This post by Sophia Roppertz and Ludger Deitmer is part of the TaccleAI project for “‘Improving the Skills and Competences of VET teachers and trainers in the age of Artificial Intelligence.” It describes what is clled a ‘Deep Reinforcement Learning Project” in a German Vocational Education and Training school.

The topic of the project was Deep Reinforcement Learning – preparation of the topic “artificial intelligence” and implementation of an agent in the game “Sonic the Hedgehog”. Sonic is a computer game series of the Japanese publisher Sega. The classic main parts of the series are characterized by fast 2D jump ‘n’ run passages. There you control the blue game character Sonic The Hedgehog through so-called “zones”, which are divided into individual “acts”. In all Sonic games, rings are collected, which the main character loses when touching an opponent. If he is hit without rings, you lose an extra life. In the classic main games, after using up all extra lives and continues, you have to start all over again after a game over.

The task of the student group was to implement an agent into the game and finally to give a project presentation about the project. To accomplish this overall goal, some intermediate goals had to be achieved:

1) Acquire an understanding of artificial intelligence and neural networks

2) Gain advanced knowledge of the Python programming language

3) The AI should master different levels independently

How is the project structured?

Trainees of the vocational school “information technology assistants” (German: “Informationstechnische*r Assistent*in”) took part in the AI project. The AI project took place in the second year of training within the framework of the learning field “Planning, implementing and evaluating projects” (practice). The total time required was 160 hours per school year. The project meetings usually took place on a full day of lessons. The students had the opportunity to work in the computer room or in the corresponding workshops of the school. During this time, a teacher was present to provide support but did not actively participate in the project.

As part of the KI project, the students were given a presentation on project management by the responsible teacher. With this knowledge team rules were established, field analyses were made, a target matrix was created, a schedule and work packages were created. The individual work packages were assigned performance specifications and outputs that had to be delivered. Responsibilities for the work packages were also defined. Furthermore, the students were assigned roles within the project group: e.g.

Team speaker: Moderates the group work and makes sure that everyone can get involved, that the topic is worked on consistently, and that the team rules are observed.

Timekeeper: Makes sure that the timetable is respected.

Foreign Minister: Communicates with people outside the team, maintains contact, and involves people.

What do the trainees learn in the project?

The trainees were able to acquire both technical and social skills in the course of this project. On the one hand, they learned project-oriented work in a group, they set themselves goals and divided and organised their work independently. On the other hand, they independently dealt with a programming language (Python) that was new to them and learned its basics to the extent that they were able to understand, modify, and create programs. In addition, the trainees have dealt with the basics of neural networks and the different terms of machine learning, so that they were able to present the basics to their fellow students and explain the terms. They acquired this knowledge mainly by watching videos. They used textbooks less because they mostly dealt with the AI topic in a very mathematical way and the mathematical knowledge of the students was not sufficient for this.

They have dealt with the topic “Deep Reinforcement Learning” and were able to program an agent to such an extent or to change existing programs in such a way that this “agent” learns to improve “his” game. In the end, they got so far into the programming of the “agent” that they were able to explain to their classmates which parameters they had to adjust/change so that their “agent” could improve his game.

Reflection and Recommendations for other teachers

The supervising teacher reports in the interview that basic knowledge in the field of AI is becoming increasingly important for information technology assistants since, in the context of the digitalised working world, processes are increasingly influenced by algorithms and the use of computers. In addition, many of the students attend the technical secondary school (In Germany: Fachoberschule für Technik) after their vocational schooling in order to subsequently complete a corresponding course of study. Since the students have to deal with the topic of artificial intelligence at the latest then, it makes sense to deal with it already in the vocational school. In the project documentation, the students report that it was surprisingly easy to acquire basic knowledge about AI. However, they emphasize that the deeper immersion in the subject matter was an obstacle, as more complex mathematical knowledge would have been necessary. The students report that reading about this AI content sometimes led to lower motivation and productivity. Overall, however, the students report that the choice of project was a good decision and that they have gained an advanced understanding of AI and its practical implementation.

