grundtvig e-learning for adults

7/30/2019 Grundtvig E-learning for Adults

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/grundtvig-e-learning-for-adults 1/117

Feasibility of an Electronic Platform for

Adult Learning in EuropeDG Education and Culture

4 May 2012



This page is intentionally blank



Feasibility of EPALE

Feasibility of an Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in EuropeDG Education and Culture

A report submitted by GHK in association with

Technopolis Limited

Danish Technological Institute3s Unternehmensberatung GmbH

Date: 4 May 2012




Contents

Executive summary ........................................................................................................ 4 Approach to the study.............................................................................................................................. 4 Potential users’ views.............................................................................................................................. 5 Key messages from the experience of other similar websites................................................................ 5 Assessment of proposed features and functions .................................................................................... 7 Assessment of approaches ..................................................................................................................... 8 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................. 8 1 Introduction......................................................................................................12 1.1 This study............................................................................................................................... 13 1.2 Method ................................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 Structure of this report............................................................................................................ 18 2 Potential users’ views .......................................................................................19 2.1 Features/content .................................................................................................................... 19 2.2 Functions................................................................................................................................ 23 2.3 Participation / contribution...................................................................................................... 25 2.4 Languages ............................................................................................................................. 26 2.5 Online Events/Training........................................................................................................... 27 2.6 Dissemination / Use of social media ...................................................................................... 28 2.7 Need and rationale for a platform .......................................................................................... 30 2.8 Key messages emerging........................................................................................................ 30 3 Learning from the experience of other websites............................................. 32 3.1 Other platforms ...................................................................................................................... 32 3.2 General platform characteristics ............................................................................................ 44 3.3 Usage and value of features and functionalities.................................................................... 50 3.4 Dissemination and communication ........................................................................................ 51 3.5 Key messages........................................................................................................................ 54 4 Assessment of features and functionalities......................................................57 4.1 Assessment of features.......................................................................................................... 57 4.2 Assessment of functionalities................................................................................................. 66 4.3 Assessment of languages...................................................................................................... 74 4.4 Key messages........................................................................................................................ 77 5 Assessment of approaches............................................................................... 79 5.1 Development and management............................................................................................. 79 5.2 Dissemination......................................................................................................................... 84 5.3 Key messages........................................................................................................................ 85 6

Conclusions......................................................................................................86

6.1 What is the case for EPALE................................................................................................... 86 6.2 What are the broad options.................................................................................................... 87 6.3 Way ahead............................................................................................................................. 89

Annex 1 Glossary of Technical Terms................................................................. 93 Annex 2 Online Survey........................................................................................ 95 Annex 3 Survey: Detailed Analysis Tables........................................................ 102 Annex 4 Summary of Information about Other Platforms .............................. 105 Annex 5 Pros and Cons of 5 Content Management Systems (CMS) ................. 112




4

Executive summary

Background to the study

The European Union (EU) has aimed to increase the participation of adults in lifelong learning and

education. It has set a target of raising average participation across the EU to 15% by 2020 from anaverage of 9.5% in 2008. The European Agenda for Adult Learning was renewed in 2011, in

recognition of the contribution that can be made by adult learning to enabling adults to improve their

prospects in a changing labour market and their contribution to society1. The renewed Agenda

identifies the following priority areas for the period 2012 to 2014:

▪ Making lifelong learning and mobility a reality;

▪ Improving the quality and efficiency of education and training;

▪ Promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizenship through adult learning;

▪ Enhancing the creativity and innovation of adults and their learning environment; and

▪ Improving the knowledge base on adult learning and monitoring the adult education sector.

The Grundtvig sub-programme of the EU’s Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP) aims to support the

achievement of the target for adult participation in lifelong learning through providing more and better

learning opportunities to adults and particularly to: improve the quality and amount of co-operation

between adult education organisations; develop innovative adult education and management

practices, and encourage widespread implementation; and support innovative ICT-based educational

content, services and practices2:.

As a consequence the Grundtvig sub-programme’s activities are contributing to creating a European

area of adult education, driving innovation and transferring knowledge and expertise in the field of

teaching adult learners, and raising participation.

For the EU’s programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport for the period from 2014 to 2020,

the Commission has proposed to establish an Erasmus for All programme3. This is designed tostrengthen lifelong learning and support Member States to modernise their education and training

systems. In particular it proposes a greater emphasis on cooperation for innovation, good practice in

adult learning and an IT platform for adult learning for peer learning and exchange of good practice for

a greatly enlarged group of potential beneficiaries than events and mobility programmes can achieve.

It is also clear in the current and future framework for lifelong learning that further progress is sought

across the EU towards good quality non-vocational adult education which encourages participation,

enables adults to continue learning and developing their skills, and enables social inclusion. It is also

clear that to achieve this, learning from Member States should be shared through exchanges,

products, cooperation and collaboration.

An Electronic Platform for Adult Education (EPALE) could therefore be expected to:

▪ Help to develop a culture of lifelong learning by making adult education more attractive, accessibleand effective;

▪ Support the process of building a European adult learning community by providing good quality

information about policy and practice and learning products for mutual learning from the range of

providers of non-vocational adult education;

▪ Enhance and speed up the process of building closer cooperation, networking and exchanges of

information and people that currently largely take place through workshops and events;

1Council of the European Union 16743/11 draft Council resolution on a renewed European agenda for adult

learning2 Grundtvig: practical learning for adults: http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-programme/doc86_en.htm3

Erasmus for All: the EU programme for education, training, youth and sport. EC Communication from theCommission to the European parliament COM (2011) 787 final




5

▪ Capitalize on the results of Grundtvig projects, products and activities and those funded by other

European , national, regional and local sources both public and private by disseminating them

more widely, in particular evidence of best practice to address specific problems in adult learning

such as around participation and the quality of adult learning; and

▪ Support the process for developing as well as implementing European adult learning policies.

