15 minutes
presentation to one LL tool/toolset. Then the groups switched clockwise and got another
presentation. In this way the following tools/toolsets were presented: “Bits and Pieces” (by
Sebastian Dennerlein), “Learning Toolbox” (by Gilbert Peffer), “Living Documents” (by
Christina Sarigianni) and “AchSo!” (by Markus Manhart).
The Learning Toolbox table
For me and the colleagues from Bau-ABC (Melanie Campbell and Kerstin Engraf) it was a
natural choice to join Gilbert in presenting the Learning Toolbox (LTB). In these
presentations we could give an overview of the LTB as a mobile framework and as an
integrative toolset. We were happy to present fresh insights into the mobile app, into the
tilestore and into the contexts of deployment in Bau-ABC. From the participants we got
questions regarding the use of LTB in training and in work processes as well as use of LTB
in a personal learning environment.We were happy to discuss the development so far and
the potentials that we see in the LTB (but made the point that phase of deployment is yet to
come). Our counterparts were happy with this information and expressed their interest to
learn more in the coming times. At the same time Ludger Deitmer completed the whole
round of topic tables and got an update on all tools/toolsets as they stand now.
…
The event did not last long and the time was effectively used in the groups. Therefore, I only
have a vague idea on the discussions in parallel tables. Yet, my impression is that we
altogether could give informative and interesting presentations. The participants were clearly
interested and congratulated the project for a good event. We could happily recommend the
organisers of the next consortium meeting to prepare a similar ‘warm-up’ event as well.
8
6. LL Consortium meeting in Innsbruck – Part Two: Working
forward in the meeting, February 7th, 2016
Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its consortium meeting in
Innsbruck. In the previous post I discussed the ‘warm-up’ event that the hosts organised
with representatives of Austrian clusters and networks. In this post I discuss the work in the
meeting and the general results. In the final post I will discuss the results of exploitation
sessions (from the perspective of construction pilot).
In a similar way as I did when reporting on the preparation, I will try to capture the main
thematic blocks and the essentials of the conversations and conclusions:
1) Overview of the current phase of the project – working perspective: In his opening
presentation the scientific coordinator Tobias Ley (TLU) restated the approach to present the
results of the final year in one single package – with the emphasis to support the exploitation
activities. This approach was reconfirmed by the partners.
2) Further development of the DevOps-Use model: Ralf Klamma (RWTH) presented an
updated picture on the DevOps-Use model and how it has been introduced into the LL
project. As the newest development he reported on the Community Application Editor (CAE)
as a further support for dialogue between users and developers. Here again, the plan to
produce a conceptually based overview on design-based research and design patterns in
the LL project was restated.
3) Production of ‘training materials’ and dissemination materials: Pablo Franzolini
(CIMNE) gave a brief presentation on this topic. He drew attention to the work that had
already started with the healthcare pilot and the tools/combinations of tools that are used.
Currently, this work has resulted in a relatively wide set of “Frequently Asked Questions”
videos with short duration. Whilst this work was appreciated, we concluded that there is a
need to coordinate the efforts to produce such materials and more content-related promotion
videos. A working group was set up to prepare a proposal for producing “Layers OER”
materials (and to address the orientation to OER in the follow-up phase).
4) Documentation of project achievements with “scorecards”: TLU had prepared a
short workshop session to test the draft ‘scorecards’ by filling them with exemplary project
activities. In the first phase we described the situation before the LL project, the intervention
of the LL project and (inasmuch as it was possible) the situation after the intervention. In the
second phase we used coloured cards to specify different aspects of the impact. This
exercise helped us to get a common understanding on the kinds of activities to be reported
and on the kind of impact to be stated. (TLU will follow this up.)
5) Deployment of LTB and related evaluation measures: In a set of group sessions we
had the chance to discuss the technical development of LTB and plan the deployment and
evaluation measures.
5a) Technical development of LTB: The developers had presented a working document
that highlighted the following points: a) addressing the stacks to groups of users, b) creating
a stack file system (SFS), c) content creation and sharing with the help of SFS, d) enabling
bottom-up communication via chat channel. The users reported on improvements that are
needed in the navigation and in the instructions. In this conversation we reached an agree of
the necessary measures to be taken by the end of February.
9
5b) Deployment and evaluation measures: Based on these conclusions we could reach
agreements on the introduction of LTB for training purposes and on a synchronised start of
evaluation measures. We identified primary pilot groups from the trades of carpenters and
well-builders and agreed on a timeline for kick-off workshop (with tool introduction and focus
group), interim workshop and concluding workshop. We also agreed on the accompanying
communication and feedback. (The detailed results were summarised by the powerpoints of
the UIBK colleagues).
6) The exploitation measures: During the first afternoon we had a general introduction to
the exploitation model (see my earlier blog on the preparation of this meeting). We also got
an explanation, what role a jointly prepared and agreed ‘exploitation manifesto’ can play as a
working agreement. We also were briefed of the IPR issues to be clarified. With this
preparation the partners were invited to present their exploitation plans and/or intentions.
During these presentations we were asked to list our wishes to have bilateral talks (persons,
topics). On the second day a special time slot was reserved for these talks. (During this
session there was a fire alarm and all people were evacuated outside. As we were well
prepared, we could continue our bilateral talks there as well.)
…
I stop my reporting on the meeting here because I (and my colleagues from ITB and Bau-
ABC) couldn’t attend on the last day. Thus, I have missed the wrap-up of the exploitation
sessions and the discussion on the exploitation manifesto. We will have an opportunity to
catch up very soon. Therefore, in the final post of this series I will focus on the exploitation
plans/initiatives of the construction sector partners.
7. LL Consortium meeting in Innsbruck – Part Three: Presenting
exploitation initiatives February 8th, 2016
Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its consortium meeting in
Innsbruck. In the previous posts I discussed firstly the ‘warm-up’ event with Austrian
clusters/ networks and secondly our project meeting and its general results. In this post I will
discuss the results of the exploitation sessions (presentations and bilateral talks).
1. The setup of the exploitation sessions
As I had indicated in the previous post, we had firstly a general introduction to the
exploitation model that served as a reference model. We also agreed to work towards a
jointly agreed ‘exploitation manifesto’ that helps us to settle the IPR issues. With this
preparation the partners were invited to present their exploitation plans and/or intentions. A
major part of the session was dedicated to the presentations of partners (or groups of
partners), altogether 15. Then, on the next day we had a special session for bilateral or
trilateral ‘matchmaking talks’ (on the basis of expressions of interests indicated during the
first session).
2. Contributions of the Construction sector partners
2a) The presentation of ITB/Pont (Bremen) & Bau-ABC teams highlighted firstly some key
questions for the LL project and then a further challenge for follow-up activities. It also gave
10
an overview on tools and services developed so far. Based on this background the
presentation drew then attention to two kinds of emerging R&D projects:
● The DigiProB project as a spin-off from LL in the context of Continuing Vocational
Training (CVT). The technical challenge is to reuse/repurpose an integrative toolset to
support Personal Learning Environments of CVT participants. The social challenge is to
support individual learners (who are learning alongside work) with the aim to
demonstrate with work-related projects that they have acquired higher (managerial)
qualifications in construction sector.
● The “Bauen 4.0″ has been selected as a recognised cluster initiative and is invited to
submit specific project proposals. One of the initiatives discussed in the cluster meetings
is a project for incorporating know-how on Building Information Modelling (BIM) to the
CVT schemes for advanced construction craftsmen in carpentry and woodwork
(Holzbau). Here we see a chance to make use of LL tools.
Alongside these examples we presented two cases in which the integrative toolset Learning
Toolbox can be brought into collaboration and exchanges with third party software/services
(who were affiliated with construction sector stakeholders).
● Pontydysgu had been contacted by Construction Excellence Wales, Construction
Industry Training Board and a consortium of four FE colleges with interests in the
Learning Toolbox. In particular there was an interest to link the LTB with the e-learning
environment that had been developed by the FE colleges for construction sector
apprentices.
● Bau-ABC had been contacted by a new company that continues the prior work of a
company that had been producing handbooks for well-builders. The new company
focuses on developing mobile apps and digital contents. This company will launch its
products during February 2016 and is already making contacts with key players in
domain-specific education and training.
2b) The presentation of Bau-ABC: The Bau-ABC team had prepared a separate
presentation in which they brought forward their interests in further development and
promotion of LTB. In this respect the presentation summarised the immediate benefits for
individual users (urgencies for developers), the benefits for Bau-ABC as training provider
and multiplier and the prospects for cooperation between Bau-ABC and the developers of
LTB and related LL tools and services. In this way Bau-ABC outlined the working
perspectives with which it positions itself on the “Exploitation map” to be drawn later.
3. The bilateral talks
After the presentation session our requests for bilateral talks with other presenters (with
eventual topics to be discussed) were collected. Then a similar ‘world café’ session was
organised as in the warm-up event. We had four tables for rotation but this time no fixed
‘table hosts’. Instead, we were rotating with uneven opportunities for the talks. In some
sessions we participated as wider groups, in some sessions as individuals. At some point we
were interrupted by fire alarm and the whole building was evacuated to an outdoor meeting
point. (The fire was put out promptly, the fire brigade just needed to check the situation and
that the smoke was properly ventilated. Yet, this all took that much time that we couldn’t
properly complete the session.)
At this point it is not necessary to report on all bilateral talks in which I/we were involved.
Some of them focused on very specific questions and very particular interests. Some were
11
talks on emerging ideas for future projects that need further conversations. In addition – due
to the interruption – we didn’t have a chance for some talks that we had on our list.
Therefore, it have prepared a list of topics for further talks to be continued at a later date:
● ‘Cross-sectoral’ talks on the uses of LTB (and other LL tools) taking into
account prior work with nurse education and nurse education networks in Germany
and England.
● ‘Cross-institutional’ talks on the use of LTB and other LL tools/services to
support problem-, project- and practice-based learning in vocational education and
training (VET) and/or Vocational Higher Education (notably in Germany, Estonia and
Austria).
● ‘Cross-curricular’ talks on the use of LTB and other LL tools in the activities of
vocational teacher education/ training the trainers (notably in Germany and in
Austria, e.g. the partners of the pre-event).
● ‘Sustainability’ talks with LTB developers on their new organisational initiative
and the role of R&D initiatives.
● ‘Scalability’ talks on the experience with the ‘Theme Room’ training in Bau-
ABC to adapt the approach for multiplier activities. (These talks will be based on the
involvement of the initial contributors and other interested parties).
I think this is enough of these sessions. Due to our tight schedules we couldn’t be present in
the final sessions of the meeting. But we are sure that there results will be discussed in
several follow-up meetings. Given, that we are entering an intensive period of fieldwork, we
need to keep the exploitation issues on our agendas.
12
8. Possible use of Learning Toolbox in Bau-ABC training – three
exemplary cases, February 22nd, 2016
Last week we had two working visits to the training centre Bau-ABC in the contexts of our
EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. The aim of these visits was firstly to clarify, in
what kinds of projects Bau-ABC trainers (Lehrwerkmeister) have planned to use Learning
Toolbox (LTB) in the forthcoming pilot phase. Secondly we wanted to clarify what measures
need to be taken to facilitate the Internet access in Bau-ABC. Thirdly we wanted to clarify,
how to link third party apps or complementary tools to LTB to meet specific needs. The two
latter points have been covered by internal notes. The first point merits public attention,
therefore this blog gives a quick overview on the plans of Bau-ABC trainers.
During the two visits the Bau-ABC trainers presented three exemplary cases for
implementing LTB in their training. The first case (developed together with Lothar Schoka)
focuses on apprentices projects in trade of well-builders (Brunnenbauer). The second case
(developed together with Thomas Weertz) deals with training materials and facilitation of
learning in the learning area ‘health and safety’ (Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz).
During the second working visit a third case was brought to picture by Markus Pape and
Kevin Kuck: a joint project of Carpenters (Zimmerer) and Bricklayers (Maurer).
a) The Brunnenbauer-pilot is adjusted to the start of a new group in Bau-ABC and the
introduction of the LTB comes along with their induction to project-based learning. The use
of LTB will not cover entirely the documentation of project work of apprentices (plans,
reports, certificates) but will support it. The main thrust for the trainer is to provide support
material (Zusatzmaterial, e.g. Extracts of relevant DIN-norms). Also, the work of apprentices
can be supported with digital worksheets (lists of tools and materials) that can be produced
with the help of apps made available via LTB. Here, the apprentices could present digital
interim versions and get feedback before completing the projects. As a use-case for two-way
communication, Schoka indicated that apprentices can produce and share photo sets of
construction sites of their companies as eventual targets for on-site-visits of the whole group.
b) Concerning the theme “Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz”, the competent
body in the construction sector (BG Bau) has produced a comprehensive set of modularised
reference materials (Baukasten) and a special program for young craftsmen. In addition to
these, Bau-ABC uses a special compendium for trainers (KomPass). These materials are
available on the net. In addition, in each of their projects the apprentices are required to fill a
risk analysis form regarding possible occupational hazards with the tasks
(Gefährdungsbeurteilung). The advantage of using LTB with this theme is that it enables
delivery of compressed information (checklists, extracts of information sheets, model
solutions with feedback) as well use of Quiz tools (ordinary quiz or detecting errors).
c) The joint project of Zimmerer and Maurer was based on the traditional technique of
building houses with wooden frames and brick walls (Fachwerkhaus). Bau-ABC projects with
smaller constructions using that technique serve as cooperation exercises between these
two trades. By using LTB and creating a joint stack it is possible to
● give an overview on the common project (as a whole),
● on related standards,
● to distribute the tasks between the trades
13
● to organise the boundary-crossing exercises of Zimmerer and Maurer in each
others’ tasks and to
● coordinate the collaboration between the two trades.
After these working visits we are heading towards the pilots in the coming weeks and
arranging the necessary support. We will report more on the pilots when we take further
steps with the implementation.
9. Start of Learning Toolbox pilots in Bau-ABC – Part One: The
Kick-off event 14.3.2016 April 3rd, 2016
On Monday the 14th of March we experienced a great day for our EU-funded Learning
Layers (LL) project. We had the kick-off event of the piloting with the Learning Toolbox
(LTB) in Bau-ABC (the training centre for construction sector in Rostrup). On the whole, this
was a manifold event with different sessions and different activities (with focus on tool
development, implementation in different trades and evaluation measures). And, moreover,
the event was organised as parallel activities in two trades – the carpenters (Zimmerer) and
the well-builders (Brunnenbauer). In this post I try to give some first-hand impressions on the
sessions with the group of carpenters (and complement them with some remarks on the
parallel group of well-builders). I know that the evaluators from the LL team of the University
of Innsbruck (UIBK) will give more detailed accounts on these sessions and on their
recordings on the talks with apprentices. From my perspective it is important to get a picture
on the process that was kicked off with the Learning Toolbox (LTB) to be used by the
apprentices.
Introduction of the Learning Toolbox (LTB) in the group of carpenters (Zimmerer)
In the group of carpenters we (the LL project partners) had firstly the chance to present the
Learning Toolbox as an integrative toolset to be used in the forthcoming training projects of
the apprentices. Gilbert Peffer presented the essentials and then the apprentices installed
the LTB apps on their smartphones. Then the trainer of carpenters, Fidi Bruns explained the
training project of the next few weeks for the group. After this session and a break, the other
trainer of carpenters, Markus Pape, gave an overview of the parent stack and of the
daughter stacks that he had prepared for the project. After these introductory sessions we
had a group discussion with the carpenter apprentices (recorded by the UIBK colleagues).
In this discussion the apprentices felt very positive about the new toolset and on the
prospect to use digital media and web resources in their projects. In a similar way they were
keen to get the LTB to work on their devices. They were also pleased to participate in instant
debugging talks in the cases in which the installation caused problems.
Introduction of the Learning Toolbox (LTB) in the group of well-builders
(Brunnenbauer)
In the parallel group of well-builders the introduction of LTB had already taken place one
week before and the project using LTB had already been started. Yet, there was some need
for assistance in the installation as well as real-time debugging. Also, the approach in
developing project-related stacks was somewhat different – instead of shaping a parent
stack and daughter stacks the well-builders were equipped with a set of thematic stacks that
will be networked with each other.
The way forward
14
During the event we had teams of ITB (accompanying researchers), LTB developers
(RayCom, CIMNE) and evaluators (UIBK). In addition we had as a special support agent
Jaanika Hirv (TLU) who stayed one week in Bau-ABC to collect feedback from apprentices
and trainers on their first steps working with the LTB. She reported this feedback with daily
e-mails that were collected into a Google Doc. Then, in the second round, Gilbert Peffer and
Jaanika had exchanges on these messages (in the same Google Doc). Summaries of the
conclusions were then reported back on a German-speaking ‘hotline’ mailing list “LTB Pilot”.
In my next posts I will report on a follow-up visit to Bau-ABC and then have a look at the
working issues that have come up in our talks and e-mail correspondence.
10. Start of Learning Toolbox pilots in Bau-ABC – Part Two:
Feedback during a working visit to Bau-ABC, April 6th, 2016
On Tuesday the 4th of April we had an interesting working visit in Bau-ABC in the context of
our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. I, Lars Heinemann (both from ITB) and
Martina Lübbing (from Pontydysgu) were on a whole-day visit in Bau-ABC to collect
feedback and situation assessments after the first weeks of piloting with the Learning
Toolbox (LTB) (see my previous post). In addition we discussed several initiatives to support
the pilot activities during the LL project and afterwards. Below I try to give an account on the
points and working issues that are most relevant for the whole LL project.
Building upon the work of the pioneering trades
During our visits in the working areas got a picture how the Bau-ABC trainers had
experienced the first weeks of the pilots and how to support the next steps. With the pilot
group of carpenters (Zimmerer) the LTB had been received well and also apprentices from
other groups had shown interest. (However, this other group is right now preparing for
interim examinations, so therefore an introduction of LTB would not be well-timed and can at
best take place in the autumn.) The pioneering group will shortly return to Bau-ABC and
work in another trade – with the bricklayers (Maurer). This cooperation has been built in
into the preparation of the stacks for this pilot group and the trainers (Lehrwerkmeister)
Markus Pape and Kevin Kuck have been working together.
A similar possibility is available with the pioneering group of well-builders (Brunnenbauer)
which is now having a school period in the same area and then switch to work with the trade
of machinery and metalworking (Maschinen- und Metalltechnik). In order to support the
use of LTB in that period the pioneering Lehrwerkmeister Lothar Schoka volunteered to
contact his colleagues in that trade and advise them on preparing similar LTB stacks for their
trade.
Integrating new trades and learning areas into the pilot with LTB
On our visit to the working area of road-builders (Strassenbauer), pipeline-builders
(Rohrleitungsbauer) and sewage builders (Kanalbauer) we explored new possibilities to
extend the pilots. One of the experienced trainers, Stefan Wiedenstried, is now for the
moment working with the pipeline builders and expressed his interest to prepare similar
stacks for that trade as his colleagues had done in other trades (and Gilbert Peffer for the
road-builders before the kick-off event). In a similar way, the shop steward for health and
safety (Sicherheitsbeaftragte) Thomas Weerts expressed his interest to prepare stacks for
health and safety instructions for apprentices in Bau-ABC. This learning area was already
15
discussed on an earlier working visit of LTB developers in Bau-ABC in February. Now we
have a chance to take this initiative further.
Support measures and further activities
Alongside these talks we discussed the need to update the user’s manual for LTB (originally
written by Jaanika Hirv during her internship period in Bau-ABC during November-December
2015). In addition we discussed the need to prepare online instructions (as a tile or as a
stack) that would be easily accessible in the LTB. The ITB-Pont team took this issue with it
as homework. As a further step we had discussions on the prospect to start a new cycle of
“Theme room” training in Bau-ABC and to introduce the work with LTB as a new theme.
Here we expect Bau-ABC to have internal discussions and then we can start preparing the
new cycle in greater detail.
I think this is enough of the general picture. We also took up several working issues on the
infrastructure, access problems and proposals for improvements. I will discuss some of
these in my next post.
11. Start of Learning Toolbox pilots in Bau-ABC – Part Three:
Technical issues, requests and ideas for further development
April 7th, 2016
In my two previous posts I have blogged about pilot activities with Learning Toolbox (LTB)
in the context of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. In the first post I reported of
the Kick-off event in the training centre Bau-ABC (on 14.3.2016). In the second post I
reported on our recent follow-up visit (5.4.2016) with emphasis on progress reports in the
pioneering groups and on plans to get new groups and learning areas integrated into the
piloting. With this final post I focus on technical issues, requests for improvements and on
ideas for further development of the tool.