When asked about what needs to happen on the part of the school and the teachers so that such projects can be practiced regularly, the teacher interviewed reported that, on the one hand, appropriate further training for the teachers is necessary. Besides the transfer of knowledge about AI, the joint development of teaching concepts should be more important. In addition, existing teaching materials should be jointly reviewed and classified. Useful material could then be made available to interested colleagues as Open Educational Resources. The exchange with product developers is considered desirable in the area of teacher training. In such a framework, the social, political, and sociological aspects of AI should be discussed more critically.

The teacher recommends that the students have a say in choosing the appropriate topic. Students need motivation and perseverance to work in project groups, so it is an advantage if the project tasks are linked to the students’ interests. In addition, clear evaluation criteria should be established and communicated transparently.

I am speaking at a seminar on Vocational Education and Training’s Role in Business Innovation at the Ramon Areces Foundation in Madrid tomorrow. The title of my presentation is ‘The future of work, Artificial Intelligence and automation: Innovation and the Dual Vocational Education and training system in Valencia’ which is really much too long for a title and I have much too much to say for my allotted 20 minutes.

Pexels (CC0), Pixabay

More as promised in my last post from the interviews we are doing on AI and Education.

One implication of AI and automation is changes in curriculum content and pedagogy. I talked with Chris Percy about this.

Chris pointed out that for school leavers qualification at GCSE level maths and English are a requirement even for vocational students and he thinks this is unlikely to change. However he thinks that programmes in these subjects will move to  –to adaptive personal learning environments.

Furthermore he says the flipped classroom model will change the role of teachers. “It has proved impossible to improve the staff student ration – general courses have 20 – 40 students or 7 to 10 on niche courses. This needs 3 / 4 way differentiation. Teachers are more conductors than coaches.” However Chris added a caveat – research suggests the the flipped classroom re model has limits. “It only really works for those who want to learn. It is possible that adults know what they want to learn but lack the motivation for self learning. Peers and teachers are important for extrinsic motivation. Disengaged teenagers are frequently not sufficiently motivated. Self taught learning even wth a mentor will only go so far. ” Cris also says that learning has a social element and questions whether avatars can really replace the social role played by teachers. As he points out, generalized AI is still out of reach.  “Chatbots cannot replace teachers at the front of a classroom. Students will have no respect for a chatbot. Teachers are skilled in developing engagement. Chatbots are good for students with a base level of motivation.”

The issue of motivation has come up in most of the interviews I have undertaken as part of the AI and Vocational Education and Learning project. I will talk more about this in a short podcast this weekend talking about my experiences as a language learner using the popular and heavily gamified DuoLingo application.

Its never boring with Yishay Mor. Here he is inviting you to send us videos, pictures or presentations which express your perception of a “hybrid learning space”.

During the last few weeks I have worked hard to finalise my deliverables for the EU-funded project TACCLE4 CPD. The project develops models for continuing professional development (CPD) to promote digital competences of teachers and trainers. The acronym TACCLE stands for “Teachers’ aids on creating contents for learning environments”. The current project is already the fourth one in the series of TACCLE projects. The earlier ones have focused on classroom teachers and on organising training for interested teachers. The current project has shifted the emphasis to organisational level and to different educational sectors – including adult education (AE) and vocational education and training (VET).

My contributions (on behalf of our institute ITB have focused on the field of VET and made transparent challenges and boundary conditions for promoting digital competences as contribution to vocational learning. In my previous blogs I have discussed this with reference to the particular reports once I have got them completed. Now that I have the full set of  reports ready and uploaded on ResearchGate I want to present an overview, what all has been produced to support CPD initiatives and to draw attention to promotion of digital competences in the field of VET.