GHK Consulting was commissioned in August 2011 to carry out a feasibility assessment and cost

analysis of EPALE to identify the most useful features and functionalities of EPALE and the costs and

benefits of such features and functionalities; consider the models for providing EPALE and associated

costs and the approaches to disseminating information about EPALE; and provide estimates of the

potential costs to establish, promote and maintain EPALE. This was with a view to shaping any

commissioning of the development of a platform.

Approach to the study

The feasibility study drew on:

▪ Interviews and assessments of 11 existing websites with similar objectives to identify feasibility of

features and functions, costs, management arrangements and challenges;

▪ Consultation with potential users with a short on-line survey which had 573 responses

representing the range of potential users from 33 countries;

▪ In depth interviews with representatives of different potential users from a range of countries (15);

▪ A discussion at a Grundtvig National Agencies meeting;

▪ Cost utility assessments of the features, functions, development, management arrangements,

dissemination and languages options; and

▪ An assessment of various scenarios for development of EPALE with the broad implications for

costs and staffing

Potential users’ views

The survey findings and stakeholder interviews suggest that many stakeholders hope that EPALE

could raise the profile of the sector and be a one stop shop or springboard to the sector’s information

resources. But it needs a clear reason to be a tool that the potential users would use. While most

respondents are generally very positive about the suggested content of EPALE (around 70-80% for

each feature), a smaller proportion (15-20%) suggest they would not use it because there are other

websites available. While generally supportive, several stakeholders cautioned that it runs the risk of

“being all things to all men” without a clear function and being too focused on EU funded activities.

About three quarters of respondents indicate that they would use each of the features suggested but

many cautioned that the content would need to be identifiable (well-tagged) and searchable and linked

to other platforms. Respondents have more varied views on the functions suggested with much higher proportions indicating that a calendar of events, resources for staff training, and a tool to find partners

in other countries would be more useful than a members’ community and a discussion forum, for

example. Adult education providers are slightly less interested in adult education policy and more

interested in calendars of events and staff training resources. The National Agencies and government

bodies are more likely to have information from other sources and need links and some resources less

than adult education providers. Respondents would be much more willing to undertake participative

activities that required less time commitments, such as uploading event information and joining a

partner finding tool (over 80%) than translating content (under 40%) or uploading lesson plans and

other learning tools (under 60%) from which they would not personally gain. There is considerable

interest in on-line events and training even if they are only in English; though this is a lower proportion

than for most of the suggested functions that respondents would find useful/very useful (under 60%).

There are mixed views about the extent of content available in EU languages. Some strongly believethat English would be adequate especially if plain English guidance were applied; others that all EU

languages are needed if the platform is to engage adult education providers in Eastern and Southern

Europe. This appears to depend on the content and functions; with perhaps greater need for multi-




6

lingual provision for good practice information and for partner finding tools than for discussion forums

and information for policy makers.

Email newsletters are used by three-quarters of respondents and many would prefer this for keeping

up to date with the platform’s content and functions. Some have suggested targeted newsletters as

well for specific areas of adult learning. There are very mixed views on other social media tools butless contention over RSS feeds than Facebook for example.

Key messages from the experience of other similar websites

General approach

Useful learning for establishing EPALE appears to be that having a clear set of purposes (expected

outputs and outcomes linked to increasing target users’ knowledge, skills and abilities) and a menu of

content and functions to achieve these is more likely to focus attention and lead to successful

development. Establishing ownership at the outset is critical for development and re-tendering as well

as ensuring that resources and materials which are available on other websites are signposted.

Initial and continuing developmentsUseful learning for setting up EPALE appears to be:

▪ A few have had short set up contracts but most with wider ambitions have had initial contracts for

several years (3-5 years) to set up/launch within a year and continue development with

management activities; few have done this in-house;

▪ Costs of development range from €10-40,000 to €100K-1million but the scale is clearly linked to

the ambitions and when initial development merges with management and maintenance;

▪ Some have been developed incrementally but many have been designed to service a potential

fixed range of purposes and functions linked to these (and re-designed periodically). Contracts

require flexibility to enable evolution of functions and content;

▪ Making the decision about whether the website should be multi-lingual early on is important as it isdifficult to add a language functionality at a later stage. Adding an additional language on a

website that is already multilingual is not as problematic; and

▪ The chosen Content Management System should be open source and straightforward to use but

the final choice should reflect the uses of the platform including the languages available.

Other useful learning for the process of development appears to be:

▪ Potential users can test and provide feedback on the website as a whole, as well as for each new

feature. Testers should represent the demographic of the target group; this should include staff of

small adult education providers, older workers and staff with limited experience of online portals;

▪ Building in means of monitoring, such as counting downloads of resources, should be done at the

outset so that outputs can be measured and evaluated;

▪ A Web Accessibility Initiative Level A accessibility requirement should be met at the outset; and

▪ EPALE could potentially use the LRE resource hosting platform rather than create one from

scratch.

Maintenance and management

Useful learning for EPALE appears to be that most other platforms have included maintenance and

management with continuing development and have flexible contracts (3-6 years) to enable priorities

to be agreed between client and contractor on a regular basis. Costs of maintenance and

management are not always distinguished from other related activities (such as dissemination,

organisation of events, developing content, editing/ reviewing new content, organisation of training

activities and delivery of training) but it is not generally believed to be necessary to separate them

contractually. Functions tend to increase management costs more than features though both need

active management if they are to be useful to large numbers of target users.




7

Active management ranges from developing and commissioning new material to exploiting content

(editing and disseminating) and targeting potential users. Most have specified these additional

activities partly to ensure that content is up to date and functionality is enhanced and partly to make

the content relevant and useful or to increase and maintain take up. Costs range from €250K to

several millions a year but these seem to be related to scale and the extent of roles and

responsibilities.