Technical issues
At the moment the WLAN provides rather limited opportunities for using LTB in Bau-ABC.
Partly this is due to the weak infrastructure provided by Deutsche Telekom to the area of
Rostrup. This issue has been taken up by Bau-ABC to get the services improved – given the
nation-wide importance of their training. Given these limitations, the capacity of the WLAN is
not ideal. Yet, the colleagues are trying to adjust their settings in such a way that the pilot
groups could work with LTB without interruptions. This is subject to internal discussions in
Bau-ABC.
Requests for improvements
As we see it, there will be some new trades that could join in the pilot and there is a chance
to work with the transversal learning area ‘health and safety’ (Arbeitssicherheit und
Gesundheitsschutz). This will increase the number of stacks and make the search processes
more complicated. In general, the searches could be facilitated by using project titles, group
numbers and domain-specific tags as keywords for search. However, if the apprentices are
expected to type themselves correctly spelled terms, this will be a hurdle. For apprentices it
would be practical to navigate from a menu of the main occupations to the ‘parent stacks’ (in
that occupation) and then to recommended tags (this requires efforts from the LTB
developers and from the trainers).
16
At the moment LTB doesn’t provide an online tutorial. This would be appreciated very much.
(The ITB and Pont team took this issue as homework.)
The trainers had observed that the apprentices do not notice that they have got new
messages if there is no alarm tone alerting them to the fact. This would be a major
improvement.
Ideas for further development
The trainers in Bau-ABC are constantly observing the emergence of new apps in their
trades. One of the newest newcomers is the BaustellenApp (www.baustellenapp.com) for
the road-builders (Strassenbauer) and for the construction site managers in this trade. It is
worth checking if this can be linked to LTB.
Also, there is an interesting development in the protection of hearing. The newest earmuffs
are equipped with technologies that can pick wireless signals and convert them into audio
messages. Thomas Weerts can give more information.
These were some of the issues were taken up in our latest discussions. As I see it, they
give a picture of the constraints, practicalities and possibilities with the current pilots using
the Learning Toolbox (LTB). We will continue the monitoring of the pilots and take further
steps to engage more users in a short while.
17
12. Learning Layers in dialogue with DigiProB project – Part One:
Preparations for the new project May 11th, 2016
Our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project has recently entered an interesting new
phase. In the Construction pilot the Learning Layers project has a chance to work together
and share experiences with a spin-off project. Recently, the German-funded DigiProB has
also started its work in the German construction sector. Two LL partner organisations – the
training centre Bau-ABC and the research institute ITB – play a major role in the new project
that can be called as a spin-off from the LL project. Whilst the LL project is focusing on
workplace learning from the perspective of skilled workers and apprentices, the DigiProB
project shifts the emphasis on training of construction site managers. With this series of
blogs I try to give a picture of the conceptual preparation for the new project (part one), on
the lessons to be learned with initial interviews (part two) and on the prospects for using LL
tools in the new project.
I start by looking back at a symposium at the European Conference on Educational
Research (ECER 2015) in Budapest that was initiated by the LL team of ITB. In the
symposium we brought together three recently completed or ongoing projects with focus on
digital media, web tools and support for workplace learning. With their recent work the three
projects (Kompetenzwerkstatt, Learning Layers and EmployID) had reached a transition
stage. From this perspective the symposium provided an opportunity to learn from each
other and to draw conclusions for a new phase. Below, I will focus on the contribution of the
LL team in this symposium and on the interim conclusions from the discussion.
Outline of DigiProB presented in an ECER symposium in Budapest 2015
In our contribution to the symposium we shifted the emphasis from the Learning Layers
project to a designed spin-off project (DigiProB) which we expected to be start soon. The
context of this project is the training of construction site managers – a vocational progression
route for former skilled workers.
In a recent reform the training of certified construction site managers (Geprüfte Polier) has
been regulated with new nationwide standards. The tasks of the certified construction site
managers include organisation and controlling of work processes, supervision of
construction workers, subcontractors and apprentices as well as monitoring the compliance
with health and safety regulations. The new examination model with integrative tasks and
project work seeks to push forward a more holistic learning culture.
The major challenge for adapting the new requirements in the training scheme lies in the
construct of the curriculum. In general, the curriculum is based on a two-phase model. The
first phase (ca. two months) is provided by presence courses in the training centre. During
this period external part-time lecturers provide courses in the main areas of expertise for the
future construction site managers. The second phase (which has now been shaped in the
light of the new regulation) is based on self-organised learning activities of the participants
alongside work. This phase includes integrative learning tasks and production of a coherent
project report. With the integrative tasks the participants are expected to demonstrate their
capability to manage complex construction sites and supervise related work processes. The
18
project report should make transparent their competences in planning, preparing,
implementing, documenting and assessing construction projects.
The task of the DigiProB project is to introduce digital media and web tools to support
integrative learning of the participants (with the learning tasks and project work) and
pedagogic reorientation of the trainers (to facilitate the learners in such learning). Here, the
new project DigiProB should take into account the prior work of the Learning Layers project.
Interim conclusions of the discussion at the ECER symposium
In its contribution the ITB team drew attention to following tensions between the new
requirements, the traditional mode of delivering the courses and lack of support for the self-
organised learning:
1. The new training regulation was introduced with short introduction events that
familiarised the trainers on the new guidelines. However, these events did not provide
an in-depth training for trainers to adjust themselves to new requirements.
2. The part-time trainers are engaged as subject specialists and responsible for specific
blocks in the presence training. They do not have an overarching responsibility on the
supervision of integrated learning tasks and project work.
3. There has been no clear model for developing online support, arranging peer tutoring
and promoting peer learning among the participants.
The interim conclusions of the ITB team were formulated as follows: For the new spin-off
project it is necessary to build upon the experience with the Learning Layers pilot but to take
into account the differences between presence learning within training centre (supervised by
full-time trainers) and dispersed self-organised learning (supervised by part-time trainers).
Secondly, it is essential to equip the trainers with didactic know-how and learning
technologies to support the dispersed learning activities. Thirdly, it is crucial to facilitate peer
learning among the participants and to raise their awareness of their own learning.
– – –
At this point I leave our discussions at the ECER symposium behind. Now that the DigiProB
project has started its initial activities, it is interesting to see, what kind of new experiences
we are making and how the initial picture starts to change. From this perspective it is
interesting to have a look, what we are learning from the initial interviews and from the
dialogues on the usability of LL tools in the new project. These topics will be discussed in the
next posts of this series.
19
13. Learning Layers in dialogue with DigiProB project – Part Two:
Interviews with guest trainers/lecturers in continuing vocational
training May 12th, 2016
In my previous blog I started a series on the new phase of our EU-funded Learning Layers
(LL) project. Currently, in the Construction pilot we have been able to start closer
cooperation with a spin-off project. The German-funded DigiProB has started its work and
the training centre Bau-ABC and the research institute ITB have a central role to play. The
DigiProB project focuses on the training of certified construction site managers (Geprüfte
Polier) – see more on this training and on the background of the project in my previous post.
In this post I will have a look at the initial interviews and what we may learn from the
dialogue with gust trainers/lecturers who are engaged in this training programme.
The reform of the training concept and tensions in the implementation
As I indicated in the previous post, the new training of the certified construction site
managers had introduced a new examination model that put an emphasis on integrative
tasks and on a concluding project report. In the conceptual preparation for the project
proposal we had emphasised the following tensions:
1. The new training regulation was introduced with short introduction events that
familiarised the trainers on the new guidelines. However, these events did not provide
an in-depth training for guest trainers/lecturers to adjust themselves to new
requirements.
2. The guest trainers/lecturers are engaged as subject specialists and are responsible for
specific blocks in the presence training. They do not have an overarching responsibility
on the supervision of integrated learning tasks and project work.
3. There has been no clear model for developing online support, arranging peer tutoring
and promoting peer learning among the participants.
Now that the DigiProB project was started, the initial interviews provided an opportunity to
test, whether the above outlined picture was correct and what new features could be learned
from the guest trainers/lecturers involved in the programme.
Messages picked from the initial interviews
Currently I am not actively involved in the initial activities of the DigiProB project. At best I
have been nearby when my ITB colleagues have carried out interviews. Therefore, I leave it
to my colleagues to report on the activities and on the findings in greater detail and in time.
Yet, already at this stage it is possible to pick as ‘first impressions’ some messages that
come through and have been reflected by my colleagues. Though these are only preliminary
signals, not thoroughly analysed findings, it is worthwhile to pay attention to them:
● Rapid implementation of the new model: It seems to me that both the training
providers (such as Bau-ABC) and guest trainers/lecturers that they use for the training
have had very little time to adjust their pedagogic approaches. The training providers
arrange short introductory events but then the individual trainers/lecturers have draw the
conclusions on their own.
● Willingness of trainers/lecturers to work with an integrative pedagogic approach:
Although the guest trainers/lecturers have been engaged as subject specialists, they
seem to have an interest in getting their special know-how put into practice. Therefore,
they are individually looking for ways to link ‘theoretical’ elements into practical tasks
20
and exercises. Moreover, there seems to be interest in sharing experiences and
examples of good pedagogic solutions.
● Interest of trainers/lecturers in using digital media and web tools: It appears that (at
least some) guest trainers/lecturers show interest in using digital media and web tools to
support their teaching and training. In this respect the Learning Toolbox (whenever
demonstrated) has been greeted as a promising framework and the interviewees are
willing to learn more of it.
● Interest of learners to share knowledge and experiences: According to the guest
trainers/lecturers interviewed so far, the participants (learners) are interested in sharing
knowledge and experiences during the course periods and during the periods for self-
organised learning. In particular from this perspective they considered the Learning
Toolbox as a promising toolset to support individual or collaborative learning processes.
– – –
I leave these first impressions and ‘messages picked from discussions’ here and let my
colleagues work with further interviews and the group pictures that we get as a result.
Altogether, I believe that the DigiProB project is well-timed and that trainers/lecturers as well
as learners will be interested to work with the project. However, the project will also pose
new challenges for the tool developers and to the project partners who introduce the tools.
14. Learning Layers in dialogue with DigiProB project – Part Three:
Talks on the usability of Learning Layers tools May 12th, 2016
In my two previous posts I have blogged on a new phase of our EU-funded Learning
Layers (LL) project. In the Construction pilot we have started cooperation with a spin-off
project. The German-funded DigiProB project focuses on the training of certified
construction site managers (Geprüfte Polier) – see more on this training and on the
background of the project in my two previous posts. In this post I will have a look at the
discussions between the technical partners of both projects on the usability of the Learning
Layers tools in the new context. But firstly, I need to recapitulate, what kind of change of
perspective is taking place in the transition from the LL project to the spin-off project.
Changing the perspective from apprentice training to continuing vocational training
(CVT)
So far the pilot activities of LL project in the training centre Bau-ABC have focused on initial
vocational education and training (VET). Thus, the LL project has worked with apprentices
and full-time trainers who are present in intermediate training centres (in workshops and on
outdoor training areas). In such contexts and the processes instruction, tutoring and peer
learning rely on the presence of a learning community.
The change of perspective to the CVT programme for certified construction site managers
(Geprüfte Polier) brings into picture a completely different learning environment. The
participants are former craftsmen who are in the process of transition to managerial
positions. The training programme is based on a 2-month period of courses and a
subsequent period of self-organised learning alongside working. In the latter phase the
participants are expected to complete integrative learning tasks and to prepare a project
report that demonstrate the acquisition of required coordination and management
competences.
21
In the light of the discussions in the preparatory phase (see my first post in this series) and
taking into account the messages coming through in the initial interviews (see my second
post) it is possible to raise the following questions concerning the introduction of digital
media, web support and mobile devices into such a training programme:
1. What can be the role of social learning platform(s) as support for integrative
pedagogic approach and as support for self-organised and/or collaborative learning
practices?
2. What can be the role of digital learning materials provided by guest trainers/lecturers
in supporting the work with integrative learning tasks and project reports?
3. What can be the role of digital documents in facilitating the self-organised learning
processes and presenting the results of project work?
4. What can be the role of mobile devices and mobile app frameworks in facilitating
learning in the context of work and in sharing knowledge/experience with peer learners?
Sharing knowledge between technical partners of LL and DigiProB projects
The above presented questions were implicitly in my mind in the light of our experiences in
the LL project and taking into account the shift to the new project. However, in the
preparatory meeting of both projects we first explored, what kinds of tools the LL project has
developed and in which contexts they have been piloted. In this discussion most attention
was given on the Learning Toolbox (LTB) – the integrative toolset with which Bau-ABC is
making experiences in several trades. In addition, we took up in particular ‘Bits and Pieces’
(Erfahrungssammler), ‘Living documents’ and ‘Confer tool’ (for collaborative knowledge
processing) as different individual tools that can be linked to each other.
Altogether, we concluded that many of the LL tools address some aspects of the R&D
agenda that needs to be developed in the new project. In this respect this meeting between
the two project needs to be followed up in the near future.
22
15. Piloting with AchSo and getting feedback on Learning Toolbox
– Part One: Bau-ABC apprentices work with AchSo May 24th, 2016
In my recent blogs on the EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project I have mostly focused
on our pilot activities in the construction sector – and in particular on the introduction of the
toolset Learning Toolbox (LTB) in the training centre Bau-ABC. This week we are again
having field events in Bau-ABC but the main emphasis is given on the introduction of the
complementary tools AchSo and SoAR that are presented by our colleagues from Aalto
University (Finland). Alongside these activities our colleagues from the University of
Innsbruck (UIBK) have been organising focus group meetings to get feedback on the use of
LTB in the pilot groups that started with this toolset in March. In this first post I will focus on
the introduction of AchSo and how it was received by Bau-ABC trainers (Lehrwerkmeister)
and apprentices (Azubis).
Development of and piloting with AchSo in Finland
Whilst the Learning Toolbox (LTB) has been developed in the context of the co-design
process in construction sector – and Bau-ABC as the main pilot environment to support the
process – the development of AchSo has mainly been promoted in Finland. The LL partner
Aalto University (later on referred to as Aalto) has taken further the video annotation tool that
was so far developed by RWTH Aachen. With the name “AchSo” the developers want to
highlight the usability of a video annotation tool in the context of (informal) learning at
workplace. This is achieved by the functionality for shooting short videos, for visual tagging
of details and for adding short written comments.
As has I have reported earlier on my blog and on an article on the LL website, the Aalto
team has piloted with the AchSo tool with a Finnish construction company, regional
vocational school centres and with the Finnish Construction Workers’ Trade Union (see my
blog of the 3rd of April and the article of the 19th of April on the Learning Layers website).
In the Finnish construction pilot the users of AchSo were trainees in full-time vocational
schools that were completing their workplace learning period (Praktikum) in construction
companies or apprentices that had switched from full-time education to apprentice contract.
In both cases the vocational school teachers were responsible for the final assessment of
the learning of trainees and apprentices. By using annotated videos trainees or apprentices
could document their working and learning tasks and demonstrate their learning gains.
Introduction of AchSo to apprentices and trainers in Bau-ABC
Now that we – the had got the pilot activities with the LTB started and some progress had
been made, it was an appropriate time to introduce the AchSo tool and explore, how it could
be integrated into the ongoing piloting with the LTB. For this purpose two colleagues from
Aalto – Sanna Reponen and Matti Jokitulppo – came for a three-day event to introduce
AchSo to different groups of apprentices. During the first day they presented AchSo to a
group of well-builders (Brunnenbauer) who had already used LTB when being trained in their
own trade. Now they were receiving training in the neighbouring trade of machine- and metal
techniques. In this context the Bau-ABC colleagues chose to add the work with video
annotation as an additional feature to the apprentices’ projects.
We started together with the group of apprentices when they were beginning their first mini-
projects (duration one day) with metalworking. Firstly Sanna Reponen gave the background
23
information on AchSo and how to use it. In this context we also clarified the data protection,
privacy and sharing-related issues when using such tools. Secondly the apprentices installed
AchSo on their own devices or got spare devices from Aalto for the session. Thirdly the Bau-
ABC trainers introduced the project task – cutting a metal plate to a measure, filing the
edges and marking spots at given distances for further processing. This ‘project’ is a
traditional elementary exercise with which apprentices and trainees are guided to pay
attention to appropriate use of tools and to paying attention to quality requirements.
After the introduction the apprentices started working with the tasks and – once they had
made some progress – shooting videos of each others’ work at different phases. Parallel to
this, one of the trainers also shot some videos on the work of apprentices. It appeared that
some apprentices shot only one video, whilst some others tried to cover all major phases of
work with short video clips. One of the videos showed deliberately inappropriate use of tools.
Others tried to portray good practice. At the end of the day the videos were shown as a
gallery and some exemplary videos were played. In particular the videos with comments
were shown. After this viewing session we had discussions on the benefits of the tool, on
possible improvements that apprentices would wish and on the prospects for using it in the
training at Bau-ABC and in the companies (with which they have apprenticeship contracts).
Immediate feedback on working with AchSo
On the whole the apprentices were positive about shooting videos – although it was an
additional task and required cooperation, whilst the project task was individual and each one
had to complete it on his own. In the discussion the apprentices emphasised that they paid
more attention to different phases of work when selecting, which of them to be documented
with videos. The trainer emphasised that videos shot by apprentices gave him a better
overview on the work of apprentices (instead of just going around the workshop and
monitoring them individually in the short time). Secondly, it was agreed that such a
documentation of training that takes place in Bau-ABC workshops makes it easier to inform
the vocational school teachers of the the tasks that have been carried out in the training
centre. At the moment the apprentices agreed that it was easier to start using the new tool
with such elementary exercises. Yet, they saw more potential and more challenges in linking
the use of annotated videos into more complex projects in well-building (Brunnenbau).
We also discussed some hurdles and limitations for using AchSo in real work situations
(these were very similar to the issues that came up with feedback on LTB, so I will take
these up in my next post). However, the trainer of the well-builders, Lothar Schoka,
expressed his interest to get from his apprentices annotated videos from construction sites
of their companies. These could highlight specific working tasks that could be observed on
joint visits of the whole group or discussed more thoroughly in training sessions in Bau-ABC.
Altogether, we had the impression that the introduction of AchSo in this group worked well.
However, we became aware of some technical issues that need to be observed when
proceeding from such initial introduction to wider use of the tool. Yet, it appears that the use
of AchSo as a complementary tool to LTB is not a problem to trainers or to apprentices.
16. Piloting with AchSo and getting feedback on Learning Toolbox
– Part Two: Apprentices’ views on using the Learning Toolbox
May 25th, 2016
24
In my latest blog on the EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project I started a series of
reports on our latest field visits in the construction sector – and in particular in the training
centre Bau-ABC. We are now having visitors from Aalto University (Finland)to introduce the
tools AchSo and SoAR. In addition, our colleagues from the University of Innsbruck (UIBK)
are getting feedback on the use of Learning Toolbox (LTB). In my first post I reported on the
introduction of AchSo and how it was received. In my second post I will report on the
feedback that apprentices have given using the LTB. Here I just want to give some
impressions on the procedure and on the discussions in the groups that I observed. I leave it
to the UIBK colleagues to give more detailed account.
The pioneering groups and their learning paths with Learning Toolbox
As I reported in my earlier blogs on the kick-off event of the pilots with Learning Toolbox
(LTB) – see my posts of the 3rd of April and of the 6th of April – we started with two
trades: carpenters (Zimmerer) and well-builders (Brunnenbauer). With the group of
carpenters their trainer Markus Pape had designed a joint project with the trainer of
bricklayers (Maurer), Kevin Kuck. This project was about traditional building techniques with
wooden frameworks for brick walls (Holzrahmenbau, Fachwerkhäuser). Accordingly, the
trainers developed a parent stack that covered the information resources and pointed to
specific stacks for the two trades involved in the project and for accessing further knowledge
resources. Considering the schedule of the group, they were at the moment having a school
period in the nearby vocational school. Afterwards they will continue this project with the
bricklayers. During our visit the UIBK colleagues arranged a group discussion with the
apprentices at the school.
Concerning the group of well-builders, they started with a project in their own trade. Their
trainer Lothar Schoka used the stacks to give them access to selected supplementary
materials that are relevant for their project work. In the next phase the group proceeded to
neighbouring trades (like machine and metal techniques or pipeline building) in which they
get the foundation level training. At the moment they were having a period in Bau-ABC with
metal technique. Thus, also the feedback on the use of LTB could be implemented alongside
their work with the elementary exercises. Below I will give insights into feedback collected
from discussions with this group.
