Initial Comments
1. Personalised learning underpins the programme of change outlined
in the recent FE White Paper. This includes emphasis on effective
assessment of initial learner needs, improving pastoral support, along
with developing learner ‘voice and choice’ through participation and
representation. The intention is to improve learner engagement,
achievement and progression across the board and influence the shape of
future provision.
Institutions would argue that significant aspects of personalised
learning is already a reality for their learners: that they already
have well developed systems in place and a well developed ethos that
puts learners and their individual needs at the heart of what they do.
Personalising Further Education: Developing a Vision is a DfES
sector-wide consultation which seeks to develop and take forward a
shared understanding of personalisation within the FE system.
This response seeks to highlight the definition of personalisation
outlined in the consultation document, particularly in the context of
electronic environments and to review the proposed changes to current
roles, activities and procedures.
2. AoC NILTA supports the assertion made in the document that
personalising learning has an integral role in improving quality. Our
vision is for the nationwide provision of learning appropriate to and
accessible by every individual, that recognises individual learners’
circumstances, and supports their needs and aspirations. We believe
that this cannot be achieved without strategic development of
technological solutions in all aspects of an institution’s engagement
with the learner, including: recruitment, enrolment, monitoring,
support, tutoring, learning and teaching, advice and guidance,
assessment and reporting and progression.
3. We regret the lack of emphasis on how ILT will support the aims
outlined in the personalisation strategy. Although the use of
technology is clearly understood to play a role in the systemic changes
necessary to support widespread personalisation, we do not believe that
the document recognises the extent to which the exploitation and
application of ICT will be necessary to support personalisation. We
would be keen to explore the range of ways technology, particularly
collaborative and user content-creation tools can be used to support
the personalisation agenda and the specific areas identified by the
document. We would expect the personalisation agenda to rely on and
further support the embedding of ICT and e-learning across all aspects
of educational provision and facilitation.
4. We would refer to the recent report of the Gilbert Committee
‘2020 vision: Report of the Teaching and Learning 2020 Review Group’
which identifies ways in which technology might contribute to
personalised learning. We believe that there are many benefits that are
generic to learners and therefore consistent across sectors. We
encourage the colleagues within the Department to work in partnership
across the sectors in developing strategy.
5. We are committed to working with the Department and its partners
in the delivery of this strategy to ensure that e-strategy is embedded
into relevant delivery strategies and projects, and to ensure that the
views and needs of the post-16 sector are recognised and accounted for.
The deployment of technologies within the context of coherent and
comprehensive e-strategy within institutions, and the associated
organisational and cultural change are not optional. This is not
recognized within the consultation document and we believe that this is
a serious omission.
6. We are delighted that participation is seen as a key process of
the facilitation of personalised learning. We fully agree with the
importance given to this form of engagement – empowering and supporting
learners to shape the services they receive, and recognising the
important contribution learners can make to improve the quality of
educational provision.
However, we are keen that participatory personalisation is not
limited to consultation and evaluation, but that the contribution that
user participation that empowers learners to take initiative and
control is supported in order to realise the government’s vision for a
transformed, innovative and world-leading sector.
7. We are in agreement that personalisation has the potential to be
an effective strategy for engaging all learners, and could operate as a
particularly effective mechanism for engaging vulnerable, disadvantaged
and disengaged young people. We are keen to see all learners’
circumstances, needs and preferences adequately recognised and
appropriately supported. We believe that personalisation is not simply
a matter of determining what learners or groups of learners need – it
requires the more complex approach of supporting people in their own
exploration and articulation of their needs, both in collaboration with
other learners and in their independent contribution to their own
learning.
8. We welcome the intention to expand and to harmonise existing
provision. More focused support, greater one-to-one time, staff
development, introducing and establishing new systems – all of these
require the provision of sufficient time and resource. We would expect
to see a significant financial commitment to support the systemic
extension of services proposed for the sector, particularly in terms of
staff development and time.