Several have networks as well as a contractor with the network members (in Member States) required

to do local dissemination and to produce local material. Most have contracted out the work but a few

have in-house teams undertaking some of the active dissemination and updating of content, for

example, in addition to contract management; one has several contractors with different

responsibilities but acknowledges that this requires coordination. Some successfully use panels or

groups of users to check new materials and propose content.

Features and functions

Useful learning for EPALE’s potential features and functions appears to be that a critical mass of users

is needed for some functions, such as partner tools and discussion forums, to be viable. Discussion

forums can generally only flourish when a website has become established or has developed acommunity of users who have established relationships at events or visits. The various school partner

finding tools support the creation of virtual professional networks and exchanges by enabling the

sharing of information and resources.

Many functions enable a legacy from events, exchanges and visits to be built because they will bring

in other users of the knowledge and understanding gained. Content such as materials for teaching and

‘good practice’ need to have search functions and ought to have editorial controls and quality

standards if they are to be useful.

Discussion forums, online communities and ask an expert functions need active management too if

they are to be used and provided resources for other users. Some features and functions are already

available through other means (such as E-partnership space) or existing websites (such as Infonet).

Some features are available on websites in some Member States and in some languages. Examples

of national websites offering resources for teachers are the Norwegian Agency for Lifelong Learninghttp://www.vox.no and the Association of Austrian Adult Education Centres http://www.vhs.or.at.

Dissemination

Useful learning for EPALE’s potential features and functions appears to be that a ‘have to use’ or

‘must use’ feature can increase usage though neither necessarily bring users to all other features and

functions. This needs to be supplemented by search engine optimisation (SEO) and active

dissemination. Most of the platforms demonstrate that active management and dissemination increase

use and can significantly increase take up of features/functions such as downloadable teaching

materials, partner finding tools and discussion forums. Some activities bring in users, such as regular

e-newsletters and RSS feeds. Rewards and quality marks for active participation are appreciated and

may support active contributions from users. There are mixed views about registering and restricting

access and having open access; some of the most successful have open access.

Languages

The experience of other platforms tells us that the languages available for resources bring in new

users but also restrict users to the languages they can work in. While the use of plain English will help

(which then requires editorial control and guidance), some features, such as resources, benefit

considerably from being translated. The cost of translation depends on the scale of translation

required; those providing material in six or more languages only translate the material which is

centrally generated or for some features/functions. This can be supplemented by translation on

request and machine translation software availability.

Assessment of proposed features and functions

The assessment indicates that EPALE could significantly contribute to some of the key aims of the

adult learning agenda and the proposed Erasmus for All programme, especially to improve the quality

and extent of cooperation, widen the beneficiaries of resources produced and to strengthen the sector

http://www.vox.no/

http://www.vhs.or.at/

http://www.vox.no/

http://www.vox.no/





http://www.vox.no/




8

by supporting innovative better quality teaching. It could also drive transferring knowledge and

expertise in the adult education field for both teaching and raising participation and achievement both

by enhancing and expanding the opportunities for exchanges and sharing for mutual learning and

collaboration.

Principally because some of the features and functions could be expected to have a greater impactthan others and make a more significant contribution to the aims and targets of the adult learning

agenda and the Commission’s future programme, the highest priorities should be:

▪ Good practice on adult education policy;

▪ Partner finding tool;

▪ Resources for teaching / teachers;

▪ Resources for staff training;

▪ Calendar of events;

▪ Learning opportunities for staff; and

▪ On-line training / e-learning space.

The following would only be secondary priorities:

▪ Good practice on delivering adult education;

▪ Resources for managers;

▪ Catalogue of useful links;

▪ Funding and awards information;

▪ On-line members community; and

▪ E-partnership space.

And the following should not necessarily be considered for EPALE: adult education news, library of

documents, discussion forum, and Ask an Expert, unless they provided value to any of the highest

priority features and functions by increasing traffic to the platform or providing resources to users.

The highest priority features and functions would benefit from the following arrangements for

languages:

▪ Professional translation in 25 languages:

– Good practice on adult education policy

– Learning opportunities for staff

– Summaries of resources for teaching and staff training

▪ Machine translation:

– Partner finding tool

– Calendar of events

▪ English only:

– On-line training events / e-learning space.

Assessment of approachesThe assessment of development and management approaches suggests that most of the desired

features and many of the functions for EPALE can be delivered through the development

management and maintenance (DMM) option. Adding resource support and development (RSD)

allows for the creation, moderation and production of new material and events so that the website can

evolve to offer a core “service” rather than function as a depository of material and information created

elsewhere. This has the potential of attracting new users to the site; as well as generating return traffic

from existing users which would be necessary for the platform to ensure a critical mass of users. The

addition of network support (NS) would allow EPALE to directly engage with the target audience in

their own country and in their own language and therefore increase the likelihood of “community”

functions being taken up. Creating a source of exclusive content, SEO and targeted e-newsletters are

likely to be the most effective ways of attracting visitors to the site at relatively low cost.

In relation to the priorities for EPALE and language provision suggested above, EPALE would requireDMM and RSD in the first instance to create an adult education learning community and ensure the

functions were effectively used and met users’ needs. A RSD would also ensure that dissemination

could include targeted e-newsletters which should be one of the priorities for dissemination. NS would




9

be a necessary enhancement in some Member States to promote and enable use of resources and a

partner finding tool.

Conclusions

What is the case for EPALE?

It is clear that EPALE could play a key role in transferring innovative and well tested practices in

teaching and training in adult learning to strengthen the adult learning sector across Europe and

create a wider learning community for mutual benefits. It could provide a sustainable network for

dissemination and the exploitation of knowledge and understanding to a much wider range of

beneficiaries. It would be feasible to establish the platform since the features and functions have been

developed elsewhere and it is evident that learning can be drawn on to ensure they are developed to

meet the adult learning community’s needs.