Apprentices’ views on uses of LTB in training centre and in real work situations
The UIBK colleagues put on the board small posters that presented statements picked up
from the kick-off event in March. Each statement expressed expectations on benefits of
using the LTB. Now each participant had the chance to give votes, which of these
expectations had come true – and which he would see as the most important (first, second,
third). Here I could see in two groups, how the votes concentrated on a few statements. We
were somewhat surprised that the apprentices found LTB easy to use – once the initial
difficulties had been overcome. Also, given the relatively limited amount of stacks (and the
structure of stacks for their domain) they found it easy to search the information they
needed. Also, the chat function was praised as a functioning hotline for passing quick
messages to trainers (although this was dependent on the online presence of individual
trainers). Furthermore, the LTB was seen as a good tool to have an overview on the learning
contents and on keeping the contents available (as priority contents) when needed.
25
After several positive remarks on the use of LTB as such, the apprentices in all groups made
the point that they see the major benefits in using LTB in the intermediate training
arrangements in Bau-ABC – which is primarily a learning environment. In the companies
there are less people around, questions and answers are passed more directly, there is less
chance to do searches and there is more time pressure. Furthermore, there is less tolerance
for mistakes or discussing them on the web (privacy and data protection aspects). Partly
these reservations are related to generation issues – younger construction site managers
are more positive than older. Then the UIBK colleagues asked, whether the apprentices
would prefer to carry out their projects entirely with paper-based documentation or with LTB
(if the latter option would be available). In this context the apprentices in all groups voted
almost unanimously for the LTB option.
Finally, the UIBK colleagues asked about their expectations on using AchSo. Here they also
emphasised the use in Bau-ABC. They drew attention to the possibility to focus on very
small but important details or on points in which most mistakes are being made. They also
referred to different potential in manual work as well as in complex activities with heavy
machinery. They also pointed to the possibility to use video to facilitate the learning
processes of those, who do not speak German as their mother tongue. In some groups there
were discussions on the use of AchSo in instruction videos (prepared by trainers) and
documentation of learning (prepared by apprentices). Altogether, the apprentices saw quite
a number of possibilities. Yet, there was a tension between the fact that they have to
complete their projects individually, whilst the use of videos requires cooperation with their
peers.
– – –
I think this is enough at the moment. The UIBK colleagues will work more thoroughly through
the material. But as a first impression this feedback already shows that the work with LL
tools is received well and that both trainers and apprentices are making progress.
17. Piloting with AchSo and getting feedback on Learning Toolbox
– Part Three: Introducing Augmented Reality to construction
vehicle drivers May 26th, 2016
In my two latest blogs on the EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project I started a series of
reports on a field visits in the construction sector – and in particular in the training centre
Bau-ABC. Our visitors from Aalto University (Finland) have introduced their tools and our
colleagues from the University of Innsbruck (UIBK) gathered feedback on our pilot with the
Learning Toolbox (LTB). In my first post I reported on the introduction of video annotation
tool AchSo. In my second post I reported on the feedback that apprentices have given after
using the LTB. In this third post I will report on the introduction of Social Augmented Reality
(SoAR) – also a tool developed by the colleagues in Aalto University.
The idea of Social Augmented Reality (SoAR)
For lay people (like myself) the most likely encounters with Augmented Reality have been
the commercial applications that have provided some kind of pop-up information windows or
visuals that enrich web-based information. In such applications there is a basic layer of
information that is complemented with an additional one (to the benefit of the viewer). As a
contrast, the idea of the Social Augmented Reality (SoAR) is to provided enriched
communication with all channels of mobile devices: speech, video and tagging (drawing).
26
When using SoAR in mobile phone calls, the counterparts can see each other and talk to
each other (like using Skype), they can switch the screens that they are viewing and they
can tag live videos by drawings. Whilst this idea had been presented in some consortium
meetings of the LL project, we had first put the emphasis on introducing the integrative
toolset Learning Toolbox (in March) and then the video annotation tool AchSo (on the two
first days of this field visit). On the third day we had the chance to introduce SoAR to a group
of apprentices specialising as construction vehicle drivers (Baugeräteführer).
The introduction of SoAR in Bau-ABC
Since the visitors from Aalto and UIBK had spent the second day of visit introducing the
AchSo video annotation tool for a group of construction vehicle drivers (Baugeräteführer),
the step to introducing AchSo (see my first blog of this series) was a smooth transition from
one tool to another. Sanna Reponen presented the functionality of the tool at the outdoor
training areas and the testing started immediately. Normally, the driving and operating of
construction site vehicles (caterpillars with different additional features) is organised in
groups – one is the driver, two others are supporting the lifting and adjusting operations
while others are waiting for their turns. The supervising trainer is not all the time present –
since the training is based on the culture of self-organised learning (apprentices are
expected to grow into independent task preparation, planning and implementation).
Now, in the beginning, the trainer got a mobile phone in which SoAR was uploaded and one
of the apprentices got another one. In this way the trainer was able to rotate between
different training areas and his office without losing contact with this group of trainees.
During one of the first test calls there was a real problem case, when the cylinders of the
caterpillar started making unusual noises – just when the trainer was out of sight. Thanks to
the use of SoAR the apprentices could show him the case and from the noise he could
conclude, where the problem might be. And he could give in real time advice, what
measures to take to solve the problem (or at least to avoid any damage). After this ‘real’
case, several other apprentices made similar test calls and the trainer responded from
different locations. Altogether, the communication worked well but the background noise
from the engines of the vehicles was a major disturbance. (However, the trainers have
already tested earmuffs that can filter the background noise and these can be used with
SoAR as well.)
At the end of the day we had a feedback session with the apprentices. They gave very
positive feedback on the test situation and were looking forward to further development of
the tool. In a similar way the trainer had made a very positive experience with his testing.
Altogether, we concluded that SoAR is a very positive add-on to the Learning Layers tools.
18. New stacks for new users of the Learning Toolbox – Two cases
in Bau-ABC June 3rd, 2016
In my latest blogs I have reported on the pilot activities of our EU-funded Learning Layers
(LL) project in the intermediate training centre for construction sector Bau-ABC. Therefore, I
have focused on the intermediate part of apprentice training (between learning in the
companies and in vocational schools) carried out in the training halls and outdoor training
areas of Bau-ABC. In this post I focus on efforts to open up the use of the integrative toolset
27
Learning Toolbox (LTB) for other users. This was the aim of our teamwork in Bau-ABC this
morning. Below I report on the creation of new stacks for LTB that take explicitly into account
wider range of users than the current groups of apprentices.
Stack to promote awareness on Health and Safety in construction sector
Already in February we had our first talks with the Health and Safety specialist
(Sicherheitsfachkraft) of Bau-ABC, Thomas Weerts, on the prospect of using LTB for thus
special area (see my blog of the 22nd of February). Already at that time we gathered
several ideas, how to make essential reference materials and practical tools accessible for
users with the help of the functionality of LTB. Now we had found time to put these ideas into
practice.
Firstly, we considered it important that this stack should not be exclusively for trainers and
apprentices in Bau-ABC. Therefore, we named it as ‘Health and Safety in construction
sector’ (Arbeitssicherheit in construction sector). Thus, it should also be relevant for in-
company trainers (betriebliche Ausbilder) and shop stewards for health and safety
(Sicherheitsbeauftragten).
Secondly, the first collection of materials provides links to web-based reference materials of
Berufsgenossenschaften (public trade-specific bodies for hazard prevention and social
insurance in industry and crafts & trades). In addition, this collection provides links to their
mobile apps and to compendia that are available as CD-ROMs in companies and training
centres.
Thirdly, another collection provides links to tools with which individual users assess health
and safety risks in the context of work tasks (Gefährdungsbeurteilung). In apprentice training
this is a mandatory task and it is supported by special worksheets provided by the respective
Berufsgenossenschaften. (In the near future these will probably be transformed into mobile
apps – which could then pave wider use for such tools beyond the initial training.)
The points above can be summarised quickly. Yet, it requires a special effort to decide, what
kind or resources can be made available with different tiles and how to support the work of
users with such resources. At the moment we stopped after having produced the welcome
message and two collection tiles with the above mentioned resources. Thomas had made a
good start and was prepared to continue with the next steps that would bring more
interactivity into picture. Here, the prior work with trade-specific stacks (e.g. for carpenters,
bricklayers and well-builders) could give some clues, how to integrate special tools and apps
to this theme.
Stack to support learning and social integration of apprentices from foreign countries
Parallel to the work with the above mentioned stack Melanie Campbell was preparing a
stack for a European mobility scheme. Bau-ABC is coordinating for the North-German
construction industries and craft trades the Mobi Pro EU project that promotes mobility of
trainees and apprentices from South-European countries – mainly from Spain – to get
trained in German companies within the dual system. The first cohort of apprentices has
already spent over a year and a new one is coming in a short while. As the experience has
shown, the newcomers face many open questions and challenges – not only in their working
and learning processes but even more regarding their socio-cultural integration and well-
28
being. Here, the functionality of LTB could provide an easier access to information – but also
communication channels between the apprentices and their peers of earlier cohorts.
With these thoughts coming up in our discussion Melanie started to give shape to the stack
of the Mobi Pro EU project. After the welcoming message she started to prepare placeholder
tiles for different kinds of information resources (general, domain-specific and local) to be
accessed and for communication channels to be provided (different groups and chat
channels). At the moment the format is still in the process of making, but it provides a
possibility for involving different parties in further steps of the design process.
– – –
I end my report here – at the point when we ended our joint session. Both Melanie and
Thomas will work further with these stacks and involve other colleagues as well. I am looking
forward to the next steps.
29
19. Learning Toolbox in Action – New project for Brunnenbauer
apprentices in Rohrleitungsbau June 10th, 2016
In my recent blog on our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project I described, how two
colleagues from the training centre started building stacks in the Learning Toolbox (LTB) to
make use of the toolset in their special areas. Thomas Weerts prepared a prototype stack
“Arbeitssicherheit im Bauwirtschaft” (Health and Safety in Construction). Melanie Campbell
prepared a prototype stack “Mobi Pro EU” for a transnational mobility scheme that in
bringing groups of Spanish apprentices to get apprentice training in construction companies
in Germany. (We will get back to both themes in a short while. This blog reports on a similar
stack-building session with another Bau-ABC colleague, but with more rapid steps to
implementation in practice.
Linking the trade Rohrleitungsbau into piloting with Learning Toolbox (LTB)
The aim of my working session with the Bau-ABC trainer Stefan Wiedenstried was to look,
how to link the trades for which he is responsible (Strassenbau – road-building and
Rohrleitungsbau – pipeline building) with the LTB.
However, we immediately noticed that the group that was practicing with road-building
(Strassenbau) was the initial pilot group of the well-builders (Brunnenbauer) with whom
trainer Lothar Schoka had started the LTB pilot in his area. Also, the same group had been
the test group to whom Sanna Reponen from Aalto University had presented the LL tool
AchSo when they were having training in metalworking (see my blog 24th of May 2016).
Also, the same group had been interviewed by our colleagues from Innsbruck University
(UIBK) on their use of LTB (See my blog 25th of May 2016). It just happened to be the case
that this same group was scheduled for next week to be trained by Stefan in the trade of
pipeline building (Rohrleitungsbau).
This gave Stefan a clue, how to start. He looked at the stack that was prepared for the kick-
off project in which the apprentices first time used LTB in their own trade (Projektordner
Schoka). Then he looked, how the mini-projects of metalworking were presented in another
stack (Projektordner Wiechmann). And based on these examples he started to develop his
own stack (Projektorder Wiedenstried) in a similar format as the previous ones.
The project “Waagerechter-Verbau” takes shape as an LTB stack
The title of the scheduled project is “1-03-04 Waagerechter-Verbau nach Din4124, Einbau
e”. The task is to prepare the grounds for laying pipelines for drinking water in exactly
horizontal position according to the DIN norm DIN4124.
After the welcoming message Stefan created a collection tile that contains the project
description and a set of photos that illustrate the task. He then tested the functioning of the
chat function with Lothar Schoka, who also linked this stack to the ‘parent stack’ of this group
of well-builders.
After all these preparatory measures Stefan announced the stack on the Facebook-page of
his trade “Tiefbau im Bau-ABC Rostrup, see below:
30
So, now we are looking forward to the group of Brunnenbauer apprentices bringing Learning
Toolbox in action in yet another neighbouring trade – in Rohrleitungsbau (pipeline-building).
We hope all the best and are keen on hearing more of their work.
31
20. Getting Learning Toolbox to Action – preparing stacks with and
for Spanish apprentices June 11th, 2016
In my previous blog on our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project I reported on a rapid
process of developing stacks in the integrative toolset Learning Toolbox (starting on
Wednesday, announced on Friday, to be used on Monday). When writing of this effort of a
full-time trainer in the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC, I referred to two
parallel processes of preparing stacks – firstly for the theme ‘Health and Safety’
(Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz) and secondly for the transnational mobility
scheme Mobipro – EU (and its regional implementation by Bau-ABC). In this blog I will
focus on the latter one.
On the transnational mobility scheme Mobipro-EU and how it works
The mobility programme Mobipro-EU is an initiative of the German Ministry of Labour and it
is managed by the German Employment Agency (Bundesagentur für Arbeit). Its aim is to
support the mobility of interested young people from other EU Member States to Germany to
get apprentice training in the dual system of apprenticeship. The scheme provides support
for the applicants firstly in their home countries (advice, application & selection procedure
and three months’ language training). Secondly, it provides a project organisation that takes
care of the training arrangements and accommodation. Altogether, the programme provides
the necessary support for foreign apprentices to complete the regular German apprentice
training. The programme was started in 2013 and Bau-ABC has become a regional
coordination centre for apprentice training in construction sector in 2015.
Here,it is worthwhile to note that this programme differs from the EU-funded mobility
schemes that cater for shorter placement periods of individual applicants who complete their
education/training programs in their own county. The Mobipro EU supports the placement of
groups of apprentices who will stay in Germany during the whole duration of their apprentice
training. Thus, the challenges for adjusting oneself to the use of foreign language and getting
along in the German society (and its culture of work, education and learning) are much more
profound than in the EU-funded exchange measures.
Bau-ABC as a regional coordinator of the implementation of Mobipro-EU
Bau-ABC received its first group of Spanish apprentices (initially 15) in 2015. Some of the
apprentices were placed in companies in Bremen and its immediate neighbourhood, others
into North-German municipalities near Bau-ABC. In practical terms this meant that the group
was divided into two subgroups. The Bremen group had the school part of apprentice
training in a vocational school in Bremen, whilst the other group in a vocational school in
Rostrup. Bau-ABC provided for both groups the intermediate training (überbteriebliche
Ausbildung). Concerning the language learning, the programme envisages that the
participants have completed intensive language course and language test (B1) already in
their home country. However, upon request of the companies providing the apprenticeships,
Bau-ABC has made local arrangements for additional language teaching for both groups, in
Bremen and in Rostrup.
Looking back, of the original fifteen ones seven have interrupted their training, whilst the
eight are continuing (although two of them are changing from the original occupation to
another). Yet, the companies and the Bau-ABC trainers have got a good impression of the
32
motivation and commitment of the remaining apprentices and want to continue the training
with larger numbers. Thus, in a short while Bau-ABC and its partner companies are receiving
50 new apprentices from Spain to be trained in construction companies in Bremen and in
North-West Germany. Taking into account the progress with Learning Toolbox (LTB) in the
intermediate training in Bau-ABC, Melanie Campbell started to develop a stack for the
Mobipro-EU scheme to support the training of the present and new Spanish apprentices.
LTB workshop with the Spanish apprentices (10.6.2016)
In the light of the above we seized the opportunity to organise a short LTB-workshop in
Bremen on Friday 10th of June. We had originally made the agreement with three
apprentices of the Bremen group (Pablo, Sergio and Yadel) but we were happy to get also
four others from the regional group (Carlos, Dario, Juan and Joshua). I moderated the
workshop together with Melanie.
In the beginning we gave a picture of the Learning Layers (LL) project and on the role of
Learning Toolbox (LTB). Then we got the apprentices registered to LTB and looked at some
of the stacks that had been prepared to provide information and materials for trade-specific
training in Bau-ABC. Then we looked at the prototype stack for Mobipro-EU prepared by
Melanie. The participants were invited to reflect on their experiences and think of blocks of
themes and related resources to be covered by collection tiles/ navigation tiles of the stack.
We had a very lively discussion and I am not in the position to cover it completely. (Melanie
made comprehensive notes on flipchart and tried to outline a structure of tiles to be created.)
Here I try to give some impressions of topics that came up and tensions to be considered:
● Making the move to Germany: The apprentices were pleased with the thick handbook
(full of relevant information) provided by the Spanish consulate. Yet, they appreciated
the prospect of having a digital version and shorter information sheets that refer to
certain contents of the handbook.
● Making progress with the language skills: The apprentices had completed an
intensive course and (most of them) passed the required language test. When coming to
Germany they were surprised that their language skills were not always trusted and they
were not encouraged to speak German. Also, in their leisure time they had the
temptation to seek for Spanish-speaking company. Therefore, they emphasised the
need to motivate themselves to to keep speaking German and to try to learn more.
● Getting used to working for construction companies in Germany: Most of the
apprentices had attended some kind of school-based vocational education with eventual
workplace placement. Yet, the transition to a German apprentice contract (which is
essentially an employment contract) provided a major cultural change. Furthermore, the
working conditions at construction sites or in project-based work that requires mobility
from one site to another, have been new experiences. From the motivational point it
would be helpful to prepare the newcomers with advance information.
● Peer learning: Many of the problems and challenges encountered by the apprentices
are such that no one has prior information – the members of the pioneering group have
had to find their own solutions (or ways to cope). In this respect the blog of Carlos has
served a more general purpose – as a forum, on which he has discussed questions of
others. In this respect the LTB has a chance to provide a “Questions and Answers”
section and a forum for new issues. Also, there are needs to develop peer
33
communication between the Spanish apprentices and their German peers – this should
also be explored when developing the stack.
● Recognition of prior learning: One of the shortcomings in the implementation of the
Mobipro-EU programme has been the fact that far too little attention has been paid on
the recognition of prior competences. Partly this is a matter of insufficient documents or
lack of appropriate procedures. Thus, it appears that apprentices may be guided to new
occupations (that are alien to them) although they have received a school-based
education in another. In some cases it is discovered only in Germany that the
apprentices have got vocational education in a (closely) matching occupation and could
apply for partial recognition of their prior learning. Here, it is necessary to look at the
procedures and to give accurate information on modes of recognition.
– – –
I stop my list here. We discussed these (and other) issues from many perspectives. We
came to the conclusion that Learning Toolbox can play a significant role in supporting the
newcomer group(s) with their start and with their adjustment to the new circumstances. We
were pleased to see that the pioneering apprentices are willing to contribute to the
development of LTB stacks and tiles and to share their valuable experiences. I am looking
forward to the next steps.
21. Looking back – One year from the Learning Layers meeting in
Tallinn June 12th, 2016
My latest posts on our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project have focused on the recent
progress with introducing the integrative toolset Learning Toolbox (LTB) to new users in
construction sector. Quite suddenly I happened to look at my blog archives and spotted the
entries that I had written one year ago. It struck me that at that time we were just having our
LL consortium meeting in Tallinn. It is interesting to look, what kind of issues we were
discussing at that time as tasks for the near future. And it is even more interesting to see,
what all we have been able to implement in practice. Below I will list some of the main points
for the construction pilot of the LL project:
1. Multimedia Training concept based on “Theme Rooms”
During preparatory meeting of the construction pilot team the Bau-ABC colleagues
presented first time the idea of “Theme Rooms” (see my blog of the 25th of June 2015). In
their internal discussions the Bau-ABC trainers had proposed a new format for organising
Multimedia Training in consecutive workshops (with ‘virtual rooms’ as support areas). We all
got enthusiastic about this idea. Yet, it took some time to put it into practice.
However, in November 2015 we ( = Bau-ABC with support from ITB, Pontydysgu and TLU)
managed to implement the first cycle of Theme Room workshops. It involved all Bau-ABC
training staff (and the training staff of parallel training centre ABZ Mellendorf) during all
Friday afternoons of the November month. As we experienced it, the training campaigned
provided important support for the piloting with the Learning Toolbox (LTB) and other LL
tools.