Overview of the VET-related reports for TACCLE4 CPD project

Below I just present the titles of the reports and the links to ResearchGate. For further information I refer to the previous blogs and to the abstracts on ResearchGate:

Report One: Policy analyses as background for continuing professional development of teachers and trainers in the field of vocational education and training (VET). DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.24915.73762

Report Two: Finding new approaches to promote digital competences – Legacy of past projects and new inputs from R&D projects in vocational education and training (VET).  DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13171.68649

Report Three: Role of Open Educational Resources (OER) in the field of Vocational education and Training (VET) – Insights into uses of OER in vocational teaching/learning arrangements.  DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.23552.58880 (co-authored with Jan Naumann)

Annex to Report Three: Using Open Resources (OR) and Open Educational Resources (OER) in Vocational Education and Training (VET). Two examples of teaching/learning designs. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.10969.67684 (co-authored with Jan Naumann)

Report Four a: Strategies and Training Models for promoting Digital Competences in the field of Vocational Education and Training – Reflections on Policies, Conceptual Frameworks and Innovation projects. (Co-authored with Angela Gerrard and Werner Müller)

Report Four b: The Theme Room Training 2020 framework – Promoting digital competences of vocational teachers and trainers Report 4b for the TACCLE4 CPD project.  DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.16783.33447

Annexes to The Theme Room Training 2020 framework (Report 4b for the TACCLE4 CPD project) 

As I see it, I have completed a coherent work program starting from policy analyses, continuing with explorations on R&D projects and use cases on introducing OER and then landing to a synthesis report and to framework for shaping CPD measures. I hope that this has been useful.

—

I thing this is enough of presenting my contributions to the TACCLE 4 CPD project. Now it is time to shift to more specific themes and working issues.

More blogs to come …

Last week I was happy to announce that I had completed the text to my final deliverable for the TACCLE 4 CPD project – the Theme Room Training 2020 framework for promoting digital competences of vocational teachers and trainers. At the same time I made the point that the mere drafting of such a framework on the basis of the given thematic blocks is not enough. I made it clear to myself and to the readers that I still have to prepare Annexes to the framework – as coordinates, how to work with it. Now I have prepared a set of Annexes and I think that I have done my job to answer the question “so what“. Below I try to give a picture, what the annexes are and what they stand for.

Annexes to the Framework text – what do they stand for?

The first annex that I have prepared is an annotated list of reference materials  to the Theme Room Training 2020 framework. As it is the case, not all thematic blocks have been based on publications. To some extent there are publications that can be referred to. But equally, there are field interviews and working documents and emerging educational resources. I have tried to do justice to all these as relevant reference materials to the framework.

The second annex provides an overview, how the German framework study has interpreted the concepts ‘digitization’ (in education and training) and ‘digital transformation’ (in working life) – and what implications they have on vocational education and training (VET). In addition, the annex presents a selection of thought-provoking theses, with which the research team challenged practitioners and stakeholders to reflect the ongoing and future changes.

The third annex is a seemingly simple interview guideline to discuss the readiness of older and younger learners to take up the use of digital media and toolsets in the context of vocational learning. However, these questions were not the ones that I originally posed in the beginning of my field interviews with vocational trainers. Instead, they were the ones that I identified on the basis of our discussions – I had posed narrower questions, the trainers broadened and deepened the scope.

The fourth annex presents the use of Learning Toolbox (LTB) for preparing ePosters to promote knowledge sharing and transfer of innovation. So far I had promoted the use of ePosters in research conferences and prepared my own ones on the basis of my research papers for the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER). This week I had the pleasure to work with my colleague Jan Naumann to prepare an ePoster on the theme “Use of Open Educational Resources in Vocational Education and Training (VET)”. We were happy to complete our work and to insert the related mini-poster to the annex document. The ePoster can be accessed via the following link.

The fifth annex presents the TACCLE 4 CPD Routemap as a tool for planning the use of ICT resources in education and training and for developing training (or CPD) initiatives for teachers and trainers. I hope that the selection of power point slides gives a picture, what all can be achieved when working with the Routemap.