The table below adapts a PEST analysis to summarise the findings which support the case.

The case for EPALE

Policy relevance Economically effective

The Agenda for Adult Learning includes raising

the quality of teaching and learning in adult

education; increasing the participation of adults

in learning

Erasmus for All could expect an IT support

platform to provide opportunities for peer learning

exchange, training and open resources, and

enlarging the group of beneficiaries of partner

activities and learning events

Opportunity to spread resources and practice to

less developed adult education providers toincrease availability of innovative teaching and

ways to increase participation in adult learning

especially for the low skilled and older people

Provides for open educational resources

Functions such as downloadable resources and

shared space for e-partners attract users who

would otherwise not participate in sharing and

using new materials because of the cost

New resources obtained by practitioners and

policy makers at less cost than developing them

themselves

Tools to enable cooperation and sharing provide

‘virtual mobility’ at low cost

Opportunity to exploit the legacy of resourcesand materials from Grundtvig and other

programmes

Learning available about the development of

tools by other platforms with features and

functions planned for EPALE

Social benefits Technically feasible

Very high proportions of potential beneficiaries

believe they would use features and functions

Recognition by many potential beneficiaries that

it could address needs for training and better teaching materials

Gaps in current electronic resources for adult

learning which it could fill, especially for teaching

resources

Difficulties with current resources to retrieve

good practice and legacy materials

Similar platforms are operational and have

similar features and functions

Lessons can be learned from the experience of

other platforms about what works

Language translation can be carried out for

features and functions that would benefit from

being multi-lingual

As a consequence the development of a platform should be supported because it:

▪ Directly contributes to fulfilling many of the ambitions of the Agenda for Adult Learning;

▪

Fills a gap in what is generally available to increase the knowledge, understanding, skillsand competencies of adult learning providers;

▪ This is recognised by the majority of potential users;




10

▪ Provides cost effective means to increase sharing and use of information and resources;

▪ Could create a learning community across Europe for adult learning managers and

practitioners in particular with the remit to transfer and share resources which could raise

the quality of teaching, enhance participation, and encourage effective investment in adult

learning; and

▪ It is not a high risk in terms of technical requirements.

What are the broad options?

The broad options are more about different scales of development than mutually exclusive choices

between different features and functions because the assessment points to features and functions

which should be a greater priority than others. The features and functions to be developed in turn have

implications for the management and maintenance arrangements necessary as well as the

dissemination and language requirements.

The first scenario focuses on the highest priority features and functions, the second scenario a wider

range of higher priority features and functions; and the third scenario brings in some which are a

lesser priority.

In grouping the package of features and functions in each scenario, key considerations have been:

Providing content which will provide potential users a reason to visit the website;

Reflecting on the need to provide resources and partnering opportunities when the Grundtvig

programme comes to an end in 2014;

Reflecting on the assessments which highlighted the features and functions that were the highest

priority;

Considering the views of beneficiaries and other platform owners about the features and functions

most likely to make a difference, contribute to the agenda for adult learning, and fill a gap in what

is available; and

Building a critical mass of users to enable a partner finding tool to be useful.

As a consequence the first scenario groups the features and functions most likely to contribute to the

planned programme for adult learning and have an impact on its key aims.

The associated management and maintenance, dissemination and languages proposals for each

scenario reflect:

The degree of need for active management and dissemination;

The limited extent users are likely to be active participants and the wish to exploit resources and

materials that already exist;

The indication that multi-lingualism (25 languages) will encourage the use of shared resources for

teaching and training; and The criticality of raising awareness and generating traffic if the e-partner finding tool is to draw in

users across the Member States.

Additionally, we assumed that the website would:

▪ Be built using a CMS which can support content in many languages;

▪ Comply with at least the A level WAI accessibility standard but aim for Triple “A” compliance;

▪ Be suitably coded so that it can be accessible on a range of devices;

▪ Have effective security and personal data safety provisions in place; and

▪ Include a “how to” section which would offer step-by-step guidance to users on how they can

participate in the various tools.

There are opportunities for collaboration with existing websites and their functions. For example,

instead of creating a new database of learning resources EPALE may wish to engage in a partnership




11

with LRE or with Open Education Resources4

so that adult education material is uploaded onto their

existing database. This may result in cost savings and offer the possibility of a larger, worldwide

audience for the material. However, it might also mean that adult education material is “lost” on these

larger databases among the large number of other resources that are available5.

The estimated costs are based around the costs of other platforms with adjustments to take account of the scale of EPALE proposed compared to these. This is not an exact approach to costing but should

indicate the relative scale of different scenarios and their components.

It should also be noted that:

▪ Some of the annual costs (2014 onwards) could start before the launch of the platform; for

example the National Support network should be established before the website is launched;

▪ There will be contract management costs falling on the Commission as well as a considerable cost

to lead and support development in the first two years. The former have not been estimated; and

▪ Staffing estimates for RSD and NS have led the costing.

In considering the scenarios the Commission should balance costs against budget and what package

of features and functions will achieve its ambitions from 2014 onwards. The highest priority scenarioincludes features and functions which should have the biggest impact on the aims of the Agenda for

Adult Learning. Other platforms suggest that the creation of EPALE can be achieved by 2014.

Way ahead

Once the Commission has considered the business case made for EPALE and the features and

functions for development in the first stage if it is to go ahead, the Commission should consider

drawing on the lessons of other platforms particularly their experience in developing and delivering

similar features and functions and the challenges that have arisen in making them effective. It should

also make decisions about the related packages of management and maintenance, dissemination and

languages as set out in the scenarios above and whether any opportunities for collaboration should be

explored.

4 http://www.oercommons.org

5For example, Open Education Resources filters material in its database by post-secondary grade which covers

more than adult learning.

http://www.oercommons.org/







12

1 Introduction

The European Union aims to increase the participation of adults in lifelong learning and

education. It has set a target of raising average participation across the EU to 15% by 2020

from an average of 9.5% in 2008. The Commission has acknowledged in its Europe 2020strategy that lifelong learning and skills are a key element of the Agenda for New Skills and

Jobs and tackling the economic crisis, especially for lower skilled and older workers.