2. Making use of Learning Toolbox in Bau-ABC trainers’ projects
34
In the session on construction pilots we (ITB and Bau-ABC) presented firstly examples of
Bau-ABC trainers’ projects that could be supported with LTB. Then, the technical developers
presented the functions of the LTB to be expected in the forthcoming beta release. At that
time these presentations were two different things. Here again, we needed some time to get
ourselves worked in and to organise proper instruction for Bau-ABC trainers.
Looking at the current situation, we have noticed that since the preparation of the kick-off
event of LTB pilot (preparation in February 2016, the event itself in March 2016) we have
noticed rapid progress. The piloting trainers have soon learned their own ways of creating
and linking stacks to organise parallel or consecutive learning activities. Furthermore, they
have been able pass their know-how to each other and to learn from each others’ products.
3. Spreading Learning Toolbox to other contexts and new users
For the Tallinn meeting we (ITB, Bau-ABC and Agentur) had prepared posters with which we
visualised the exploitation landscapes in which we will be working with spin-off projects for
which we expected funding decisions in a short while. Now, looking at the present situation
we can give the following update:
● The project DigiProB (digital support for continuing vocational training – construction site
managers) has started recently. The stakeholder interviews give points of orientation for
introducing LTB and complementary tools in the next phase.
● The regional implementation of the transnational mobility scheme Mobipro-EU is
bringing to Germany the second cohort of apprentices from Spain (to be trained in
construction companies during the next 3-3,5 years). Some apprentices of the first
cohort have participated in an LTB-workshop and support the shaping of specific stacks
to support the new group of apprentices (50 persons arriving in July 2016).
● The projects NaBus and DieDa (with focus on ecological construction work) have started
and are looking forward to introduce LTB in their training programmes (scheduled for
Autumn 2016). Here they can use as points of reference the stacks prepared for the
‘Learning exhibition’ in Verden and the prototype stacks for presenting LTB to member
companies of the Netzwerk Nachhaltiges Bauen (NNB).
● The project HAKS (promoting the theme energy-efficiency in vocational education and
training) has started and is looking forward to introduce LTB in the next phase of its
training activities (also in Autumn 2016).
4. Making use of AchSo and SoAR in the training of Bau-ABC
In Tallinn meeting the team of Aalto University presented two tools. With the video
annotation tool AchSo they had already proceeded to field pilots in Finnish construction
sector. With the Social Augmented Reality (SoAR) tool they were still in the initial steps. With
AchSo they had only provided Android versions and there issues regarding the integration
with LTB. Therefore, our impression was that some time will be needed before they can be
introduced to the German pilot sites.
Now we have just experienced a three-day event during which the Aalto colleagues have
introduced AchSo to two groups of apprentices (and their trainers) and SoAR to the latter
group. All events proved to be successful and the apprentices and trainers are looking
forward to next steps. For a wider deployment of AchSo the Aalto colleagues are working
with the export function of AchSo to be able to use the tool with ordinary videos. (This step is
most welcomed by the above mentioned spin-off projects.)
– – –
35
I think this is enough to show what kind of progress we have made with the LL construction
pilot since the Tallinn consortium meeting one year ago. We know that we still have work to
do, but can clearly build on our achievements.
22. Zimmererblog is going on strong – Learning Layers’ multimedia
training bears fruit June 12th, 2016
In my latest blogs I have given progress reports on the construction pilot of our EU-funded
Learning Layers (LL) project, mostly focusing on the integrative toolset Learning
Toolbox (LTB). In addition I have provided a review on the progress we have achieved
since the project consortium meeting in Tallinn one year ago. In this blog I will have a look at
the main results of the earlier Multimedia Training Workshops (that the LL project organised
for the full-time trainers (Lehrwerkmeister) of the construction sector training centre Bau-
ABC in 2013-2014) – the trainers’ blogs. Here I will firstly focus on the most outstanding
example, the Zimmererblog (Carpenters’ blog) of Bau-ABC trainer Markus Pape.
Zimmererblog – origins, development and impact
In the first Multimedia Training Workshops of the LL project in the years 2013-2014 the LL
partners from Pontydysgu and ITB providedtraining for a group of voluntary Bau-ABC
trainers. At that time we started by getting an overview of the general web tools and by
making use of them. In this context the participating trainers created their own WordPress
blogs. In the course of the training they developed their own pattern of working with blogs.
Instead of keeping a diary or writing columns on different topics the trainers have
transformed their blogs into their own ‘open educational resources’. In this process the
trainer Markus Pape has been the pioneer and his Zimmererblog has become the most
comprehensive one.
Looking at the structure – after the startpage – the main areas of the blog are the collections
of project descriptions (worksheets) for each year of apprentice training. Then, the blog
provides links to literature and other websites as well as an additional area for special
techniques. Yet, the special trademark of this blog is that the pictures in the worksheets, in
the special area and in the slideshow have been edited to make the site more attractive.
Looking at the impact, it is worthwhile to note that the Zimmererblog has from the very
beginning on gained a wide popularity beyond the primary users – trainers and apprentices
in Bau-ABC. The statistics reveal that it has been viewed from all over the world – although it
is only available in German. Recently it has reached the milestone of 45.000 hits (the exact
number being currently 45.103) and the interest is not dropping at all. In this respect the
expression ‘open educational resource’ is justified.
Trainers’ blogs in the neighboring trades have also taken their place
Parallel to the Zimmererblog the trainers in some other trades (who had also attended the
Multimedia Training Workshops) started to create similar blogs for their trades (or groups of
trades). As a result there are three other blogs with similar structure in Bau-ABC:
● The ‘Maurerblog’ (“Mauerwerksbau im Bau-ABC Rostrup. Backsteine und Mehr”)
provides a similar set of learning resources for bricklayer apprentices and additional
resources for skilled workers. Currently this site has reached 6.604 hits.
36
● The ‘Tiefbaublog’ (“Tiefbau Bau-ABC Rostrup. Mach Dich schlau im Tiefbau”) provides
a similar set of resources for three neighbouring trades – road-builders (Strassenbauer),
pipeline-builders (Rohrleitungsbauer) and sewage-builders (Kanalbauer). In a similar
way it provides additional info sheets and links to external resorces. Currently this site
has reached 2.893 hits.
● The ‘Brunnenbaublog’ (Brunnenbauer und Spezialtiefbauer) provides similar sets of
resources for the neighbouring trades of well-builders (Brunnebauer) and for the tunnel-
builders (Spezialtiefbauer). In addition, the blog provides further links to progression
routes to higher education/qualifications (Duales Studium, Weiterbildung). In addition,
the blog provides further sections for special themes, tables and instructions for health
and safety. For this site we have not got the current statistics.
Here it is worthwhile to note that these blogs have been developed mainly for internal use in
Bau-ABC. From that perspective they have been used rather well although their external
impact has remained rather limited compared with the Zimmererblog and its impressive
outreach.
– – –
Altogether the trainers’ blogs have already taken their place before the Learning Toolbox has
been introduced. Now it is interesting to see, how these tools and instruments can best
complement each other. Already in the ‘Theme Room” training workshops the trainers
started developing thoughts in this respect. I am looking forward to the next steps.
37
23. Learning Toolbox (LTB) Online Guide published! June 16th, 2016
Today is a great day for our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. As most of the
readers of this blog will know, the key product of our project’s pilot activities in the
construction sector is the integrative toolset Learning Toolbox (LTB). In my recent blogs I
have mostly reported on our pilot activities with LTB in the North-German construction sector
training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup.
This afternoon the LTB developer team sent out the message that the new LTB Online
Guide has been published here: http://ltb.io. I take the opportunity to provide some
screenshots on this masterpiece.
Startpage
This is where you start with the LTB Online Guide:
Stacks, Screens and Tiles
This picture gives you an overview of screens that belong to the same stack (and contain
tiles).
Stack editing
This picture shows a stack in the edit mode.
38
I think this is enough for a ‘sneak preview’. I recommend all interested readers to have a
good look at the newly published LTB Online Guide and then follow the instructions. The
pilot users have found the tool worth developing and using.
24. Preparing for Learning Layers Bristol meeting – Part One: What
are we achieving with our fieldwork? June 17th, 2016
Next week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project will have its consortium meeting in
Bristol. In my recent blogs I have reported of several activities that have taken place in the
Construction pilot of the LL project – in particular with the deployment of the Learning
Toolbox (LTB). Parallel to this I have edited a series of articles (based on the blogs) for the
Construction section of the LL website. And finally, I have looked back at the LL consortium
meeting in Tallin (June 2015) and summarised the progress we have made in the LL
Construction pilot in one year. In this blog I want to change the perspective with the
question: “What are we achieving with our fieldwork?”
This question implies that we are still in the middle of an ongoing process – making progress
but becoming aware of issues yet to be solved before the project comes to an end. Here I
would like to draw attention to the following points:
1. Learning Toolbox (LTB) is being used in the field: The kick-off event in March and
the later working visits have paved the way for actual use of LTB in the training projects
of pioneering Bau-ABC trainers. The apprentices and other trainers have given positive
feedback on the usability of the tool. Yet, there are infrastructural problems that reduce
the use of LTB on a wider basis. We have to work with our local colleagues to overcome
such hurdles.
2. Capability of using LTB is spreading via peer tutoring: New users are joining in the
piloting having had short peer tutoring sessions with their fellow colleagues or with LL
R&D partners. The main thing is that the new users are creating their own stacks
(adapted to the projects they are managing) and finding their own ways to involve
apprentices as users. (This is happening both in Bau-ABC and in the Netzwerk
Nachhaltiges Bauen (NNB), where the colleagues from Agentur are developing
39
prototype stacks for their users. Parallel to this they are developing specific stacks for
the permanent exhibition ‘nachhaltig. bauen. erleben’.)
3. Apprentices are coming into picture as LTB-users and co-designers: Bau-ABC
trainers have always emphasised the need to engage apprentices as users and as co-
designers (giving feedback and proposing new ideas). The latter aspect came most
prominently into picture in the workshop with Spanish apprentices of the mobility
scheme Mobipro-EU. It became clear that the LTB has a great potential in supporting
apprentices that are having their apprentice training in a foreign country – struggling with
language, learning, working and with their new local environment.
4. Complementary tools have been brought into picture: The field visits for introducing
AchSo and SoAR were successful and the tools were well received. Yet, there are some
technical issues about getting these tools smoothly used as add-on tools via LTB. The
recent messages on working with these issues have been very promising.
I stop my list here. In general, we have been going through an introductory phase in which
we have launched processes. Now we are clearly in a situation in which the use of the tools
is spreading and the users are developing their own patterns of use. At the same time we
need to see that we can provide appropriate support for broader circles of users. In this
respect the publishing of the LTB Online Guide is a major achievement. We are looking
forward to new workshops with new users in the construction sector.
25. Preparing for Learning Layers Bristol meeting – Part Two:
Taking homework with me to Bristol June 17th, 2016
In my previous blog I mentioned that our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project will
have its consortium meeting in Bristol next week. As preparation I have had a final run with
reporting on activities that have taken place in the Construction pilot of the LL project – in
particular with the deployment of the Learning Toolbox (LTB). In the previous post I tried to
give a picture, what we are achieving altogether with our user engagement and tool
deployment – enabling the users to become owners of innovation. Yet, at the same time I
drew attention at the hurdles we still have to overcome to get the best out of the ongoing
processes. Now, in this post I shift the emphasis to the agenda and to the topics the we are
working with – to prepare the final deliverable of the project. However, I will not discuss in
detail the plans we have – instead I try to put together my thoughts on what we (as the
Construction pilot team) can contribute to some main points.
Below I try to outline my thoughts and a todo-list, how to proceed with them:
1. Impact scorecards: We have earlier this year to use impact scorecards to present,
what difference the introduction of LL tools has made in different pilot contexts. So far
we in the construction pilot have not been rushing to draft them. However, due to our
recent field activities we can give a far more differentiated picture with emphasis on
different user groups of Learning Toolbox and on the role of complementary tools.
However, we are looking forward to enrich the gallery later on with the results of our
forthcoming workshops with construction companies (scheduled for September).
40
2. Text for the section ‘research & development methodologies’: Here we need to give
insights into the way in which the participative co-design activities and the contributions
of accompanying research have nurtured each other. In particular we need to draw
attention to some lead ideas and theoretical concepts that have characterised our work,
such as a) enhancing vocational learning as action-oriented and self-organised
learning, b) supporting the acquisition and exploitation of ‘work process knowledge’
and c) promoting co-design as social shaping of work, technology and work
environment. Here, I have drafted the structure for our contribution and collected the key
materials from our Theory Camp contributions, conference papers, LL website articles
and contributions to Y2 and Y3 deliverables.
3. Contributions to ‘Learning scenarios’: With the scenarios we want to highlight a) how
our ‘lead theories’ have supported our development work and 2) how they help us to
specify the potential and actual changes in the (informal) learning at working contexts.
Here we are having a differentiated look at trainers in Bau-ABC (and their peer learning
as change agents) and apprentices as users of new tools (and their insights into their
role in vocational learning).
4. Contributions to ‘Exploitation activities’: Here we can revisit the exploitation
landscape (consisting of several spin-off or follow-up projects) that we presented last
June in the Tallinn consortium meeting. As things stand now, most of these projects are
going on and are looking for opportunities to introduce Learning Toolbox (and eventually
other LL tools) in their contexts. This requires further talks on the partnership relations to
be created with the tool developer teams and the new projects.
I guess this is enough for the moment. I have put down some of my thoughts and I need to
work with them before the meeting and in the respective sessions. That is what will be there
for – to achieve common results for the final phase of activities. I am looking forward to busy
days in Bristol.
41
26. Returning from Learning Layers Bristol meeting – Taking
homework back to Bremen June 23rd, 2016
In my previous blogs I reported on the preparations for the consortium meeting of our EU-
funded Learning Layers (LL) project that took place in Bristol during the last few days.
Now I am on my way back and have some spare minutes to reflect on the baggage of
homework that I am taking from the meeting back to office. In general we had a very
productive meeting – so many ideas sparking up that it was good to have colleagues taking
notes (on the spot and at the other end of online connection). Therefore I just make some
short remarks, how our talks helped us to bring our work further: In particular I was happy to
see that we are finding a way to present our results as a part of a common group picture –
rather than as stand-alone results of different partners or work packages teams working on
their own. Below some main points on this:
1. Evaluation and documenting the impact: So far more attention has been given on the
use of specific evaluation instruments (focus groups, complementary interviews, impact
score cards, logdata on use of LL tools) and analysing data gathered with these
instruments. Now we opened up this discussion to consider, how to use complementary
evidence that is being gathered alongside the fieldwork in the sectoral pilots and in the
co-design work. Here we worked with a set of transversal themes (such as digital
transformation, adoption of innovation and changes in (informal) learning practices).
This has implications for the work of narrower ‘evaluation data’, complementary data and
the impact scorecards.
2. Presenting our R&D methodologies: We have already earlier agreed to report our
results with a single deliverable – a website – and that one section should be dedicated
to R&D methodologies. For this section some partners had prepared draft documents
that shed light on different ‘local’, sectoral or technical aspects of our R&D work. In the
light of these drafts we made clear progress in trying to open up certain contributions
(such as co-design work) to be presented from the perspective of both pilot sectors –
construction and healthcare. And we developed a better understanding how different
activities carried out in the project can be presented as part of a coherent whole.
3. Outlining ‘learning scenarios’: At different points of time our project had been working
with different sets of ‘use cases’, ‘user stories’, ‘learning scenarios’ or ‘learning stories’.
All these had been characterised by a preparatory and explorative phase of the project –
presenting possibilities to work with the tools and learning arrangements that we were
developing. Now it appeared that we are building learning scenarios that rely on ‘lead
theories’ and on the way way have built upon them when developing tools and learning
arrangements. Here we are drawing upon the transversal themes (mentioned in point 1.
and on the more specific impact cards). This was reflected in a very specific set of
‘learning scenarios’ and tasks to draft them.
4. Working further with the exploitation agendas: Here our colleagues Gilbert Peffer
and Raymond Elferink presented a ‘generalised’ and at the same time well grounded
42
model, how to adjust the prior partnership relations to new and renewed ones (with an
exemplary start-up company for services in the centre). Alongside this example we also
revisited the conclusions of the Aachen Integration Meeting on the co-management of
the Open Source Software that has been developed in the context of the project. The
most important point was that we found both models fully compatible with each other.
I guess this is enough for these spare minutes that I have had today. I am continuing my
journey to Bremen (where I still have some meetings before I start my summer break).
27. Special challenges for using Learning Toolbox (LTB) in a craft
trade company June 30th, 2016
In my recent blogs on the fieldwork of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project I have
mostly reported on our pilot activities with the toolset “Learning Toolbox (LTB)” in the
construction sector training centre Bau-ABC. Earlier this week the ITB project team visited a
craft trade company in electrical engineering to discuss the use of LTB in the context of ‘real’
working life – not only from the perspective of apprentice training. Our counterpart was the
founder of the company and an associate partner in the project – Meister Dieter as we know
him of the user stories of the first year. We had maintained the contacts at different phases
of the project but now we felt that there is a need to discuss the potential use of LTB as a
toolset that is reaching a mature stage.
Of our earlier talks with Meister Dieter we knew that he is engaged in both ‘traditional’ and in
extraordinary projects in electrical engineering. Therefore we could expect him to present
different kinds of special challenges for companies like his own and to make some thoughts,
how tools like LTB could be helpful. Below I summarise some points of our lively discussion
after we had demonstrated the LTB and how it functions. I will mainly focus on the
challenges he presented – not that much on the specific contribution of LTB:
1. Changes in the plans during the construction work: Craft trade companies are used
to the fact that when architects visit construction sites, they often make changes to their
plans. These tend to have consequences to the workload and the costs for the craft
trade company (that have to be renegotiated). From this perspective a tool like the LTB
can facilitate real-time documentation and negotiation on such issues.
2. Different versions electric installations to be considered during the work: Partly
due to the above mentioned reasons and partly due the specific nature of constructions
sites (renovation, modernisation), craftsmen in electrical engineering have to work with
different versions of installations (and respective drawing). There might be a co-
existence between older, intermediate and newer versions to deal with. Here again, a
tool like the LTB might help to bring clarity to the situation.
3. Management of flows of photos from construction sites: Currently a lot photos are
being taken, forwarded and stored to keep up to date the information flow from
construction site to the company. This is a challenge for the filing systems that may not
be sufficiently specific about the context and the actuality of the photos. Here, we
43
assume, the Stack File System of the LTB might help to maintain transparency
regarding the contexts and the actuality of photos.
4. Management of working interfaces between different trades: Sometimes in bigger or
complex construction projects the management of working interfaces between different
trades becomes very challenging (and requires special experts to take responsibility).
Here, a tool like LTB might help craftsmen from different trades to adjust their work to
the work of parallel trade to avoid complications and delays.
5. Project work in very specific circumstances: In addition to the above mentioned
issues Meister Dieter gave some examples of project work, such as testing of specific
instruments in unusual geographic locations or in offshore contexts. Here the challenges
are related both to the equipment (to be tested and eventually modified) as well as to the
use of manpower (when is the term of electricians and how can they adjust their
contributions to the others’). We took note of these examples to see, what solutions
could be found in the further development process.
I guess this is enough for the moment. We had arranged these talks as a preparatory
session for a forthcoming workshop with craft trade companies and LTB (to be organised in
September). We will keep our preparations and our talks with partner enterprises going on in
the meantime.
44
28. 150 blogs on Learning Layers project – 200 altogether on
Pontydysgu site August 4th, 2016
I have come back from my summer break – but not back to work and normal business.
During my holidays I had to run through a series of medical tests/investigations and now I
am on sick leave for some time. I do not want to go into details – some investigations are yet
to come – but I know enough that I have to take a break from my normal work. This gives me
a reason to spell out some thoughts on my blogging on this site. It so happens that I have
reached the milestone of 150 blogs on our ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project
and altogether the milestone of 200 blogs on Pontydysgu site.
In general, such numbers are not great achievements – veteran bloggers count their posts in
thousands, not hundreds. And indeed, during my first years as a blogger I was not so
successful in finding my approach and ways to work forward. With my first blog “I-Europe” I
tried to stimulate a debate on European initiatives to promote vocational education and
training (VET). Unfortunately, these entries were not so well grounded and attracted little
attention. With my second attempt – with my new blog “Working & Learning” – I tried get
closer to the work of European projects and educational debates. Yet – for some time this
remained at the level of irregular scraping. Some of the projects of that time were perhaps
not that inspiring or they required blogging (or similar writings) on other platforms. Therefore,
I had made some experiences but had not really found my own way of blogging.