Altogether, I think that the annexes have given an appropriate push to work further with the themes that were raised in the Theme Room Training 2020 framework. After all, we didn’t aim to provide cookboks with ready-made recipes. Instead, we have tried to raise key themes and give impulses, how to work as innovation leaders and change agents.

—

I think this is enough of these annexes and how they complement the framework. Let us hope that these have been useful pieces of work. Time will tell.

More blogs to come …

In my previous posts I have given an overview of the reports for our ongoing TACCLE4 CPD projects that I had completed so far. At the end I have mentioned that all the reports so far provide contributions to a new framework for developing training for teachers and trainers – with emphasis on promoting digital competences in the context of vocational learning. Already in the previous reports I had made the point that this should be based on the Theme Room training concept that was initiated and implemented in the Learning Layers project. During last week I have written a draft report to outline such a framework.  Below I will present some background information and the concluding section of the report. I think that they will give an idea, what kind of framework is taking shape.

The idea of Theme Room Training – oringins and new perspectives

This framework is being prepared as a final product of the EU-funded project TACCLE4-CPD. The project has continued the work of earlier TACCLE projects in promoting digital competences of school teachers. However, concerning the field of VET, this project drawn upon the experiences of the EU-funded project Learning Layers (LL). The LL project developed digital tools and training concepts to support workplace-based and vocational learning. The concept of “Theme Rooms” was developed as a part of the LL project to promote digital competences of vocational trainers.

The training in ‘Theme Rooms’ was initiated by the above-mentioned trainers who wanted to develop a more systematic training arrangement. With this approach they wanted to reach all training staff in their organisation. In this way they wanted to promote the use of digital tools in all areas of apprentice training.

The idea of Theme Rooms was based on the following pedagogic principles:

• Combination of real and virtual learning spaces for focused thematic blocks for promoting digital competences;
• Signing in into ‘theme rooms’ for completing the learning sessions with exercises and then signing out (with a flexible tempo);
• Working together in teams in terms of peer learning and peer tutoring;
• Rotating between different themes in order to reach common awareness of the subject matter and to develop a common competence base.

The concept of Theme Room training was put into practice as a staff training campaign during one month. This training campaign based on the Theme Room concept helped the trainers to become users of the LTB in their own training. Now, in the current situation, it is possible to identify many parallel approaches to introduce digital tools and new media into vocational learning. At the same time there are new qustions concerning the significance of digital technologies in the context of vocational education and training (VET). These are taken up in the new framework.

What does the new framework stand for?

The main elements of the framework are thematic blocks that can be used as a basis for the Theme Rooms of the updated training concept. The following set of thematic blocks is presented in the further sections below:

In the first thematic block the framework draws attention to digital transformation (as a major socio-cultural challenge) and to digitization (as a more specific development). This block invites to think, how VET provisions can prepare for such processes and/or provide co-shaping contributions.

The second thematic block discusses the readiness of older and younger learners to use digital media and tools in the context of vocational learning. This block invites to think, how older teachers, trainers and workplace mentors can find their own ways to use such tools to promote vocational learning. Also, it invites to think, how younger learners can best familiarise themselves with work processes, uses of traditional tools and digital tools in their own learning.

The third thematic block presents a set of parallel “Innovation paths” for introducing digital tools into vocational learning contexts and to enhance the digital competences of teachers, trainers and learners. Four of these paths have been named on the basis of specific projects or their final products – the Kompetenzwerkstatt, Learning Toolbox, Brofessio and CARO paths. The fifth path refers to smart uses of Open Educational Resources (OER). This block invites to think, what kind of vocational learning contexts are relevant for the user and what can be learned from the exemplary cases.