As a consequence there have been commitments to increase participation in and raise the

quality of adult learning and a recognition that adult learners could benefit from innovative

methods for teaching and learning and more comprehensive learning opportunities.

The European Agenda for Adult Learning was renewed in 2011, in recognition of the

contribution that can be made by adult learning in enabling adults to improve their ability to

adapt to changes in the labour market and society6. The renewed Agenda identifies the

following priority areas for the period 2012 to 2014:

▪ Making lifelong learning and mobility a reality;

▪ Improving the quality and efficiency of education and training;

▪ Promoting equity, social cohesion and active citizenship through adult learning;

▪ Enhancing the creativity and innovation of adults and their learning environment; and

▪ Improving the knowledge base on adult learning and monitoring the adult education

sector.

The Grundtvig sub-programme of the EU’s Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP) aims to

support the achievement of the above target through providing more and better learning

opportunities to adults and tackling problems associated with Europe’s ageing population.

Grundtvig specifically aims to7:

▪ Increase the number of people in adult education to 25,000 by 2013, and improve thequality of their experience, whether at home or abroad;

▪ Improve conditions for mobility so that at least 7,000 people a year can benefit from adult

education abroad up to 2013;

▪ Improve the quality and amount of co-operation between adult education organisations;

▪ Develop innovative adult education and management practices, and encourage

widespread implementation;

▪ Ensure that people on the margins of society have access to adult education, especially

older people and those who left education without basic qualifications; and

▪

Support innovative ICT-based educational content, services and practices.

The Grundtvig sub-programme’s activities are contributing to creating a European area of

adult education, driving innovation and transferring knowledge and expertise in the field of

teaching adult learners, and raising participation.

For the EU’s programme for Education, Training, Youth and Sport for the period from 2014

to 2020, the Commission has proposed to establish an Erasmus for All programme8. This is

designed to strengthen lifelong learning and support Member States to modernise their

education and training systems. In particular it proposes a greater emphasis on cooperation

6Council of the European Union 16743/11 draft Council resolution on a renewed European agenda for adult

learning7 Grundtvig: practical learning for adults: http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-programme/doc86_en.htm8

Erasmus for All: the EU programme for education, training, youth and sport. EC Communication from theCommission to the European parliament COM (2011) 787 final




13

for innovation, good practice in adult learning and an IT platform for adult learning for peer

learning and exchange of good practice for a greatly enlarged group of potential

beneficiaries than events and mobility programmes can achieve.

It is clear in the current and future framework for lifelong learning that further progress is

sought across the EU towards good quality non-vocational adult education whichencourages participation, enables adults to continue learning and developing their skills and

enables social inclusion. It is also clear that to achieve this, learning from Member States

should be shared through exchanges, products, cooperation and collaboration.

Consultations on the future programme in relation to adult learning point to9:

▪ The particular importance of transferring innovative projects to strengthen the adult

learning sector;

▪ The need for institutional networks which could strengthen learning exchanges between

the more developed and the underdeveloped areas of the EU in relation to adult learning

provision; and

▪

The relatively high importance of supporting sustainable networks to disseminate andexploit good practice in adult learning and to support peer learning activities.

An Electronic Platform for Adult Education (EPALE) could therefore be expected to:

▪ Help to develop a culture of lifelong learning by making adult education more attractive,

accessible and effective;

▪ Support the process of building a European adult learning community by providing good

quality information about policy and practice and learning products for mutual learning

from the range of providers of non-vocational adult education;

▪ Enhance and speed up the process of building closer cooperation, networking and

exchanges of information and people that currently largely take place through workshops

and events;▪ Capitalize on the results of Grundtvig projects, products and activities and those funded

by Member States by disseminating them more widely, in particular evidence of best

practice to address specific problems in adult learning such as around participation and

the quality of adult learning; and

▪ Support the process for developing as well as implementing European adult learning

policies.

1.1 This study

GHK Consulting was commissioned in August 2011 to carry out a feasibility assessment and

cost analysis of a possible Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe (EPALE). The

feasibility assessment is expected to:

▪ Identify the most useful features and functionalities of EPALE;

▪ Identify the costs and benefits of such features and functionalities;

▪ Consider the models for providing EPALE and associated costs;

▪ Consider the approaches to disseminating information about EPALE; and

▪ Provide estimates of the potential costs to establish, promote and maintain EPALE.

This is with a view to shaping any commissioning of the development of a platform.

The Commission provided some initial consideration of potential features and functionalities

and in discussion identified that EPALE must be interactive (allowing users to contribute in

9Preparation of a new programme on education and training (LLP) post 2014: results of the public consultation

undertaken by GHK for DGEAC (2011); EAEA Action plan follow up paper (2011)




14

some way), dynamic (kept up to date) and appeal to a range of people (adult learning

teachers and managers, researchers, policy makers). The following were felt to be priorities:

▪ A platform in all European languages;

▪ A source of practical materials for adult learning teachers which could be downloaded;

▪ An opportunity for e-twinning and exchange of information; and

▪ Features that will encourage use by practitioners (possibly practitioner led content on

good practice or a calendar of events with rewards/incentives for contributors).

It was agreed that the feasibility study would:

▪ Take the initial consideration about features and functionalities and their rationale further

with a survey and telephone interviews of a range of potential types of user across the

EU;

▪ Draw on the experience of similar websites established to identify actual costs and

models used for setting up, dissemination and management (both maintenance and

further development); consider what works and what is most cost effective; and identify

what might be used to inform the development of EPALE;

▪ Also draw on the experience of similar websites to test out the rationale for features and

functionalities and the subsequent usage/feedback from users;

▪ Develop a range of broad options and choices for EPALE’s features and functionalities

and EPALE’s development and management which can be narrowed down; and

▪ Develop and use a cost utility assessment tool to compare these options and choices.