This all changed with the start of the EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project in 2012. The
project has required us (ITB – research institute with focus on VET and learning in the
context of work) to face new challenges. It has not been merely a matter of introducing new
learning technologies and new learning concepts to the field (and study the impact). The
project has been far more innovative in terms of exploring different options, involving users
in co-design & co-development and in engaging us as VET researchers in different roles as
co-developers, co-tutors and co-testers of new tools. From this perspective I have had the
challenges and the opportunities to produce a more or less regular flow of blogs on new
project activities, observations on parallel developments, links to inspiring research or to
policies that have an impact on our work. And, moreover, the flow of blogs has not merely
been recording of events, debates and happenings – they provide insights into our learning
processes as research partners, developers and application partners. In particular they
provide insights into our transformation from explorers to change agents and interpreters of
the changes.
Having said all this I feel sad that I cannot continue with the intensive observation and
documentation of field activities in the same way as I have done so far. From now on I have
to take the role of listener and thinker. Perhaps that is also a positive turn in its way – after
all, the rich project experience needs to be digested and interpreted in conceptual terms.
And surely, our experiences as accompanying researchers differ from the traditional patterns
of doing such research. But, as I said in the beginning, I have to take some time out of
regular project work to get myself fit. Nevertheless, I will be around.
45
29. Catching up with Learning Layers fieldwork – Part One: Looking
back at developments in 2016 August 31st, 2016
This year my summer break was longer than I had planned due to health issues. Now I am
back at work and trying to catch up with the fieldwork of our ongoing EU-funded Learning
Layers (LL) project. In particular I have to catch up with the recent fieldwork of the
Construction pilot with the deployment of Learning Toolbox (LTB) in work-based learning
and at construction sites. Before going into the most recent developments (I will deal with
them in the next posts) I will firstly summarise where we ended up with the introduction of
the LTB in our field activities earlier this year.
Introduction of Learning Toolbox (LTB) in the training of the pioneering trades of Bau-
ABC
In the middle of February 2016 we (the ITB team of Learning Layers) had a field visit to the
construction sector training centre Bau-ABC to prepare the introduction of the Learning
Toolbox (LTB) in some pioneering trades. These discussions are reported in the following
blog entry:
Possible use of Learning Toolbox in Bau-ABC training – three exemplary cases
In the middle of March 2016 we had the joint kick-off event to start the active use of LTB in
the pioneering trades (well-builders and carpenters). In addition to the ITB team we had the
LTB developers and the evaluators from the Universities of Innsbruck and Tallinn. The
activities of the event are reported in the following blog entry:
Start of Learning Toolbox pilots in Bau-ABC – Part One: The Kick-off event 14.3.2016
In the beginning of April 2014 we (the ITB and Pontydysgu teams) had another working visit
to Bau-ABC to collect feedback on the functioning and actual use of the LTB. Our findings
have been documented in the following blog entry:
Start of Learning Toolbox pilots in Bau-ABC – Part Two: Feedback during a working visit to Bau-ABC
Altogether we could observe that the use of LTB had become part of the ordinary training
and learning practices of Bau-ABC trainers and construction sector apprentices.
Spreading the use of LTB into other trades/ learning contexts
Another series of field visits in Bau-ABC took place at the end of May and in the beginning of
June. At the end of May 2016 we had a three days’ working visit in Bau-ABC with colleagues
from Aalto University, University of Innsbruck and Pontydysgu. The colleagues from Aalto
were introducing the video annotation tool AchSo and the Social Augmented Reality tool
SOAR. Alongside these session we had also evaluation workshops moderated by
colleagues from Innsbruck. The feedback on the use of LTB has been documented in the
following blog entry:
Piloting with AchSo and getting feedback on Learning Toolbox – Part Two: Apprentices’ views
on using the Learning Toolbox
In the beginning of June 2016 we made some progress with introducing LTB to further
trades and learning contexts.
Firstly I had a short session with two colleagues to prepare the introduction of LTB in the
joint learning area ‘health and safety’ and in a trans-national mobility scheme that brings
apprentices from Spain to German companies.
46
Secondly I worked with a Bau-ABC trainer to introduce the use of LTB in a new trade
(pipeline builders) involving a group of well-builders getting trained in this trade (and already
familiar with LTB). This session is reported in the following blog entry:
Learning Toolbox in Action – New project for Brunnenbauer apprentices in Rohrleitungsbau
Thirdly I had a special working session with a group of Spanish apprentices and project
coordinator Melanie Campbell from Bau-ABC to explore the uses of LTB in supporting the
newcomers from Spain during their apprentice training in Germany. This session is reported
in the following blog entry:
Getting Learning Toolbox to Action – preparing stacks with and for Spanish apprentices
Publication of the online guide to Learning Toolbox (LTB)
In the middle of June 2016 we were happy to observe that the LTB developers had
published a comprehensive online guide to Learning Toolbox (see http://ltb.io/). I provided a
brief introduction to the guide in the following blog entry:
Learning Toolbox (LTB) Online Guide published!
– – –
I guess this is enough of the activities in the spring and early summer months of 2016. In my
next blogs I will report on the most recent activities (based on the information I have got from
my LL colleagues).
30. Catching up with Learning Layers fieldwork – Part Two: Fresh
feedback on the use of Learning Toolbox August 31st, 2016
With my previous post I started a series of blog entries to catch up with the fieldwork of our
ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. Because of my sick leave I felt the need
to catch up with the recent fieldwork of the Construction pilot with the deployment of
Learning Toolbox (LTB) – both in work-based learning and at construction sites. With my
first post I summarised where we ended up with the introduction of the LTB in our field
activities earlier this year. With this second post I provide insights into fresh feedback on the
use of LTB by construction sector apprentices.
The field visit of Markus Manhart (University of Innsbruck) to Bau-ABC
In the meantime our colleague Markus Manhart from the University of Innsbruck (UIBK) was
on field visit at the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC in Rostrup to collect
feedback on the use of LTB by apprentices and to interview their trainers. Markus has
shared his results with us and I can only do justice to his good work by making his report
available via this blog post.
Markus told that he organised two Focus Group sessions (focus on LTB) with six carpenter
apprentices (project Holzbau) and had two interviews with their trainers (Bruns, Pape). In
addition he had three Focus Groups with altogether 14 apprentices from another trade
(Baugeräteführer) on the use of video annotation tool AchSo. Since the use of mobile
devices is restricted (or not allowed at all) during their working periods in construction
companies, Markus asked them to reflect on their experiences with using the tools in Bau-
ABC (from the initial introduction to present date). Below I give extracts from Markus’ reports
(with next to original wording but to some extent edited by me – PK):
47
First finding: “Guiding replaces strict instructions”:
There is some evidence for a tool-supported change of the training patterns at Bau-ABC. In
the past, apprentices and trainers had a rather hierarchical perception of training activities,
characterised by limited autonomy for learners (= apprentices). Trainers told what to do and
apprentices expected to get detailed instructions. Using LTB (and also AchSo) is partly
contributing to a change towards more autonomous learning. The trainers tend to give
apprentices more room of manoeuvre how to prepare and implement their projects. Instead
of strictly instructing them, trainers tend to take the role of ‘guides’ for the apprentices.
However, the increase of autonomy seems to be dependent on many factors: characteristics
of learners, type of learning materials and achieved knowledge. Finally, the interpretation of
the trainers on their own role will influence greatly, how such change can occur.
Second finding: “From consuming to contributing”:
In the past, learning material was provided in a one-way communication from trainers to
apprentices. Thus, apprentices were more consumers of learning materials and recipients of
trainers’ knowledge. Now, the new tools (provided by the LL project) support a transition
towards a peer-to-peer mode of treating learning materials and knowledge resources.
However, in this context it is important to note that the asymmetry cannot be completely
abolished. From the perspective of trainers it is clear that some learning materials and
knowledge elements cannot be freely produced or acquired by apprentices. Also, the
apprentices are aware of their limits in this respect.
What can be produced and shared in terms of peer-to-peer communication are problems
with the apprentices’ projects or experiences with managing such projects (e.g. time
management, planning work steps). What should not be produced and shared in such
terms are instructions, how to perform project tasks (e.g. methods of how wooden beams
should be prepared or constructed) and information on health and safety regulations
(Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz).
Third finding: “Digital transformation”:
In the light of the two aspects mentioned above, apprentices and trainers have described
several episodes as exemplary cases, how the LL tools contribute to changes in training and
learning practices. These can be treated as indications on digital transformation in the
training and learning culture of Bau-ABC. (Below I give a nutshell summary, more
information can be obtained from Markus Manhart.)
Interestingly enough, in the light of these examples digital transformation does not
appear as a fundamental change of training and learning pushed by the tools. Instead,
it is perceived rather as meaningful changes of specific practices. Regarding meaningfulness
the apprentices gave the example on their obligation to document their daily project progress
and achieved results.
When working with paper- and pencil-based documentation the apprentices had several
possibilities to cheat the trainers with their reports. In general, they could write down what
the trainers would expect to get from them (even when this wouldn’t quite correspond with
the reality). Thus, if a task has taken a whole day, they could report having completed it in
48
three hours. Or they could omit mentioning problems they had encountered with project
tasks in their reports. In practice their trainers would not always be in the position to monitor
their work very thoroughly. In such cases, the marks given on their performance would not
reflect the actual performance of the apprentices. This deficit in controlling would favour the
ones inclined to cheat at the expense of the more honest apprentices.
When documenting the work with project tasks with videos, the apprentices provide a true
picture of situations, activities and results. This makes it possible for the trainers to assess, if
the task was performed adequately. Thus, they are better informed on what grounds they
can give the marks. In this way the changing pattern of reporting on apprentices’ projects
serves as an example, how the use of digital tools in the interaction between trainers and
learners enhances the apprentices’ commitment and motivation to appropriate task
completion.
– – –
I hope I have done justice to Markus’ text and conveyed the message he intended. To me
his findings are important clues for our conceptual interpretation on digital transformation in
workplace learning – as demonstrated in the context of the training centre Bau-ABC. In my
next post I will discuss our recent efforts to promote the use of LTB in craft trade companies
in the construction sector.
31. Catching up with Learning Layers fieldwork – Part Three: Introducing
Learning Toolbox to craft trade companies September 1st, 2016
With my previous posts I have been writing a series of blog entries to catch up with the
fieldwork of our ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. After my sick leave I
have been catching up with the recent fieldwork of the Construction sector pilot. In particular
I have been interested in the news on the deployment of Learning Toolbox (LTB) – both
in work-based learning and at construction sites. With my first post I summarised where we
ended up with the introduction of the LTB before the summer break. With this second post I
reported summarised recent feedback on the use of LTB by construction sector apprentices.
In this third post I will give insights into the introduction of LTB to craft trade companies in
construction sector.
Special challenges for Learning Toolbox in the work of electric engineering
companies
At the end of June 2016 some members of the LL team of ITB visited the company Siever +
Knüppel (one of our application partners) to discuss specific challenges that could be met
with tools like LTB. So far our pioneering examples had been from the context apprentice
training and project work on training sites. Dieter Siever (the director of the company
specialised in electric engineering) gave us a manifold picture of unexpected incidences,
changes of plans and potential mismatches between different trades involved in construction
work and electric engineering in reparation and maintenance work. In the course of
discussion we found several points in which the LTB could be adjusted to give support for
necessary measures. A summary of these discussions is available in the following blog:
Special challenges for using Learning Toolbox (LTB) in a craft trade company
49
Special challenges for the use of Learning Toolbox in managing construction sites
Recently the Verden-based architect Thomas Isselhard (our application partner from the
networks for ecological construction work) has got the responsibility to manage a special
construction site in Verden. In addition to the complexity of ordinary construction sites there
are special requirements from the perspective of maintaining cultural heritage
(Denkmalschutz). In addition to this, the construction site is located next to a street that is
used as open market area once a week (due to which there are restrictions to the work and
transport).
Thomas had already made his experiences with testing the LTB. Therefore, he was keen to
find out, how LTB would help him in supervising the craftsmen (from different trades and
companies) involved in the work as well as managing the contacts with clients and other
stakeholders (e.g. public authorities). Some members of the LL team of ITB have made a
working visit to Verden to discuss this case with Thomas and are preparing demonstration
materials with reference to this special case.
Workshop on the use of Learning Toolbox for craft trade companies in construction
sector
The above mentioned working visits are closely related to the preparations (of the LL team of
ITB and the LTB developers) for a workshop to introduce LTB for craft trade companies in
Bremen region. This workshop will take place in ITB next week and we are looking forward
to introduce the newest version of LTB there. Also, we want to collect similar exemplary
cases from the companies to find out specific points of intervention. So, I assume that by the
end of next week we have more to report from this front.
50
32. Bringing Learning Toolbox to users – Part One: Workshop with
ITB researchers September 9th, 2016
This week we have taken further steps in the fieldwork of our EU-funded Learning Layers
(LL) project and its key product Learning Toolbox (LTB) developed in the construction
sector pilot. The LTB has been shaped together with our application partners in the North-
German construction industries and trades to support workplace learning and/or learning in
the context of work processes.
With the two workshops that we organised on Wednesday (7.9.) and Thursday (8.9.) we
wanted to present the Toolbox and to bring it close to users. With researchers from our
institute – Institut Technik & Bildung (ITB) – we wanted to discuss interfaces and future
cooperation prospects. With representatives of craft trade companies in Bremen region we
wanted to discuss specific needs and opportunities for using the Toolbox in their work – and
to get feedback for further development. In this first post I focus on the workshop with ITB
researchers.
Getting an up-to-date picture of Learning Toolbox and where it can be used
Many of the ITB colleagues had already participated in earlier events in which we had
informed them of the LL project, on our work with the construction pilot and on the
participative design processes that led to the development of the LTB. Therefor, Werner
Müller (ITB) gave a very brief overview and then handed over to Gilbert Peffer (CIMNE) who
represented the developers of LTB. Gilbert gave an up-to-date presentation on the key
features of LTB and on its usability in different working and learning contexts – see Gilbert’s
slides here: LTB-WS_Handwerksbetriebe
As a part of his presentation Gilbert also demonstrated live the mobile application, the editor
(Tilestore) and the Online Guide. Finally, he gave a sneak preview to some new functions
that are being tested and will appear in the next version.
Engaging ITB researchers as users of Learning Toolbox
Together with the LL team of ITB Gilbert had prepared a specific application – a stack – in
the Learning Toolbox to support the preparation of an internal ITB event (“Klausurtagung“)
later this year. With this stack (see the screenshots below) he showed, how the information
on the forthcoming event can be delivered and the participants’ contributions can be
obtained in an interactive way.
51
We became aware of the questionnaire that has been prepared and of the opportunity to
contribute via using the LTB.
Discussion on the potential use of Learning Toolbox in further ITB projects
In the following discussion we mainly focused on possible use of the Toolbox in other
(ongoing or forthcoming) ITB projects. We discussed issues on data protection, data privacy
and confidentiality – who controls, who has access. We also discussed the potential to
develop the Toolbox as a contributor to e-portfolios of apprentices and trainees. Several
questions were raised on the role of social media (e.g. Facebook) and on good or bad
52
examples how it is being used. In the light of our multimedia training activities with our
application partners (in particular the training centre Bau-ABC) we could give insights how
they are using Facebook to promote professionalism and commitment to their trades via
specific FB-groups.
Altogether, many of these questions could be responded with reference to field visits and
working events on which I have reported on this blog during the recent months. With some of
the questions we could refer to issues that would come up with the discussions with craft
trade companies in the workshop scheduled for the next day. And with some questions we
took notes for the developers of the Learning Toolbox. We still have work to do in the
ongoing project.
33. Bringing Learning Toolbox to users – Part Two: Workshop with
craft trade companies in Bremen September 10th, 2016
In my previous post I started a series of reports on the newest events in the fieldwork of our
EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project and its key product Learning Toolbox (LTB)
developed in the construction sector pilot. The LTB has been shaped together with our
application partners in the North-German construction industries and trad to support
workplace learning and/or learning in the context of work processes. With the two workshops
that we organised on Wednesday (7.9.) and Thursday (8.9.) we wanted to present the
Toolbox and to bring it close to users. The previous post covered the workshop with
researchers from our institute – Institut Technik & Bildung (ITB). This second post focuses
on the workshop that we had with representatives of craft trade companies and construction
sector professionals from Bremen region.
Introducing the Learning Layers project and the Learning Toolbox
In this workshop the moderator Werner Müller (ITB) and the representative of the developers
of the Toolbox Gilbert Peffer (CIMNE) focused on the efferts of the project to support
learning and knowledge sharing in the context of work and organisations. In particular Gilbert
demonstrated the use of the Toolbox with different examples on practice-based learning and
on getting access to relevant information and deeper know-how in work situations. See
Gilbert’s slides here LTB-WS_Handwerksbetriebe.
The case for using Learning Toolbox at a construction site (by Thomas Isselhard)
After the introductions our application partner Thomas Isselhard from the network for
ecological construction work (Netzwerk Nachhaltiges Bauen – NNB) presented the case with
which he had trained himself to become an active user of the Learning Toolbox. Thomas is
an architect with expertise on renovating old buildings and work with ecologically sound
construction materials. He is now in charge of a special construction site in Verden. The old
building that is under preservation order (Denkmalschutz) needs to be renovated thoroughly.
However, due to the preservation order there are further requirements how the work needs
to be done. And therefore, there are frequent changes in plans and instructions – and
repeated needs for real-time communication between and advice for the teams that are
working on the site. In the following video clip Thomas and Werner discuss this issue when
visiting the construction site:
53
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFNK2n9btSg
Concerning the introduction of the Toolbox in their working Thomas refers to their standard
procedures, files and use of colours in paper-based archiving. It has been convenient for his
fellow colleagues and collaborators to use the similar structure in creating digital tiles in the
Toolbox (for specific phases and documents) and to equip them with the colours that have
been used in paper-based archiving. Therefore, he has a general prototype stack (of such
tiles) that he can copy for new cases with which he will use the Toolbox. In the following
video clip Thomas expresses this in his own words:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SIaQjBGBRNA
Thomas gave us several examples from everyday life situations, how much
miscommunication and unnecessary delays (due to waiting times) can be avoided if different
parties involved were equipped with such a Toolbox and had the updated information
(without confusion on versions) at the same time available.
Discussion on other prospects or working issues to be considered
In the discussion several issues were raised from the perspective of the companies. In the
beginning some participants were concerned, whether construction workers are ready to use
digital tools and insert information in writing. Thomas stated immediately that the Toolbox is
very easy to use and that users can adjust it to their needs without heavy training. Others
emphasised that there are several ‘paperwork’ duties that can be immensely facilitated with
such an interactive tool. Furthermore, the Toolbox makes it easier to manage different
communication channels and versions of documents that are being used.
Also, the Toolbox makes it easier to distinguish between archives and working documents –
and to make this distinction transparent to all parties. Yet, for regular use, the participants
needed clarification on storage of data (cloud – central server – local server), on different
levels of privacy and sharing, on access to public resources (official maps held by public
authorities) and on the policies and pricing for subscriptions. These, as we see it, will be
clarified by the end of the LL project, when the support of the Toolbox is continued by a new
service provider.
54
34. Thoughts on “Digital divide 4.0” – Part One: How to overcome
such divides? September 13th, 2016
With this post I will start a series of reflections on the concept “Digital Divide 4.0” (to be
explained below). These reflections have been inspired by recent experiences with fieldwork
for our ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project and in particular with its key
product the Learning Toolbox (LTB).
In particular these thoughts have been triggered by our workshops last week (see my
previous posts) and our working visit to the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC (to
be covered in my next posts). All of a sudden I started thinking, what kind of ‘digital divide(s)’
we are encountering. And in addition to this, I got struck by the question: In what ways can
the Learning Toolbox help us to overcome such divides?
The different meanings of ‘digital divide’
As I see it, debates on the topic ‘digital divide’ have come and gone in several waves. In the
more recent debates the authors have characterised their point of view with expressions like
‘Digital divide 2.0’ or (in some cases) ‘Digital divide 3.0’. This, of course has been shadowing
the authors’ view on the evolution of web technologies, uses of web and the perception of
the gaps that cause the respective divide.