The fourth thematic block presents insights into the TACCLE4 CPD Routemap tool and its uses for organisational planning (of the use of ICT resources) and development of training (with focus on promoting digital competences). For both purposes the Routemap outlines levels of proficiency with corresponding criteria. In this way the tool invites to think, at what stage is the organisation regarding its use of ICT resources and what kind of steps can be taken with the help of training.

Altogether, the framework invites the readers to think of their own solutions and to find their own ways to promote digital competences in their field. Thus, the framework provides starting points and gives further impulses and references for further developmental work.

—

I guess that this is enough of the idea of the Theme room Training 2020 framework. I need to emphasise that it is still under construction. As I see it, the texts for the thematic blocks have already been shaped. Yet, each block needs a further layer for comments, questions, resources and impulses. So, there is still some more work to be done.

More blogs to come …

There seems to be a day for everything now. Anyway as I found out from the presentation by the ever creative Fred Garnett, 26 October is World Heutagogy Day!

We have long known that educational outcomes are heavily influenced by social class. But little has been done to try to understand how social class affects learning. In that respect the article by Lien Pham on ‘How socioeconomic background makes a difference in education outcomes‘ is very welcome.

Pham notes that although “PISA publishes its PISA context assessment framework to supplement its regular international PISA testing of reading, maths and science”, ” these are just snapshots rather than an analysis of the impact of students’ background characteristics on their participation in these processes, or whether the educational system, schooling processes and classroom practices may favour certain groups over others” and “they do not help to shed light on how and why some students perform better than others.”

Pham says “In order to truly understand what is happening with inequality I believe we have to recognise the implicit social relationships and social structures in the schooling processes that position students in different vantage points.”

Pham goes on to look at what PISA says about students’ family backgrounds, student ethnicity and polices to improve educational inequality, adding his own comments and analysis. His overall conclusion is that reducing inequality neds more than just access to economic resources

We need to deeply understand students’ “real” opportunities within our systems of education. I believe we need to look more closely at what students can reasonably do (or not do) with those resources given their backgrounds and situations.

Resources are important, but just because a school has a wide variety of resources doesn’t mean all of its students will benefit from those equally.

I am arguing that policy attention to improve educational inequality should place student agency and diversity at the forefront, rather than focussing on resources with the assumption that all students will be able to access them in similar ways with similar outcomes.

You can read more in his paper: Capital and capabilities in education: Re-examining Australia’s 2015 PISA performance and context assessment framework

It’s the last day of the summer holidays.

On Sunday I am traveling to Hamburg for the European Conference on Educational Research (ECER). I am not a great fan of conferences – al least the formal part. I have long campaigned for the ‘flipped conference’. All too often conferences just consist of researchers reading out their bullet points from their slides. Their is little chance to interrogate the ideas, less so to have a proper discussion about the work they are presenting. All too often presentations overrun with it being accepted that the ten or so minutes scheduled for discussion at the end of three or four presentations will be eaten up. And it is interesting that people still hark back to the Personal Learning environment conferences where we did at least try to do things differently. In reality the best bit of the conferences are usually in the informal discussions which take place outside the official sessions.

Having said that I like the ECER conferences. One strength is the priority given to emerging researchers. Another is the international focus for ECER, not just in terms of attracting delegates from all over the world, but in stressing that presentation should focus on at east the European dimension of the research. A third advantage of ECER is that it covers many different areas of education through the 31 or so networks which organise the programme. This year, I am in a privileged position as I have been commissioned by the European Educational Research Association to make a series of short videos, interviewing the network conveners. The idea is that the videos provide a quick and informative way of people understanding the focus of the networks and the activities they are undertaking, including the increasing number of what EERA call ‘season schools’ (formerly summer schools but the changed nomenclature reflecting the fact that most take place outside the summer time). This week we are aiming to record 21 videos. It will be hard work but a lot of fun and for me a great learning opportunity.

Of course, one of the attractions of conferences is the chance to meet up with old colleagues and friends. I will be in Hamburg all week. If you would like to meet up just drop me a line.