1.2 Method

Each of the main components is described briefly below.

1.2.1 Learning from existing platforms

From a review of a long list of 28 platforms, a sample of 11 case study websites was

selected to investigate in greater detail. These were chosen on the basis of similarities with

EPALE’s aims, initial range of features and functionalities, types of user, and the availability

of information on development and management but with some different arrangements for

management and development. The platforms are listed below in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1 Sample of Websites for in-depth analysis and critical review

Online

Community

Features

Dissemination

of good practice

/ learningproducts

Management

systems

(differenttypes)

Multiple

Languages

Community of

Users / Active

membercontribution

Etwinning.net 9 9 E-platform +

National

Resource

Centres

9 (including

on

TwinSpace)

9

Salto-youth.net 9 9 European

resource centre

+ national

agencies

9

European Infonet

Adult Education

9 23 national

correspondents

CORDIS 9 E-platform only 9

British Council

Schools online

9 9 E-platform +

partnership




15

OnlineCommunity Features

Disseminationof good practice/ learning

products

Managementsystems(different

types)

MultipleLanguages

Community of Users / Activemember

contribution

supportScientix network 9 E-platform +

annual

conference

9 9

iNET

(International

Networking for

Educational

Transformation)

9 9 E-platform +

central resource

centre (products

& events)

9

elearning europa E-platform only 9 9

Learning

Resource

Exchange

9 E-platform only

(provider controls

content)

9

Adult Learning

Australia

9 E-platform +

webinars +

members’ area

Possibly through

Webinar feature

Teachers TV 9 Teaching

material +

community

activity

9

In addition to looking critically at the websites and reviewing the content and functionalities,

members of the team interviewed the site owners and/or the managing agents about their creation and management, their purposes and usage, the effectiveness of their

functionalities, the reasons for their choices and the costs of development and management.

This has enabled the study to:

▪ Identify and list all functionalities and tools offered on similar platforms and assess their

pros and cons in terms of EPALE’s aims as well as feasibility, technology and cost;

▪ Review management arrangements as well as other possible activities and gather

information on the cost and resources required for each;

▪ Identify good practice/examplar features in terms of content, features, management

arrangements and communications; and

▪ Understand the process and challenges faced when creating a good product and setting

up a new e-platform and identify lessons from established websites’ experiences.

While the interviews have usefully supplemented use and review of the sites, it was not

possible to secure interviews with iNET and Teachers TV, who did not wish to participate in

our research. Ten interviews were completed in total, which included a mixture of owners

and managers. Interviewees from British Council Schools and Adult Learning Australia were

not prepared to provide information about costs – and estimates provided in terms of

numbers of staff, time required for various functions and budgets have to be treated with

some caution because they are for websites which may not be directly comparable with

EPALE and they are only a small sample. As will be discussed in Chapter 3, many websites

examined are delivered through a contract which includes several other requirements

beyond developing, maintaining and managing the dynamic and static elements of thewebsite. These, for example, include producing research and other reports and material,

organising training, providing helpdesks for users, organising events and conferences and

undertaking on-line and off-line dissemination and communication activities. It was not




16

usually possible for websites to provide detailed information on any itemised costs, such as

the development of specific functions and features.

1.2.2 Consulting potential users

To gain a wider view of the need for EPALE, potential end users were consulted through:▪ A short on-line survey distributed through Grundtvig National Agencies and the contacts

held in DG EAC’s database of adult learning organisations. Respondents were asked to

indicate the most useful features, their value to their work and the work of other potential

users, and what contribution they would make to content and interactive features. The

survey is included in Annex 1. This has been analysed by type of user;

▪ In depth interviews of different potential users in a range of countries covering needs,

key gaps in electronic information within the adult education sector, the priorities among

the proposed features and functionalities, views on specific content (training materials,

news, languages), and maintenance requirements. The sample is set out in Table 1.2

below;

▪ A discussion at a National Agencies meeting in Brussels.

Table 1.2 Interviewees

Type of User No. of

Interviews

Interviewee organisations

(Country)

EAEA Representative 2 EAEA (UK) (AT)

National Adult Education Association or

National Council of Adult Education (or

similar body)

1 NIACE (UK)

Academic / Researcher 1 EUCEN (AT)

National Policy Maker (Education Ministry) 2 Department of Education and Science,

Further Education Section (IE)

General Secretariat of Adult Education

(GR)

Regional / Local Policy Maker 2 Instituto Beni Culturali (IT)

Commune de Ferrara (IT)

Grundtvig National Agency 2 ECORYS (UK)

Foundation for the Development of the

Education System (PL)

Adult Education Provider 4 Alden Biesen (BE)

Kriminalvarden / Prison and Probation

Administration/Service (SE)

Hordaland County Adult Education

(NO)

E.N.T.E.R Network (AT)

EACEA (Executive Agency) 1 EACEA (LT)

Total 15

There were 573 responses to the survey. Table 1.3 shows the responses by country of origin

(as indicated by respondents). Responses were received from 33 countries; all LLP

countries except Estonia, the spread across Europe suggesting it is broadly representative.

The largest number of responses came from Belgium which included a relatively large

number (13) of national and local policy makers though there were relatively good responses

from most of the larger countries too (Germany, France, and UK with 35 or more responseseach and Italy with 29).