I am not an expert on this topic but my rough picture of this history is the following:
● The initial discussion on the topic ‘digital divide’ (which we could now label as
the phase of ‘Digital divide 1.0’) drew attention to lacking access to computer
technology and computer literacy as main problem. Thus, strategies to overcome
digital divide were directed to provide access (private and public) to devices and to
promote computer literacy by different campaigns involving formal and informal
learning opportunities.
● The second phase of these debates – named by some authors as ‘Digital divide
2.0’ – has shifted the emphasis on computers and computer literacy to Internet,
World-Wide Web and to social networks. The key problem is seen in the lacking or
poor Internet connections and web-literacy. Thus, the strategies to overcome digital
divide have emphasised the necessity to promote access to internet and to engage
the users as participants (clients) of social networks and networked services.
● The third phase – arising from the previous one and only rarely distinguished as
‘Digital divide 3.0’ shifts the emphasis to mobile devices, in particular to
smartphones. In this perception the lack of Internet access via mobile devices (and/or
the lacking capability to use them for real-time Internet searches and communication)
is the main problem addressed by the concept. And, consequently, the main
emphasis is given on informal coaching, tutoring, mentoring, scaffolding etc. to get
the potential users over the hurdle and turn them into active users.
What are we missing from this picture and how – in this respect – could these divides
be overcome?
55
Whilst the above presented picture seems valid, to us it is one-sided: the technologies (as
such) appear as the driving force and the users only need to get access to the devices and
to the respective ‘literacy’ to use them. In this way the ‘ordinary’ users need to be educated
to be able to use the technologies in the way the designers have planned.
However, from starting from very the beginning of the LL project and up to present date we
have experienced another type of problem constellation that we could characterise as
‘Digital divide 4.0’. Here we have a situation in which the potential users have access to
appropriate devices and to average digital literacy but are confronted with a multitude of
stand-alone apps, tools, platforms and services – the relevance of which remains a riddle to
them. Thus, the users lack orientation and guidance that would help them to make informed
choices for options that match their needs. This can be characterised as a Tantalos-situation
– by analogy to the antique tale. (Tantalos was stuck into position next to fruit treas that were
quasi at his reach but kept their branches out of his reach. Likewise, he was standing next to
a river, but when he bowed down to drink, the water escaped his lips.) Therefore, this new
divide is not characterised by lack of access to (and command of) particular technologies but
lack of overview and strategic mastery of them in terms of user-competences.
What is so specific in the Learning Toolbox regarding ‘Digital divide 4.0’?
In the light of the above we are happy to announce that on several occasions we have been
able to witness that the introduction of the Learning Toolbox has clearly contribute to
processes that help to overcome such Tantalos-situations. At the moment our experiences
are episodic and limited in numbers. Yet, we can start looking at the turning points and at the
criteria for overcoming the kind of ‘Digital divide 4.0’ that has been typical of the situation
before our pilot activities.
– – –
I guess this is enough as an introduction to the topic. In my next post I will have a look at our
fieldwork and on our observations concerning the use of the Learning Toolbox to overcome
the kind of digital divide I discussed above.
56
35. Thoughts on “Digital divide 4.0” – Part Two: Observations on
the uses of Learning Toolbox in Bau-ABC September 16th, 2016
With my latest post I started a series of reflections on the concept “Digital Divide 4.0”
(see my previous post ). These reflections have been inspired by recent experiences with
fieldwork for our ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project and in particular with its
key product the Learning Toolbox (LTB).
In particular these thoughts have been triggered by our LTB workshops (covered in my
earlier posts) and our working visit to the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC. With
this blog I try to give insights into our observations on ‘digital divide 4.0’ in the beginning
phase of the LL project and into the role of our project work in overcoming such divides.
Here I would like to emphasist the role of participative design processes, capacity-building
measures and the user-driven deployment of LTB in the training activities of Bau-ABC.
Findings on the use of digital tools and mobile apps in the early phase of the LL
project
In the beginning phase of the LL project the ITB team carried out several interviews among
Bau-ABC trainers and representatives of craft trade companies regarding their use of digital
tools, web platforms and mobile apps. Likewise, we carried out (in collaboration with Bau-
ABC) a user survey among the Bau-ABC apprentices.
Without going into details, both the interviews and the survey gave a picture of a scattered
landscape of stand-alone tools, apps and platforms. The trainers and company
representatives had looked at different sites but were not convinced of the quality – it was
difficult to distinguish, what tools/apps were meant for professional use and what for
hobbyists. The apprentices new very few of them and had hardly any experience with them.
In general, this picture corresponds with my characterisation of ‘digital divide 4.0’ (see my
previous post). Both our interview partners and the apprentices responding to the survey
were users of smartphones, had acquired a considerable web capability and were exploring,
how to use the new tools and technologies. Yet, the trainers and company representatives
experienced a kind of Tantalos-situation (see my previous post) – having a multitude of
possibilities but not getting a hold of them. Likewise, the apprentices were frustrated
because web tools, apps and mobile devices played no role in the training.
What was the role of co-design processes and multimedia training?
In the co-design workshops with Bau-ABC trainers we were looking for ways to support their
pedagogic approaches (action-oriented learning, self-organised learning) in context-specific
training projects. Likewise, in the workshops with apprentices we were looking at
characteristic working tasks and specific situations in which digital tools would be useful.
This all was fed to the development of the Learning Toolbox.
In the Multimedia Training we (the facilitators from Pontydysgu and ITB) helped the Bau-
ABC trainers to find their own approach to using digital tools and web resources – and to
editing their own contents. The most important achievements of this phase were the trainers’
57
own WordPress blogs with which they have made their training materials publicly available.
(See Zimmererblog, Maurerblog, Tiefbaublog, Brunnenbauerblog.)
Interim assessments by Bau-ABC trainers during the project
In between the Bau-ABC trainers have contributed with their interim assessments that have
given important impulses for the development of the Learning Toolbox and for reshaping of
the multimedia training arrangements:
● In August/September 2014 the Bau-ABC colleagues couldn’t participate in the LL
consortium meeting in Tallin. Instead they prepared a video message that was later on
edited into short videos. These outlined different contexts for using the Learning Toolbox
in the training of Bau-ABC and in different work situations. In one of the videos four
trainers discuss their pedagogic principles (action-oriented learning; self-organised
learning) and how they see the possibilities to promote such learning via Learning
Toolbox (see below).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muunm2lDqo8
● In May 2015 the Bau-ABC trainers made an interim assessment on the earlier
Multimedia training (2013 -2014) and on their internal follow-up (2014 -2015). They
came to the conclusion that Bau-ABC needs to organise a training scheme for the whole
trainer staff to bring the media competences to a common level and to work out joint
approaches for using the respective tools, apps and platforms. This provided the basis
for the Theme Room training campaign that was implemented in November 2015 by
tutors from Bau-ABC, ITB and Pontydysgu (with on-site support by Jaanika Hirv from
TLU). This campaign was a major step forward to prepare the Bau-ABC trainers to take
the role of active users of the Learning Toolbox.
Reflections on the deployment of Learning Toolbox and on the feedback from the
users
In February and March 2016 we started the active phase of deployment of the Learning
Toolbox with some Bau-ABC trainers in their training projects. Already at that stage we could
see that the trainers quickly developed their own ways to use stacks, pages and tiles to
shape their training projects:
● In the trade of well-builders (Brunnenbauer) the emphasis was given on a specific
project folder that is supported by content tiles (Reference materials) and collection
tiles (photos and videos). When the pilot group of well-builder apprentices moved on
to training periods in other trades (metalworking, borehole building), the trainers in
these trades provided similar project folders.
● The joint project of carpenters (Zimmerer) and bricklayers (Maurer) was based on a
common mother-stack that was linked to daughter stacks that presented the
respective subprojects to be carried out during training periods in the respective
trades. In addition, the mother stack provided links to other daughter stacks that
provided collections of tools and of further learning materials.
When collecting feedback on the use of Learning Tools the LL researchers involved (mainly
Markus Manhart from UIBK) could conclude that the trainers were becoming owners of the
innovation and that the apprentices had adopted the use of Learning Toolbox as ‘their way’
of managing the projects. In particular the following observations were of interest:
58
● From the pedagogic point of view the trainers had set somewhat different accents.
Some of them put an emphasis on equipping the apprentices with comprehensive sets
of reference materials and challenging them to do selective and searches for their
purposes. Here one could use the metaphor of ‘well’ for the stacks as stable learning
resources. Other trainers put an emphasis on curiosity- and interest-based learning and
with respective opening of new pages or tiles for apprentices. Here one could use the
metaphor of ‘watering cans’ for the stacks as learning resources that are adjusted to the
learners’ progress. Consequently, their apprentices have developed either explorative or
level-by-level progressing learning approaches.
● From the infrastructural and organisational points of view the trainers concluded
that the deployment of Learning Toolbox had been carried out as a limited pilot. Now the
time had come ripe to make commitments for the whole organisation (including the
infrastructure and the availability of mobile devices for all training areas). The
apprentices had experienced difficulties due to limited internet access – both in the
training centre and even more when they were on construction sites. Yet, they
emphasised the advantages of using Learning Toolbox vis-à-vis the time when they had
not had such a toolset. Also, they put a major emphasis in having the necessary tools in
an integrated and contextually adjusted set. However, very few had been able to
convince their employers or supervisors of the benefits of the Toolbox. Here, it apparent
that the company representatives have to find their own ways to use such a toolset and
to become aware of the benefits from their perspective.
Concluding remarks
I believe this is enough of our learning journey in the context of the Learning Layers project
and with focus on the project activities in the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC. To
me this story serves as an example, how participative design process, capacity building and
user-driven tool deployment can work well in the long run. As I see it, we started in a
situation that could be characterised as ‘digital divide 4.0’ and worked through processes
that helped us to overcome such divides (including us as researchers and our counterparts
in the training centre). However, the story shows that we need extra efforts to help the
construction companies to find their ways forward. I will get back to this in my next blog.
59
36. Thoughts on “Digital divide 4.0” – Part Three: Discussions on
the use of Learning Toolbox at construction sites September 17th, 2016
With my two latest posts I have presented reflections on “Digital Divide 4.0” (regarding
the concept, see the first post ). These reflections have been inspired by recent experiences
with fieldwork for our ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project and in particular
with its key product the Learning Toolbox (LTB).
In my previous post I discussed, how this concept reflects the initial difficulties of our project
work in the construction sector training centre Bau-ABC – and how our collaboration helped
the trainers to become innovation leaders with LTB. In this post I shift the emphasis to our
other application partners – the network for ecological construction work (Netzwerk
Nachhaltiges Bauen – NNB) and craft trade companies in building and construction.
Revisiting the Learning Toolbox Workshop with craft trade companies (8.9.2016)
One week ago ITB organised a workshop on Learning Toolbox in which Thomas Isselhard
from NNB presented, how he has started using the Toolbox and representatives of craft
trade companies from Bremen region discussed, what benefits the Toolbox could bring to
them. In my earlier blog post I have already reported of this event on the basis of my first
impressions. Now I have had the chance to revisit this experience when editing the video
material from the event. In particular I have been inspired by the way Thomas Isselhard has
explained, how he has overcome his own doubts about ‘yet another tool’ and how he has
been able to introduce the Toolbox as a joint instrument for coordinating the work and
sharing information in real time.
Using the Toolbox to manage a construction site in Verden – challenges and
possibilities
Looking again at the video material on Thomas Isselhard’s presentation it strikes me, how
many points he makes on the transition phase: “Why should I start using the Toolbox and
what could it bring to me/us in charge of construction sites?”. He starts with the simple things
to be coordinated with the help of the Toolbox – lists of contractors and partners as well as
the distribution of tasks between different parties. He gives insights into difficulties in coping
with changing plans and versions of plans in the traditional way – with paper documents and
communication via phone calls and e-mails. In this way we get an insight into the
advantages of real-time communication, coordinated version management and notification of
changes – all enabled via Learning Toolbox. (See below the edited short video on Thomas
Isselhard’s presentation – in German but with subtitles in English):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcaNRZ_zsts
Getting used to working with the Toolbox – starting with simple steps that make
sense
In the other video Thomas Isselhard discusses with Werner Müller (ITB) and Gilbert Peffer
(CIMNE), how to get other actors interested in using the Toolbox. Thomas emphasised how
they started in their own organisation – by simple content tiles and by replicating the
standard processes and the filing systems that they were used to (even using the same
60
colours for same contents). In the network for ecological construction work he addressed the
young professionals in the partner organisations to get them working as the pioneers for
introducing the Toolbox. When starting a cooperation with a contractor on a construction site
Thomas links the introduction of the Toolbox to the instruction to the task (uploading with a
QR-code) In this context he explains, how the Toolbox can be used to follow the updates of
the plans and to give feedback on the progress with the contractor’s work. Whilst the use of
Toolbox has been introduced as a service provided by the planners (architects, construction
site managers), the real benefit lies in the interactive use of all parties involved. (See below
the edited short video on the discussion – in German but with subtitles in English):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODmIp1YuC3s
Concluding remarks
I guess this is enough of this part of the workshop and on the videos on Thomas’
presentation and the immediate discussion. Whilst the previous post looked at a lengthy co-
design, preparation and deployment process (in Bau-ABC), these samples give insights into
a quick transition into active use. Also, it is interesting to see, how Thomas is able to
demonstrate the smooth entry to using Toolbox and the benefits it can offer in the day-to-day
cooperation in construction work. (This was taken up in the further discussion in the
workshop but I need to have a fresh look at the video recordings before continuing my
reporting on that part.) In the meantime I will discuss the role of vocational school teachers
as potential users and promoters of the Learning Toolbox.
37. Thoughts on “Digital divide 4.0” – Part Four: How to bridge the
gap between formal and informal learning? September 18th, 2016
With my three latest posts I have presented reflections on “Digital Divide 4.0” (regarding
the concept, see the first post). These reflections have been inspired by recent experiences
with fieldwork for our ongoing EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project and in particular
with its key product the Learning Toolbox (LTB). In my second post I discussed, how this
concept reflects the initial difficulties of our project work in the construction sector training
centre Bau-ABC.
In this post I shift the emphasis to another part of the German vocational education and
training (VET) system – to vocational schools. This is partly triggered by a recent working
meeting with a vocational school teacher, who wondered, why their school was not included
into our project. Indeed, for us in ITB and in the training centre Bau-ABC it is a key issue,
how to bridge gaps between formal and informal learning when developing workplace-based
learning. In my short answer I referred to the funding priorities that emphasised strongly the
promotion of informal learning (and SMEs as target groups). In order to understand this it is
useful to look back at the development of earlier policies to promote e-Learning or
Technology-Enhanced Learning (on the one hand) and initiatives to promote professional
development of teachers and trainers in VET (on the other hand). Yet, we need to ask, why
the conceptual gap between parallel earlier policies and initiatives has remained. Moreover,
we should reflect, how our work in the LL project could help to bridge the gaps.
61
Background: Earlier e-Learning as ‘alternative’ for institutionalised education and
training
Looking back at the educational initiatives in 1980s and 1990s there was a gradual
movement in efforts to create new opportunities for open learning. This was reflected in the
terminology – ‘remote learning’, ‘distance learning’, ‘open distance learning (ODL)’, ‘blended
learning’ – all these referred to different steps and measures to open access to education
and learning. Suddenly, at the end of 1990s and at the brink of the ‘New Millennium’ there
was a great hype on ‘eLearning‘. In the newer initiatives there was a clear tendency to push
the institutionalised education (and the adult education movement) aside. Some protagonists
tried to bring forward private providers and new ‘career spaces’ via commercial eLearning
programs as the innovation leaders. This was reflected in the separate European funding
opportunities for e-Learning of that time. However, concerning the projects on the uses of e-
Learning by work organisations, I remember that they concluded that the take on eLearning
provisions was low. Instead, wider European surveys – like the the ones of the project “ICT
and SMEs” – provided valuable information on the ways that SMEs actually used to support
(organisational) learning.
Shift of emphasis: Teachers and trainers in VET as ‘key actors for lifelong learning’
Whilst the above mentioned developments emerged from fringe areas in education and
training policies, the next wave – the follow-up of the EU Lisbon Summit 2000 – was part of
an overarching development of EU policies. In the field of education and training this took
shape firstly in the European Commission strategy document Education and Training 2010
and the aim was to promote a digital learning culture to support global competitiveness of
European economy. In the first phase this follow-up was promoted by European working
groups and supported by commissioned follow-up studies. In particular the follow-up study
for the Maastricht meeting in 2004 drew attention that the engagement of teachers and
trainers (notably in vocational education and training (VET) was lagging behind regarding the
promotion of digital learning culture.
This gave rise for the European Commission to introduce new initiatives to stimulate trans-
national cooperation and European exchanges with different formats: the Eurotrainer
surveys, the TTplus framework project, the network ‘Trainers in Europe’, the policy-makers’
Peer Learning seminars and the Europe-wide series of ‘regional’ consultation seminars for
different stakeholder groups. Altogether these measures increased the European knowledge
basis on VET teacher education and training of trainers across Europe. However, these
activities did not provide a basis for common qualification frameworks – instead they
recommended the continuation of such participative dialogue forums with emphasis on
learning lessons from recent innovations.
Another shift of emphasis: Focus on digital media and mobile technologies to support
informal learning
In the meantime the development of web technologies and the spread of mobile devices had
given new impulses for technology-enhanced learning. This became manifest in the wider
use of online learning platforms, e-portfolios and open educational resources (OER). Now,
there was less talk of sidelining the educational establishments but promoting specific
initiatives (the networks of open universities) or by joint services (for consortia of member
universities). Parallel to this there was a need to explore, how new forms of online learning
could be promoted in working life, in particular in such occupations that were characterised
62
by SMEs (and not catered for by university-industry alliances). Partly, the newer policy
priorities were looking for genuinely work- and organisation-based modes of (informal)
learning, partly for ways to reduce training costs by promoting flexible learning alongside
work.
The experience with Learning Layers: The role of trainers and facilitators as change
agents
In my two previous posts I have discussed the issue ‘digital divide’ in its current forms
(“Digital divide 4.0”) in general and in the light of our fieldwork in the Learning Layers project.
Also, I have given insights, how we have made progress with our application partners in the
construction sector training centre Bau-ABC and in the network for ecological construction
work (NNB). In both cases we have not relied on stand-alone tools or self-learning of
practitioners (with the help of online tutorials). With the Learning Toolbox we have managed
to develop – in a co-design process with the users – an integrative toolset that meets several
basic needs and is easy to expand by the users themselves. Also, we have trained the
pioneering users in joint learning sessions to work as peer tutors and mentors in their own
communites and networks. However, the wider use has always been dependent on the
interest of new users (and anticipation of practical benefits for them). Here, the success
factor is to introduce Learning Toolbox as one instrument to promote knowledge sharing,
coordination of tasks and real-time communication – and in this way work-related and
organisational learning.
Follow-up: What role for teachers and trainers in promoting digital agenda in
vocational education?
In the light of the above we (the partners working with the construction pilot of the LL project)
have good reasons to consider, what role could teachers in vocational schools play in the
follow-up phase. In the German dual system there is a constant challenge to improve
cooperation between the fundamental learning venues: enterprise (workplace and the
intermediate training centre) and school. In this respect the Learning Toolbox will offer new
prospects. Also, the new importance of European mobility schemes (training of apprentices
from Spain, Greece etc. in Germany) and the integration schemes for refugees provide new
challenges for teachers and trainers in VET. Here, we believe that the introduction of
Learning Toolbox could help different parties work together. I will get back to these issues
soon.
63
38. Learning Layers in Leeds – Part One: Paving the way for the
final run September 27th, 2016
Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its last joint project consortium
meeting (before the final review meeting) in Leeds, hosted by Leeds University, NHS and
our software partner PinBellCom (latterly merged to EMIS group). This consortium meeting
differed from many earlier ones because most of the work of the project has already been
done. Also, quite a lot of strategic decisions concerning the final reporting had already been
done. Therefore, we could concentrate on harvesting the most recent results and
coordinating some preparatory processes for the final reporting. Yet, this meeting also had
its salt and spices as well. In the first post I will give a brief overview on the meeting on the
whole. In the second post I will focus on the picture that I/we gave on the construction sector
pilot in some of the sessions.