9. We are surprised by the lack of reference to innovation within
the framework. We would expect that the emerging practices associated
with supporting personalisation would call for creative thinking and
solutions. We would like to see provision for the encouragement,
support and sharing of innovative responses to the facilitation of
personalisation.
10. “…personalisation has a role in encouraging and engaging those
not currently in learning by capturing the views of potential learners
and creating learning opportunities in which they want to participate.”
(p.8). While we support the proposed relationship between learner views
and the opportunities presented to them, it is not clear how or to what
degree this is being proposed. We are concerned that personalisation
should not be misrecognised as a lever which can be applied in order to
elicit a narrow band of response. We believe that if the vision of
personalisation is realised – the re-shaping of service provision in
line with learner need, ability and preference, in the context of
employer and national skills needs – then in addition to the
implications for service structure and delivery, evaluation and
assessment will have to be significantly reviewed.
11. The document refers to the development of the ‘expert learner’.
We support this as a necessary element of success in improving
retention and achievement. We would wish to raise within this the need
to consider the digital literacy that learners will need to develop to
support their learning, utilising what are for some very well developed
digital skills within their learning process.
However we recognize that while many young learners are already at
an advanced stage of digital skills and will come into Further
Education with a mindset / skill set that will naturally assume the use
of e-skills as part of their learning process, other learners have not
yet developed this level of digital knowledge and skills.
12. We are concerned that this is not recognised as part of the
learner need and therefore as integral to any strategy for meeting
learner needs. Teachers need to recognise that digital skills may not
equate to digital literacy; learners may be confident but lack the
critical skills to support their own learning and future careers. We
would also remind colleagues within the Department that there needs to
be parity in digital accessibility across the sector(s) and for the
individual
13. We welcome the reference to improved assessment for learners.
Personalising assessment, particularly with regard to assessing when
ready rather than to a predetermined timetable and the ability to
recognize and accommodate a range of evidence and ways of working, has
the potential to greatly enhance motivation and achievement. We are
disappointed that the role of e-assessment and e-portfolio is not
explicitly recognized within this, as development in these areas will
be crucial to the success of this element of the strategy.
14. If personalisation is to be truly meaningful to the individual
we need to be actively engaging with e-assessment, e-portfolios, unique
learner numbers and with the current and potential practices made
possible by web 2.0 technologies.
15. We agree that tailoring the service to the learner must apply to
the whole learner journey and not just parts of it. We encourage the
strategy to consider the various elements of the learner journey –
initial assessment, student representation, tutor/broker support,
student evaluation, more flexible qualifications etc. holistically,
ensuring that they are joined up and the danger of silo development is
avoided, particularly with regard to the supporting systems and
infrastructure.
16. We advise careful consideration needs to be taken regarding the
question of access and control of the electronic environments and data
contained within them at different stages in the learners journey.
This is particularly pertinent for younger learners as their legal
status changes from age 14 to 16 to 18+
17 We fully support the need for synergy and consistency across
sectors, ensuring the learner experience is seamless at all stages of
their learning journey. We would encourage further integration across
sectors of work such as MIAP to ensure that the data and systems used
to support learners are consistent and accessible. We would also
encourage strategies to ensure investment and development across the
sectors is equitable to ensure that the resources (particularly
e-resources) are consistent across providers.
18. We are concerned by the lack of reference to the data and
systems requirements that will need to be identified and developed to
support the aspirations for improved student identification and
support. We welcome the work of MIAP in developing the unique learner
number (ULN). We would recommend a focus on data portability, data
ownership and lifelong learning within these agendas.
19. In light of the above comments we stress the importance of
strategic review of business processes within colleges and also for the
careful planning of ICT infrastructure, taking account issues such as
cost of ownership, the need to deliver seamless managed learning
environments, simple data transfer and availability and minimizing
risks of staff skill shortages. We believe that personalisation
initiatives introduced in the absence of system-wide changes in
business processes are likely to fail.
Annex A after the jump.
Recent Comments