17

Table 1.3 Survey Responses by Country of Origin

Country No. of Responses % of all responses

Austria 17 3%

Belgium 53 9%

Bulgaria 9 2%

Croatia 13 2%

Cyprus 9 2%

Czech Republic 6 1%

Denmark 15 3%

Estonia 0 0%

Finland 13 2%

France 35 6%

Germany 51 9%

Greece 22 4%

Hungary 8 1%

Iceland 3 1%

Ireland 26 5%

Israel 2 0%

Italy 29 5%

Latvia 15 3%

Liechtenstein 2 0%

Lithuania 5 1%

Luxembourg 13 2%

Malta 9 2%

Netherlands 26 5%

Norway 11 2%

Poland 12 2%

Portugal 17 3%

Romania 15 3%

Slovakia 5 1%

Slovenia 4 1%

Spain 19 3%

Sweden 30 5%

Switzerland 1 0%

Turkey 6 1%

United Kingdom 35 6%

No Response 37 6%

Total 573 100%

Table 1.4 below shows the type of respondents (respondents could select more than onetype). Almost two thirds of responders indicated that they are providers of adult education,

the main group of users envisaged for EPALE. A large number of respondents described

their type as “other”, reflecting the range and diversity of stakeholders involved in adult




18

education. These organisations include national and European umbrella bodies in education

and/or representing a particular group (e.g. national organisation for senior citizens),

consultancies and evaluators, cultural organisations, museums and libraries and

employment and welfare organisations.

Table 1.4 Survey Responses by Role

Type of Provider No. of

Responses

% of

Total

Provider of Adult Education 368 64%

National or Local Authority Responsible for Adult Education 72 13%

LLP National Agency 16 3%

Body providing Guidance about learning and/or careers 72 13%

Higher Education Institution (Research in the field of Adult Education) 93 16%

Media / Press 8 1%

Other 72 13%

It was recognised that respondents could be tempted to indicate that all the potential

features and functionalities would be useful so in the survey and interviews respondents

were asked to indicate gaps, priorities and the extent of usefulness to their role.

1.2.3 Assessment

A systematic assessment of costs, utility and risks was carried out drawing on the

information obtained from the case study platforms, survey and interviews. This included an

assessment of the features and functional options: considering each of these against the

aims of the Grundtvig programme, the availability of alternatives, the value to potential target

end users, the facility of achieving an effective tool, and the relative costs of development

and management. To draw conclusions a rating system was devised to help to indicate

priorities.

It also included similar assessments of:

Development and management arrangements (three broad models identified);

Dissemination options (a menu of methods); and

Languages (four potential models identified).

Because the development and management arrangements, dissemination and languages

are influenced by choices over features and functions, the assessment of these narrowed

down the options to provide several models/scenarios for the development proposal and

costs.

1.3 Structure of this report

The rest of this report is as follows:

▪ Chapter 2 presents potential users’ views on the need for EPALE and its potential

features and functionalities based on an analysis of the survey and interview responses

in the main;

▪ Chapter 3 presents the learning from other platforms’ experience about developing and

maintaining such a platform effectively and ensuring it is effectively used;

▪ Chapter 4 contains an assessment of the features and functionalities;

▪ Chapter 5 contains an assessment of development, management and dissemination

options; and

▪ Chapter 6 brings together the findings to address the key questions posed for this

feasibility study and proposes the broad options and their implications.




19




20

2 Potential users’ views

In this chapter potential users’ views are presented and analysed drawing on the responses

to the e-survey, the stakeholder interviews and the comments of National Agencies.

2.1 Features/content

Of the suggestions made about content, around three quarters of the survey respondents

indicated they would use each of them because they could not find them elsewhere; around

a quarter would not (Table 2.1 below). The breakdown of responses by type of provider is

presented in Table A3.1 to Table A3.8 in Annex 3.

The main differences are:

▪ 20% indicated that they found information on funding available elsewhere;

▪ 8% indicated that they do not need information on learning opportunities or good practice

on adult education policies;

▪ A greater share of higher education/ research institutions (86%) and national/local

authorities (78%) than education providers (76%) indicated that good practice and case

studies on adult education policy would be useful to them;

▪ Almost a third of LLP National Agencies (27%) and over a fifth of national/local

authorities (22%) indicated that they could find information about news elsewhere,

compared to 14% across all responses;

▪ Information about learning opportunities for staff would be useful to a greater share of

adult education providers (76%) compared to all responses (72%);

▪ A library of documents and a catalogue of useful links / bookmarks in adult education

would be useful to the media/press (100% for both) and LLP national agencies (91% for

both); fewer national/local authorities would find a document library (62%) or linkscatalogue (64%) useful.

Responses may reflect the level of knowledge of where such content can be currently found

(National Agencies, Infonet).

Comments were broadly that:

Content must be easy to identify and find. This could be achieved through a clear

structure of categories provided in drop down menus, through tag clouds (as in the example

presented in Figure 2.1 below), though a powerful search function or, ideally, through all of

these.

Figure 2.1 Image of the data.gov.uk tag cloud




21

Interviewees feel strongly that the platform must not become a depository of information or a

complicated database (along the lines of EVE) where material is deposited and then “forever

lost” behind complex search forms that fail to yield results when there are spelling mistakes,

for example. The idea of a depository was felt to be a “Web 2.0 concept which belongs to the

previous decades” . The platform should reflect the next generation which is open and directs

users to other websites and sources (through links).

The content must not reproduce material or tools that already exist . Over the years,

both European-funded initiatives10

and national initiatives have created a wealth of tools and

materials. One interviewee explained “I keep coming across material in [my language]

produced in [another country] that we didn’t know about here. This must be true with other

countries who share languages”. It was suggested that if the platform is developed it should

invest resources in the development stages in collecting, indexing, tagging with keywords

and uploading the material or links to currently available material, so that it is not lost.

The content would be restricted if it only drew on the LLP funded priorities . Adult

learning activities are funded not only through the LLP and DG EAC but also through other

DGs such as EMPL (through ESF), HOME (migration), SANCO (consumer initiatives) and

ENV (environmental initiatives). “Currently it is difficult to find information about projects that are not funded by the EU”.

Content must not necessarily be organised in a way to reflect EU funding streams .