Overview on the main sessions
After a quick situation assessment on the current phase of the project we started working in
groups and in interim plenaries to be followed by group work:
1. With the sessions on evaluation studies we had parallel groups working with the
evaluation studies that had been adjusted to the progress in construction pilot and
healthcare pilot. Concerning the construction pilot, our colleagues from the UIBK
presented quantitative data and summarised the qualitative findings that have been
discussed earlier on this blog. We had some discussions, whether we can enrich that
material with some last minute interviews but that remains to be decided at the local
level.
2. Regarding the integrated deliverable (result-oriented website) we had common
discussions on the structure, on the current phase of the main sections and on the
technical implementation. Then we had parallel groups on the impact cards, ‘learning
scenarios’ (or instances of change) and on the ‘research, development and evaluation
approaches’. In the group work we focused on the situation in the sectoral pilots and on
the complementary relations between impact cards (demonstrating particular impact),
the scenarios or instances (in interpreting the findings in a conceptual and future-
oriented way) and the research approaches (in presenting the contribution of the main
research approaches represented in the project work).
3. In a joint demonstration session Tamsin Treasure-Jones informed us, how the
Learning Toolbox had been used in an adapted participative “Barcamp” session that was
implemented in the AMEE (Association for Medical Education in Europe) conference in
Barcelona. This example served as an inspiration and can be adapted for other research
and development communities as well.
4. In a practicing session we rotated between different topic tables to prepare ‘marketing
pitches’ to convey the key messages of our tools/infrastructures/impact cases/research
approaches. Each table was managed by moderator and the participants could take the
role of presenter or listener. This helped us to get an overview and to concentrate on the
core message of our presentations.
5. In the Elevator pitches session we then presented the pitches (20 second pitch to
qualify as presenter and a 3 minute pitch to convey the message). In this session Pablo
64
served as real-time rapporteur and colleagues from Leeds had invited ‘critical friends’ to
give feedback. This session helped us to shift us from project-internal reporting to
speaking to new audiences.
6. In the concluding session we discussed the organisation of the review meeting, the
time plan for remaining activities and some final dissemination activities.
Altogether we made good progress in getting a common picture, what all we have achieved
and how to present it. To be sure, we have several points to be settled in a number of
working meetings during the coming weeks. But the main thing is that we set the course to
achieving common results in the time that is available – and we are fully engaged to make it.
39. Learning Layers in Leeds – Part Two: Giving a picture on
construction pilot and Learning Toolbox September 28th, 2016
Last week our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project had its last joint project consortium
meeting (before the final review meeting) in Leeds, hosted by the local partners. We
focused on harvesting the most recent results and coordinating the final preparatory
processes for the final reporting. In the first post I will give a brief overview on the meeting on
the whole. In this second post I will focus on the picture that I/we gave on the construction
sector pilot in the preparation sessions and in the Elevator pitch session.
Insights into the preparation sessions (focus on impact and cases, scenarios and
research approaches)
In the preparation sessions we rotated between three topic tables (of five altogether) to
prepare the marketing pitches for which we had been signed (or to listen to others’
contributions and to give feedback). My choice was to give pitches on the impact cases,
‘learning scenarios’ (or instances of change) and on research approaches. In the first topic
table it was useful to share ideas between construction pilot (use of Learning Toolbox at
construction site) and healthcare pilot (use of Learning Toolbox in a conference
environment). As a spin-off I promised to communicate the idea of using LTB in the
forthcoming European conferences on vocational education and training in 2017 (ECER
2017, ‘Crossing boundaries 2017’). I also picked the idea of using LTB in conferences as a
manifestation of ‘work process knowledge’ of researchers. In the topic table of ‘learning
scenarios’ we discussed the criteria, what is to be presented as ‘impact cases’ and what
qualifies as ‘scenarios’ or ‘instances of change’ in terms of conceptual interpretation. In the
topic table of ‘research approaches’ we also had a similar discussion regarding the
presentation of research methodologies and research findings.
Presenting the construction pilot in the ‘Elevator pitch’ session (‘impact cases’, ‘work
process knowledge’ and ‘accompanying research’)
The ‘Elevator pitch’ session followed the pattern of marketing events that are typical in
educational technology and software development communities. Each presenter had a 20
seconds slot to announce the topic and attract the interest of audience. Then the presenter
had a 3 minutes slot to present the case and to convey the message. After each
presentation three persons gave feedback (including one of the two ‘critical friends’ that were
invited by the organisers). Below I focus on my/our presentations on the construction pilot of
the LL project.
65
a) The impact cases: Use of Learning Toolbox in training (the pitch of Melanie
Campbell) and at a construction site (my pitch)
In her pitch Melanie Campbell presented the training centre Bau-ABC as an application
partner of the project and gave insights into the impact of the project from their perspective.
Her key message was that Bau-ABC had engaged itself as a ‘learning organisation’ in
different phases of the project work and used the opportunity to enhance the digital literacy
and multimedia competences of its staff. On the basis of successful deployment of the
Learning Toolbox Bau-ABC is looking forward to a more prominent role in promoting this
know-how in its initial training (for apprentices), continuing training (for construction
professionals) and training partnerships (with suppliers and client companies). She
emphasised the new strategic interpretation of ‘Internet as the fourth learning venue’
(“Internet als vierter Lernort”) – alongside the company employing the apprentice
(Ausbildungsbetrieb), the intermediate training centre (überbetriebliche Ausbildunsstätte)
and the vocational school (Berufsschule) – and the contribution of the Learning Layers
project in conveying this message.
In my first pitch I presented (with the help of a short video demonstration) the impact case
of using Learning Toolbox (LTB) in the management of a construction site. I used the
video on Thomas Isselhard’s recent presentation (see my recent blog) as an exemplary
case to show, what kind of problems can be overcome with LTB, how the traditional way of
managing the processes can be supported by LTB and how different parties can be engaged
as users of LTB – to achieve real-time knowledge sharing and communication. Here I
positioned myself as the interpreter and let the practitioner explain the benefits, see below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GcaNRZ_zsts
b) The ‘learning scenario’: Learning Toolbox as means to make ‘work process
knowledge’ transparent in lived practice
In my second pitch – for ‘learning scenarios’ (or instances of change) – I focused on the
concept ‘work process knowledge’ and how the use of Learning Toolbox (LTB) can
make this concept more transparent. I looked back at the original European projects of the
Work Process Knowledge network (funded by EU, 4th Framework programme of research)
between 1998 and 2001. In the original studies the network analysed informal and cross-
organisational learning processes as preconditions for innovation. They came up with the
concept of ‘work process knowledge’ (as shared foundation of knowledge, experience and
trust) based on which the organisations can successfully implement major changes. The
network had collected several interesting cases in which interactive informal learning in
organisations – and workers’ participation in shaping the technical and organisational
changes. Yet, with their plans to develop follow-up projects they got narrowed down to more
particular approaches on ‘organisational learning’ and to local and sectoral tools or
instruments to promote such learning. With reference to the ‘impact cases’ on LTB I argued
that the introduction of the integrative toolset has helped managers, skilled workers, trainers
and apprentices to get a common overview on work processes and a shared understanding
on matching activities and contributions.
c) The research approach: Transformation of ‘accompanying research’ within
participative design and tool deployment processes
66
In my third pitch – with focus on research approaches – I invited the audience to a journey
to revisit the development of the accompanying research approach of ITB during the
construction pilot of the Learning Layers project. Firstly I mentioned two earlier models of
accompanying research (Begleitforschung) of which ITB has rich experiences:
● Accompaniment of a regional ‘Work and Technology’ programme and its
projects in 1990-1997: Focus on the attainment of policy goals regarding social
shaping of work, technology, organisations and regional cooperation.
● Accompaniment of nation-wide educational innovation programme ‘New
learning concepts in dual vocational education and training’ 1997-2003: Focus on the
attainment of self-declared innovation goals regarding introduction of new pedagogic
and curricular settings, new occupational profiles and new instructional designs.
Concerning Learning Layers, I emphasised the difference, since we were working with an
open and participative co-design process (with several iterative phases and adjustments),
with common search for an appropriate design concept and ways to deploy the integrative
toolset. During the process the accompanying researchers worked as
● explorers (mapping workshops and initial interviews),
● facilitators of digital literacy (the early multimedia training),
● co-designers (in the shaping of the concept of Learning Toolbox),
● co-tutors (the training campaign for all Bau-ABC staff),
● facilitators of tool deployment (introduction of Learning Toolbox),
● co-evaluators (collecting feedback and reviewing the qualitative feedback).
Concerning the interaction of accompanying researchers with practitioners we tried to
position ourselves as supporting partners – helping them to become owners of the
innovation. This was clearly successful with the early multimedia training and with the
launch of trainers’ blogs (see the video of August 2014 below). In a similar way the
deployment of Learning Toolbox was a user-driven exercise in which Bau-ABC trainers set
their own accents on promoting problem-oriented learning (with rich resources) or interest-
based and expansive learning (with gradually increasing variety of resources). In a similar
way the apprentices were guided by trainers to become owners of their own learning
processes by self-organised use of learning resources via Learning Toolbox.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdMJ5vN5-rk
Concluding remarks and lessons for the final run
Regarding the feedback on my pitches, I was praised for the use of video to pass a user’s
own voice and accents in the first pitch, I was criticized for not using such visuals in the two
latter ones (I dropped the idea because the video could not be displayed that well to all). I
was also praised for presenting coherent stories but criticized for giving too much emphasis
on the history and leaving the connection between history and present date too thin. Finally,
I was praised by making the users visible and emphasising them as ‘pioneers’, our role in
’empowering users’ and making transparent different ways of using innovative toolsets.
Altogether, this feedback helped us to pull ourselves out of project-internal reporting and to
focus on new audiences who don’t have the shared background knowledge.
– – –
67
I think this is enough of this exercise. At the moment we are taking further steps in preparing
the final documents, making further arrangements for the final review and working with
follow-up activities.
40. Wrapping up the Learning Layers experience – Part One: Digital
transformation as lived practice October 29th, 2016
During the last four years I and my colleagues have been working in our EU-funded
Learning Layers (LL) project. Now we are in the phase of drawing final conclusions and
editing the final deliverables. Whilst such a phase easily requires more focused work on
particular products – in our cases tool descriptions, impact cards, scenarios, methodology
descriptions etc. – it is essential to keep the big picture in our minds. Our project was about
introducing new technologies – tools for mobile devices to support access to web resources
and to online communication – but not only of that. Most of all it was about changing
practices in workplace learning or learning in the context of work. And it is in this
context that the project has gone through a long journey and made important experiences.
With this post and the next ones I try to revisit our learning journey in the LL pilot in
construction sector draw some conclusions and key messages arising from it. In this post I
will focus on the overarching theme ‘digital transformation’.
Digital transformation as lived practice
I am aware of the fact that there is plenty of literature on the theme ‘digital transformation’
and that I should do my homework with if I want to use this concept properly. However, given
the intensity of our project work, I have come across this theme from the perspective of our
fieldwork and in our own processes of work. In this context we have experienced many
transitions from earlier modes of work to new ways of using online resources and web-based
communication and interaction. A great deal of our research and development work is
carried out on web platforms and by using shared resources. And if we use traditional e-
mails, then mainly when sending out group mails for wider target groups. Furthermore, when
developing new online tools, such as the much discussed Learning Toolbox (LTB), we are
more and more inclined to find ways to use for such tools in our own work – not only in the
pilot fields. Altogether, my perspective on the topic ‘digital transformation’ is primarily that of
manifold step-by-step changes in everyday life as lived practice.
Digital transformation as precondition for/aim of a R&D project
Shifting the emphasis from our everyday life as project partners into our field of piloting – the
construction sector – we need to take a broader perspective. Indeed, there have been many
speculations on automation and new technologies making skilled workers redundant – or
cautious statements on the limits to digitisation in construction work. To be sure, the true
picture is probably characterised by an ongoing change between the extreme poles. But how
to grasp the real picture of changes in construction sector?
Looking back at the earliest interviews in the project, we learned a lot of the infant diseases
of several ‘new technologies’ that didn’t work properly or didn’t reduce the workload of
construction professionals. Likewise, we heard of several stand-alone apps that were
advertised for construction sector, but were not good enough for professional use (or didn’t
promote learning at work). So, in the further work we needed to keep an eye on real
68
innovations that made a difference to our application partners and improved the quality of
working life.
Here we found ourselves in a similar position as the researchers studying the early
automation processes in the 1970s and 1980s. As the German researcher Rolf Nemitz
formulated it: ‘So far, the studies on automation have focused on, how automation can
replace or reduce human contribution. However, the real innovation lies in combining
automation and human potential.’ Or, as the founders of our institute – Institut Technik &
Bildung (ITB) – took this further: the contribution of research is to equip practitioners with
capability for social shaping (Gestaltung) of work, organisations and technology. However,
the researchers of that time were talking about production technologies, not about present-
date technologies and new media to promote learning at work. Now we have been facing
new challenges.
Digital transformation as a research theme and as transformative practice
In the light of the above, for us the topic ‘digital transformation’ has not been merely a
research them to be dealt with via academic contemplation, empirical observations and
testing designs for learning technologies. For us, the understanding of digital transformation
can only arise from processes of working with the application partners and for changes that
enhance them as pioneers for innovations in construction work. In this context I hear the
echo of the words of young Karl Marx in his Theses on Feuerbach: “The coincidence of the
changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-changing can be conceived and
rationally understood only as revolutionary practice.” (Marx/Engels Selected Works, Volume
One, Progress Publishers Moscow, 1969). Or in the original version: “Das Zusammenfallen
des Ändern[s] der Umstände und der menschlichen Tätigkeit oder Selbstveränderung kann
nur als revolutionäre Praxis gefaßt und rationell verstanden werden.” Marx-Engels Werke,
Band 3, Seite 5ff. Dietz Verlag Berlin, 1969).
Here, in our context, we could interpret this classical phrase as referring to digital
transformation as a coincidence of changing circumstances and changing self-
understanding of actors as an interactive and transformative process. Thus, it is not
enough to document the changes as observable facts or to record the self-understanding of
practitioners as their testimony. Instead, a real understanding of such processes arises from
experiencing the changes as efforts of change agents and sensing changes in their views
on, what to pursue and how to make it work. In this way in-depth research has to be
involved in the transformative practice, but has to maintain its ability to reflect on the
practice.
41. Wrapping up the Learning Layers experience – Part Two:
Celebrating research & development dialogue with practitioners
October 29th, 2016
With my latest blog I started a series of posts to wrap up the experiences of our EU-funded
Learning Layers (LL) project. As I mentioned,we are in the phase of concluding our
project. For us this is not just a matter of presenting our results with individual reports or
demonstrating the achievements with individual tools. An essential part of this phase is to
reflect on our experiences on the whole – what have we learned and achieved together. I
69
started my reflections with the theme ‘digital transformation’ and how we have
experienced it as lived practice and as research challenge. In this second post I try to
describe, how this has characterised our work as researcher partners in research &
development dialogue with our application partners in the Construction pilot of the LL project.
The process dynamics: Research & Development dialogue with multiple activities and
many iterations
Shortly before the start of the project I recorded with our colleague Graham Attwell a video
interview in which he presented some key ideas for the forthcoming project. Graham made a
realistic point that ‘in the beginning the users don’t know, what the technical developers can offer
them and the developers don’t know why and how the users would use their products’.
Graham saw the great chance of the LL project in turning such ‘don’t know – don’t know’
constellation into a ‘getting to know – getting to know’ type of dialogue. This was his
anticipation in Spring 2012.
The real life in the construction pilot turned to be far more colourful. In Graham’s reflection
the technical partners and research partners were treated as one group. And finding a
common design idea and ways to put it into practice didn’t appear as complicated as it
turned out to be.
Altogether, the process dynamic that led to the development of Learning Toolbox (LTB)
was characterised by a long search for an appropriate design idea that makes sense for the
trainers and apprentices in construction sector training centre Bau-ABC. This process did not
lead to a quick listing of requirements for external software developers to do their job.
Instead, the lack of developer resources was compensated by co-design workshops and
further iterations involving research partners, intermediate technicians and application
partners – who were preparing the grounds for software developers to enter a process of
research & development (R&D) dialogue. Thus, the key characteristics and expected
functions of LTB were in a ‘getting to know – getting to know’ type of dialogue – but the
developers and their know-how had to be integrated into this process.
The multiple roles of accompanying research during the process
Concerning the role of our ITB team (Institut Technik & Bildung) in this process, the best
term is ‘accompanying research‘. This concept arises from German innovation programs
in working life and in vocational education and training (VET). Originally two German
concepts have been used, which may have somewhat different connotations –
Wissenschaftliche Begleitung (scientific accompaniment) and Begleitforschung
(accompanying research). The former might be seen as a more open approach, whilst the
latter may emphasise a more focused research design. In the innovation programs in
working life such research was used to monitor, whether the innovations improved the
quality of working life. In VET-related pilot projects (Modellversuche) the role of research
was to monitor and evaluate the implementation of pedagogic innovations. In both cases the
accompanying researchers tended to have co-participative and co-shaping roles. However,
the responsibility on the success of pilots was on the application partner organisations.
Concerning the LL project and the co-design process of Learning Toolbox (LTB), the
role of the accompanying research team of ITB was even more co-participative and co-
shaping than that of the predecessors. Moreover, the research challenges was also more
70
open – the researchers had to grasp the challenges in the course of the interactive and
dialogue-oriented process. When the process moved on to the active deployment of the
LTB, the researchers were needed as facilitators of the dialogue and as co-tutors in the
training activities. In the final phase the accompanying researchers were needed as
counterparts of evaluation researchers – to interpret together the findings. All this can at best
be characterised with the term ‘agile accompanying research‘.
The role of training interventions as capacity-building in the field
In the light of the above it is essential to emphasise that the co-design activities and the
research interventions were not enough to give the process its strength. A crucial part was
played by the training interventions at different phases of the process. In the earlier phase
of co-design process the ITB and Pontydysgu teams arranged a series of Multimedia training
workshops for voluntary trainers of Bau-ABC Rostrup. At a later phase the ITB and
Pontydysgu teams together with advanced Bau-ABC colleagues organised the Theme Room
training campaign (see my blogs of November and December 2015). These training
interventions were not merely general orientation or user-training for certain tools. On the
whole these training interventions were capacity-building for Bau-ABC as a whole
organisation and for the trades involved.
Here it is essential to emphasise that the training interventions were essential dialogical
elements in the process. All parties were engaged as learners – trying to find out, in what
ways digital media and web tools can be introduced into construction work and into
workplace-based training. And all this supported the development and deployment of the
LTB as an integrative toolset to work with.
71
42. Wrapping up the Learning Layers experience – Part Three:
Showing impact October 30th, 2016
With my two latest blogs I have started a series of posts to wrap up the experiences of our
EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. Currently we are preparing contributions for the
concluding deliverable of our project. One part of this exercise is writing “Impact Cards” to
demonstrate, what kind of achievements we have reached in the sectoral pilots in
Construction sector and in Healthcare sector as well as in the supporting activities
(development of tools, software and infrastructure). In general, I have welcomed the idea of
preparing such impact cards. They present in different contexts a) the situation before our
project activities, b) the interventions that we have carried out and c) the
situation/developments after our interventions.
However, such cards have also their limitations. Whilst they are good tools for demonstrating
particular achievements in specific contexts, it is difficult to keep the big picture visible with
such tools. Thus, we may have details but loose sight on the overall developments to which
these achievements contribute. Also, we may fail to see, what kind of challenges we have
had to meet during the work to show any impact whatsoever. This, to me is important when
we discuss the theme ‘digital transformation’ and consider, how our project has contributed
to changes in working and learning processes. From this perspective I will discuss below the
picture that we have given on the Construction pilot by reading across the impact cards we
have prepared. For practical reasons I focus now on the cards that deal with the training
centre Bau-ABC Rostrup.
The situation before the Learning Layers project
Here it is worthwhile to emphasise that the general atmosphere in Germany concerning the
role of mobile devices as support for learning – and in particular for workplace learning –
was mainly sceptical and restrictive. The use of mobile devices during work was forbidden in
most companies and in the training centres. The use of smartphones was considered as
distraction and in the worst cases as a risk factor (concerning hazards at work or concerning
data privacy in work contexts). Furthermore, the companies that had been involved in early
pilots with digital tools had made negative experiences with ‘infant diseases’ of specific tools
and compatibility problems with stand-alone tools and apps. The trainers in Bau-ABC had
been monitoring tools and apps that were advertised for their trades, but not many of them
had proven appropriate for professional use or as support for apprentice training. Moreover,
the apprentices had not learned to know tools or apps relevant for their learning and most of
them had used smartphones only for private hobbies.
However, having said all that we started our cooperation with Bau-ABC trainers and
management in good spirit and the apprentices were keen to join in the activities when there
was a chance. All parties were interested in looking, how to bring mobile devices, digital
media and web resources into learning and into work processes. All parties informed us of
communication gaps and practical difficulties in which they saw the possibility to bring in
digital tools to facilitate work and learning. However, the important point was that the new
technologies should offload them, not add to their workload. And regarding apprentice
72
training, the new technologies should empower them as self-organised learners, not provide
easy shortcuts that reduce the learning effect.
The training interventions as capacity-building
When starting our co-design process with Bau-ABC trainers, we soon realised that we (all of
us) needed to raise our awareness on existing tools and apps as well as of processes of
using, co-creating and co-developing. From this perspective it was great help that our
Pontydysgu colleagues – in particular Jenny Hughes – had a lot of experience with the
TACCLE courses in getting teachers familiarise themselves with such technologies for their
own use. Moreover, those courses had brought the teachers together to make their own
plans for using web resources in their teaching. This provided the background for the first
training intervention – the early Multimedia training workshops in Bau-ABC. This
training encouraged some of the participants to create their own WordPress blogs and to
use them as repositories for making their training materials publicly available (see
Zimmererblog, Maurerblog, Tiefbaublog and Brunnenbaublog).
Based on this experience the Bau-ABC trainers proposed at a later phase the Theme Room
training model to raise awareness and to promote digital competences across the
organisation. This provided the basis for the second training intervention – the Theme
Room training campaign in November 2015. This time the whole organisation
participated, whilst partners from LL project worked together with the advanced trainers as
tutors and mentors. Here again, the emphasis was on creating an overview on the themes
(social media, digital learning materials) and to work together to get an idea, how to use the
web-based and tools in apprentice training.
The co-design and pilot testing of Learning Toolbox (LTB)
In the early phase of the LL project the Bau-ABC colleagues proposed as a major design
idea the digitisation of the White Folder of Bau-ABC (the collector of training materials,
worksheets and reporting documents in their apprentice training). Already at this phase we
got a lot of feedback, how the use of the forthcoming tool should enhance the learning of
apprentices (instead of providing easy shortcuts to answers before reflecting the task).
During the process the design idea got transformed from digitising the materials to
developing an integrative toolset to facilitate the work with web-based resources and real-
time communication. In this way the co-design process took the course to developing the
Learning Toolbox (LTB). And due to their intensive participating in this work and in
Multimedia Training the Bau-ABC trainers were supporting this idea. The strongest evidence
for this were the videos that Bau-ABC trainers produced in August 2014 on potential use of
LTB in different training and working contexts. In a similar way the ca. 80 apprentices that
participated in the Demo Camp workshops in June 2014 were very inspired by the idea of
getting such a toolset to work with.
In the final phase of the project when the LTB was ready to be introduced for piloting in the
apprentice training (with several few trades and selected training projects) we were pleased
to witness a relatively smooth take-off. In spite of some technical problems we got positive
feedback from trainers and apprentices. The trainers who were leading these pilots had
found their own ways to use the LTB (building their own stacks, screens and tiles) to
provide access to learning resources. Some of them provided a wide range of information
resources (for problem-oriented searches), some preferred to open the acess to wider
73
resources as a step-by-step procedure (based on learning progress and interests). The
apprentices also found their own ways to make use of the LTB and gave their own
views as feedback. In a similar way, the separate introduction of AchSo (video annotation
tool) in some of the trades was taken as an enrichment (although there was some confusion,
whether it can be integrated into LTB or remains as a stand-alone tool). Altogether, the
experiences with piloting were by and large positive.
I think this is enough of the situation before the Learning Layers activities and of the
interventions that we have carried out during the project work. The impact cards do contain
an assessment, how the situation has developed after the interventions and on what points
we can show impact. However, from the perspective of the theme ‘digital transformation’
these points would be very detailed. Furthermore, we are still looking forward to having
concluding discussions with Bau-ABC trainers and with the management. Therefore, I will
not go into the details here. However, I need to emphasise that in our final reporting we have
a further task to interpret the impact and achievements in conceptual and future-oriented
terms – with Learning Scenarios.
43. Wrapping up the Learning Layers experience – Part Four:
Interpreting the impact and drawing scenarios November 1st, 2016
With my three previous blogs I have started a series of posts to wrap up the experiences of
our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. As I have indicated, we are preparing
contributions for the concluding deliverable of our project. In my previous post I discussed,
how we are showing impact of our project with Impact Cards. Then I discussed, how this can
lead to a particularisation of the picture. As a contrast, I tried to bring together the messages
of different cards to show, how our interventions in the Construction pilot have had impact in
terms of promoting digital transformation. However, my examples remained at the level of
presenting local and context-specific success stories and progress reports. This gives rise to
the question, what is the value of these achievements in terms of promoting the presented
innovations. And this then leads to the question, on what grounds we can interpret this
potential.
Below I will discuss these issues in the light of the two Learning Scenarios that we have
prepared on the basis of the Construction pilot. In both examples we introduce firstly an
exemplary case on the use of Learning Toolbox (LTB). On the basis of such a case we then
draw scenarios for further work with LTB and for dissemination of the innovation. And with
both examples we can demonstrate the role of research and of our theoretical work in
interpreting the impact.
LTB on construction site – the scenario on the work with multiplier networks
In the first “Learning Scenario” on cross-organisational learning with used as a starting point
Thomas Isselhard’s presentation on the use of LTB as support for coordination of the work at
a construction site and for real-time communication on plans, orders and reports. In the two
videos recorded on his presentation Thomas gives a picture, how the use of LTB can help to
avoid communication gaps between different parties involved (video 1) and how to get new
users accustomed to work with LTB (video 2). The background text in the ‘Learning
Scenario’ draws attention to the way in which the the functionality of LTB help to overcome
74
the gaps. In a similar way the text draws attention to the benefits of LTB as an integrative
toolset – customised for the users and by the users with their own sets of context-specific
stacks and content tiles. Furthermore, the videos and the text give insights into the ways in
which new users are introduced to using LTB while getting their instructions for the
construction work.
This exemplary case shows the potential of making interactive use of LTB as a common
integrative toolset for sharing knowledge and information between different parties at a
construction site. In the ‘Scenario’ part of the document we step out from the site and shift
the emphasis to different organisations and networks involved in construction sector.
Thomas Isselhard is a member in several networks on ecological construction work and
these networks have a wide range of specialised cooperation partners. In this respect the
‘Scenario’ outlines a spectrum of activities via which these networks can promote the use of
LTB in sharing knowledge and promoting cooperation in ecological construction work and in
different campaigns for awareness-raising.
LTB as support for apprentice training – the scenario on supporting learning in
special learning areas
In another “Learning Scenario” document we draw attention to the way in which full-time
trainers (Lehrwerkmeister) in the intermediate training centre Bau-ABC Rostrup have used
LTB to support their training. In the background sections the document gives insights into the
transition from working with paper-based materials to creating web-based resources that are
available via trade-specific stacks and content tiles.
In further sections we present results from field visits in which researchers have had
interview sessions with the trainers and focus groups with apprentices. Here we found an
interesting difference between otherwise similar approaches:
● Trainers who follow a problem-oriented training strategy tend to equip learners with
comprehensive resources. The apprentices need to search as self-organised learners
to find the problem-relevant information. In a nutshell, the LTB can be characterised as a
‘well’.
● Trainers who follow an interest-oriented training strategy tend to provide in the
beginning fewer resources and only gradually open access to new resources. The
learners are nurtured step-by-step with new impulses and challenges once they
have started to find their own solutions and ways of working. In this case, the LTB can
be characterised as a ‘watering can’.
In the ‘Scenario’ part we stepped out of the trade-specific contexts of apprentice training and
shifted the emphasis to specific challenges in the training of Bau-ABC. One issue that the
Bau-ABC trainers had raised already at an early stage of the project was, how to make
training in Health and Safety (Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz) more inspiring.
Another issue was, how to provide easy and filtered access to DIN norms that are relevant
for skilled workers. For both cases it is possible to provide interim solutions by providing an
overview on the sets of resources via Moodle (or similar platform). Then linking LTB to the
respective Moodle application (or similar application) the users could find the resources
easier (‘LTB as a well’). However, in the training with these resources it would be possible
to introduce some kind of ‘gamification’ to guide the learners from tasks that require general
knowledge to more demanding cases that call for special expertise (‘LTB as a watering
can’).
75
Reflections
We have also used these documents to highlight the role of our theoretical work in
interpreting the impact demonstrated in these exemplary cases (as a basis for the
scenarios):
● We have interpreted the first case – the use of LTB at the construction site in Verden
– as a micro-case that demonstrates organisational and cross-organisational
learning in a local context. Here we underline that ‘organisational learning’ is not merely
a result of good management skills or good consultancy. Instead, the key point is in
finding the way to promote interactivity and responsiveness between site manager,
craftsmen and stakeholders involved. This point has also been highlighted in the
concept ‘work process knowledge’ that we have discussed in the project on several
occasions.
● We have interpreted the second case – the Bau-ABC trainers’ transition to use LTB –
as an example of gradual digital transformation and as enhancement of their pedagogy.
Here, it is worthwhile to emphasise that the trainers have challenged apprentices to
become self-organised learners and to take ownership on their learning. With the use of
LTB they have seen more possibilities – and the learners have felt themselves more
empowered. In this way the use of LTB has strengthened the training and learning
culture based on action-oriented learning in Bau-ABC.
● We worked out these interpretations in the latter case by combining the empirical
findings of a visiting evaluation researcher, the process-related knowledge of a ‘local’
accompanying researcher and the insights into instructional designs provided by an
educational technology researcher. In this way way came to interpret the changes in
Bau-ABC as indications of a digital transformation based on step-by-step transitions –
not as an abrupt digital revolution with great leaps to unknown. Moreover, we could
conclude these changes as contributions to the Bau-ABC approach that celebrates
action-oriented learning – not as a radical paradigm shift in pedagogy.
76
44. Presenting the Learning Layers experience – the Learning
Toolbox Chronicle November 11th, 2016
One of the final efforts of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project has been the
rearrangement of the dissemination articles that we had published on the LL website, section
“Construction”. At the end of the project we felt that we should make it accessible as a more
structured documentation of the process we went through with our construction sector
partners. However, we knew that we cannot make intensive editing operations – the
materials were already there and we could at best make them more attractive by providing
easier access to them. Secondly, we needed to think beyond our project experience and to
open perspectives for follow-up activities. This gave rise to present the history of
Construction pilot as the story on the making of its main result – the Learning Toolbox. And
so the articles of past years were give a new life as the “Learning Toolbox Chronicle” and
as “Learning Toolbox Chronik (Deutsche Version)”.
Insights into the Learning Toolbox Chronicle (English version)
Under the new heading the articles appear as three volumes (annual chronicles):
Learning Toolbox (LTB) Chronicle Vol. 1, 2014 covers the early phases from the
Application Partner Days (APD) and from the early co-design activities (2013) to the
outreach activities with the LTB concept in 2014 (Brunnenbauertage, Demo Camp, Nordbau
and a smaller demonstration workshop with two active craft trade companies).
Learning Toolbox (LTB) Chronicle Vol. 2, 2015 covers several interim events starting with
the opening of the ‘Learning exhibition’ of our partners in ecological construction work in
Verden and with the annual Training Day of the Bau-ABC staff. Later in the year we had
workshops and conferences in Espoo, Bremen and Budapest and alongside the Bremen
conference the publication of the LTB Beta version. This was celebrated with a field visit in
Bau-ABC and with special sessions in the Bremen conference. (And let us not forget the visit
of the Singapore Workforce Development Agency to Bremen to inform themselves of the
Learning Layers project and of the emerging Learning Toolbox!)
Learning Toolbox (LTB) Chronicle Vol. 3, 2016 covers major training interventions (the
Theme Room training campaign) and a series of pilot activities and field events in Bau-ABC
Rostrup (the major pilot site for the LTB). We also get insights into using the LTB for
coordinating construction work processes at a special construction site in Verden.
Insights into Learning Toolbox Chronik (Deutsche Version)
In principle the German versions of the Chronicles cover the same developments. However,
the number of articles is smaller (since we have only included articles of the years 2014 and
2015) that are closer to the application partners. But regarding the year 2016 we have
covered all events and activities.
Bonus tracks and Online Guide
77
One of the highlights of the year 2014 was the joint effort of Bau-ABC colleagues to produce
a series of videos on possible use of the LTB in their training and in construction work.
These videos are also accessible via both language versions of the LTB Chronicles, see
Learning Toolbox videos from Bau-ABC (2014) – Overview
One of the highlights of the year 2016 has been the publication of the Learning Toolbox
Online Guide. It can also be accessed via the the Learning Toolbox chronicles.
– – –
I think this is enough of the new Chronicles. I hope that they serve their purpose and provide
inspiring insights into the making of the Learning Toolbox. For us who were involved in this
process they provide an opportunity to celebrate our joint achievements – researchers,
practitioners and developers, all working together. And we already know that Learning
Toolbox has a future beyond the current project.
45. Presenting Learning Layers training experience – the Theme
Room moodle application November 12th, 2016
In my recent blog I reported on a fresh web publication – the Learning Toolbox Chronicle –
that is available on the website of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. The articles
published one by one on the project website and its section for the Construction pilot have
been rearranged as a collection that consists of three volumes.
In a similar way I have prepared a new web document on the two training programs that we
have organised as a part of our project activities: the early Multimedia training (2013-2014)
and Theme Room training (2015) in the training centre Bau-ABC. I have prepared a
comprehensive overview on the programs, their implementation and on the training materials
used as the Moodle application “Theme Room Training 2015”. Below I present firstly an
overview on this moodle application and then some reflections on the role of this training
experience in the final phase of the project activities.
Insights into the “Theme Room Training 2015” Moodle
This Moodle application provides an overview of the “Theme Room” training concept and its
implementation as a part of the Learning Layers (LL) project and its Construction pilot in
Germany in 2015.
The first section of this Moodle application give an overview on the role of training activities
in the Construction pilot and on the evolution of training concepts.
The second section gives a brief overview on the Multimedia training scheme that was
implemented by the project in Bau-ABC in 2013-2014.
The third and fourth sections describe the development of the Theme Room training
concept and its adaptation for the pilot implementation in 2015.
The fifth and sixth sections give insights into the work with the two main themes selected
for this implementation cycle – ‘Use of Social Media in Training’ and ‘Preparation of Digital
Learning Contents for Training’.
The seventh and eighth sections give insights into two further themes – “Intellectual
property rights (IPR)” and “Using Learning Toolbox (LTB) as Support for Training”. For
practical reasons the theme IPR was implemented only as transversal theme that was
78
covered with short ‘guest inputs’ in the thematic workshops. The LTB was postponed for a
later occasion.
The ninth section summarises the discussions in the self-evaluation workshop that took
place in Bau-ABC in December 2015 after the implementation of the first cycle of Theme
Room workshops.
The tenth section reflects the Theme Room training experience in the light of the later
progress with the Learning Toolbox pilots and outlines some prospects for follow-up
activities.
In addition to the documentation in the introductory boxes this Moodle application provides a
comprehensive archive of concept documents, training materials, documents of learning
achievements and commentaries on implementation.
Reflections on the role of the Theme Room training experience at the end of the
project
Shortly after the pilot implementation of the Theme Room program we had to shift the
emphasis to the introduction of Learning Toolbox (LTB) into apprentice training and to co-
development of LTB-applications by Bau-ABC trainers. Following the example of Bau-ABC
trainers, also other application partners of Learning Layers started with their small-scale
pilots in the context of construction work.
Reports on these pilots have shown that the use of LTB has increased the opportunities to
empower the learners and to strengthen the culture of project-oriented and self-organised
learning in Bau-ABC. Equally, the functionality of the LTB has opened new prospects for
supporting creative learning in the context of Health and Safety or trade-specific DIN norms.
Yet, with such areas LTB alone is not enough. Therefore, the LTB development is looking at
the potentials of LTB integrated with a learning platform (such as Moodle).
In the light of the above it appears that the use of the Learning Toolbox (as an integrative
toolset) can play a stronger integrative role also in such multimedia training that was
provided in the Theme Room training in Bau-ABC. Equally, when the use of LTB is
spreading to new pilot fields, it is appropriate to make use of similar collaborative learning
arrangements as in the Theme Room workshops. From this perspective it is appropriate to
revisit the Theme Room experience and to consider, how such training can be developed
and adapted for new contexts and challenges.
– – –
I think this is enough of this new document on our training experience. In the coming days I
have to work (once more) with the final deliverables of the project. But we are reaching the
point when we have presented the results and realise, what all we have learned in this
project – and on what legacy we can build.
46. ‘Methods’ or process innovations in Learning Layers research –
Part One: Reflections on accompanying research November 15th, 2016
79
During the last few weeks we have been preparing our contributions to the final deliverable
of our EU-funded Learning Layers (LL) project. And obviously, my recent blogs have
included a lot of ‘loud thinking’ on these contributions. Due to the fact that we have had a
complex innovation process in the Construction pilot to report, I may have been repeating
some issues when discussing in different posts our various deliverables (Impact Cards,
Learning Scenarios and Research Methodology documents). Also, I have noticed that with
several iterations in writing I have got the message clearer. Thus, I have been able to
highlight the characteristics of the innovation processes and the way different parties worked
together to make them happen.
In the final phase I have been working with the question, how to present our research work
as a contribution to the innovation process (that we have gone through with our application
partners):
● Can we claim that we have applied a ‘method’ that triggered an innovation process into
movement and guided it into good results? Can we present this ‘method’ as the legacy
of our project?
● Or – is our project experience to be interpreted as a more complex process innovation in
which we played a part – as active contributors, moderators and conceptual interpreters,
but yet as part of a common story? Shall we present such a story of research &
development dialogue as our legacy?
Below I will present the answers that I have given to these questions in our document
“Accompanying Research and Participative Design in the Construction Pilot in
Germany“. I hope that the extracts from the longer report text give a clear idea, what our
answer is and why.
The starting point: relatively open user-initiated co-design process searching for
solutions
“This document presents a picture of the collaboration of researchers, technical partners and
application partners in the construction pilot of the Learning Layers as a multi-channeled
research & development (R&D) dialogue with an emphasis on the following points:
● The co-design activities started as a relatively open search for solutions to match the
user-initiated design idea (digitisation of learning contents and reporting processes).
● Research partners were engaged as accompanying researchers with co-shaping roles
to support application partners in a complex iterative process, during which the initial
design idea was transformed into shaping of Learning Toolbox as an integrative toolset.
● The R&D dialogue was maintained with several parallel activities – joint work process
analyses, shared training events, co-design workshops and joint outreach activities. In
this way the process could overcome periods of rupture and uncertainty.
● The research interventions consisted of empirical studies and conceptual inputs that
gave insights into vocational learning and learning in organisational contexts as
contexts in which the Learning Toolbox promoted digital transformation.”
Reflections on the process: Multi-channeled R&D dialogue with many interventions
and iterations
“In the light of the above it is apparent that the work of accompanying researchers was not a
process that would have guided by one single ‘method’ or pre-defined methodology. Neither
was it a case of classical action research. As has been indicated earlier, the ITB team built
80
upon earlier experiences with accompanying research in innovation programmes but
adapted its approach to a more open co-design process. Also, it is worthwhile to note that
the co-design process was not primarily about social shaping of work and (production)
technology or about pedagogic development of vocational education and training. The
project was based on interventions to introduce digital media and web resources via mobile
devices to (informal) learning at workplaces.
From this perspective it is important to understand that the co-design activities in the
Construction pilot were not primarily a tool-centred and design-driven process. Instead, in
the early phase the accompanying research partners and application partners were
supported by technical partners with intermediate role (but not that of software developers).
Under these circumstances it was important to generate a multi-channelled R&D dialogue
that included work process analyses, co-design sessions and shared learning activities. In
this context the partners could agree on a radical transformation of the design idea, which
meant a shift from digitisation of learning content to shaping a flexible digital toolset for
accessing and sharing learning resources.”
The experiences of researchers and practitioners – working towards, with and for the
innovation (‘Learning Toolbox in practice’)
“In this – essentially transformative – process of R&D dialog