The distinction between informal adult education and vocational adult education is becoming

increasingly blurred and therefore potentially unhelpful to learning providers and learners, as

well as national policy makers.

10Examples include materials produced by the EAEA, ERA, LLP Thematic Monitoring and Peer Learning

Activities.




22

Table 2.1 Potential User’s Views on Type of Content

Survey Responses to W

European Electronic Pfollowing?”, percentag

Content Information from Qualitative Interviews and OpenSurvey responses

Yes - I can'tfind thisinformationanywhere

else

I don'tI can fiinformneed

somew

Good practice and case

studies on the delivery of

adult education inEuropean countries

Need to be practical examples that other providers can apply to

their own situation

Queries about their usefulness: “we have been producing and

collecting case studies for many years for European-funded

projects. But I have to ask, who reads them? What do they do with

them? I don’t know how effective they are in disseminating good

practice?”

Concerns about the selection of good practice: “I think all projects

should be presented. Not just the good ones. Others might want to

learn from mistakes and not replicate what has already been tried.

Also, how do you choose? You don’t want to create an exclusive

VIP lounge just for the good projects”

79% 14%

Good practice and case

studies on adult education

policy in European

countries

Summaries of new developments in and good practice in different

countries would be useful to policy makers and representative

bodies

76% 14%

Information on funding

available and awards

National Agencies usually provide this information.

Information about non-LLP opportunities is hard to access.

Platform could be used as a forum where the AE sector could

make suggestions about future funding areas

73% 20%

News on adult education in

European countries

Infonet currently provides this function. The service was valued by

its users76% 14%




23

Survey Responses to WEuropean Electronic Pfollowing?”, percentag

ContentInformation from Qualitative Interviews and Open

Survey responses Yes - I can't

find thisinformationanywhereelse

I don't

I can fiinformneedsomew

Calendar of Events in the

field of adult education

Should allow users to filter / search for events that interest them

Quality control required (for example some NAs are more

permissive about the types of events they advertise compared to

others)

75% 13%

Learning opportunities for

staff in European countries

Would this replace the Comenius and Grundtvig In-service Training

Database? If so, then it could be redesigned to make searching

easier

If it will not replace the existing database then a link to the currentresource will suffice – do not replicate what is already been created

72% 15%

Library of documents on

adult education

Needs to be properly tagged and searchable.

Library not just of documents but also of links to useful documents

or tools (see below).

75% 17%

Catalogue of useful links /

bookmarks on adult

education

Links to useful documents or tools should be integrated in the

“library of documents”. Do not create separate index for links.79% 14%




24

2.2 Functions

In the main, stakeholders were positive about all the functions proposed to them. Comments

on each function were broadly that:

Partner-finding tool: this was the function that most stakeholders mentioned spontaneouslyas a current gap that an EPALE may fill. Some said that no such tools exist while others said

that there are a number of such tools but they do not work very well. They indicated that

elements which contribute to a useful partner-finding tool include: very good filtering and

searching functions, up-to-date information and well-defined subject areas.

Calendar of Events: Interviewees mentioned that there are other calendars of events

available and that EPALE should look to bring information together. Not all types of events

would be of interest to everyone – with too much information or too much irrelevant

information reducing the usefulness of the calendar. Therefore the ability to filter, search and

personalise the calendar would be valued by stakeholders.

ePartnership Shared Space: some interviewees could identify potential that may arise from

using this function, such as improving the quality of partnerships and reducing costs by

eliminating the need for travel. Others, however, expressed concerns about virtual

partnerships because they believe that successful partnerships require some degree of face

to face contact. Simplicity and ease of use was seen as an important ingredient in

encouraging take-up of this function.

eLearning Space / Virtual Classrooms: these were described as being increasingly

popular in adult education and becoming increasingly important because of the need to

reduced travel costs. Providing such resources for free was suggested to potentially be a

“good selling point” to attract users to EPALE.

Downloadable resources: some interviewees mentioned examples of resources they are

aware of created through European funding which have been “lost” to the sector because

they are not readily available or because it is not easy to find them. They explained that it

would be useful for EPALE to invest some time in collecting and categorising theseresources in order to make them available. This was seen to be a more effective use of

resources than EPALE creating new resources from scratch.

Discussion Forums: some scepticism was expressed around discussion forums. Several

stakeholders told us of their experiences with discussion forums provided by their own

organisations or as part of a project they participated in which were that forums require a

high degree of moderation. This is especially true if they are meant to provide accurate

information and advice: one national agency reported that considerable resources are

required to correct inaccuracies and wrong information posted on forums (for example

around eligibility rules on funding). Furthermore, discussion forums often require active

animation and encouragement activities in the form of the moderator posting questions,

answering questions and responding to comments and setting up polls and other features.

In addition to the functions listed above, several stakeholders suggested that a Pre and PostEvent Tool would be useful. This tool would enable attendees of events to register and“meet” prior to the event, download preparatory material and then share learning and other material with event participants. They believed that such a function would enhance thequality of the event itself and improve dissemination. Some Grundtvig and other Europeanfunded projects currently provide such pre and post event networking, through their ownwebsites or by creating a Facebook group or event

11. However, there is no established tool

or software used for this function at the moment and therefore this presents an opportunityfor EPALE. It was further suggested that this function should be integrated with the “calendar of events”, although online discussions between attendees should remain in a private spaceand viewable only by other attendees.

11Some participants prefer not to become members of Facebook and therefore do not use these functions when

offered.




25

Survey respondents have similar views (Table 2.2). As with the content fewer than 10%

indicated that any of the proposed functions would not be useful to them. However there are

differences in the extent that they would find different functions useful with between a half

and three-quarters of respondents indicating some functions to be useful/very useful and

between 15% and 28% indicating some functions to be not very/not useful.

This is clearer when the ratios of percentages very useful/useful and not very/not useful are

compared. This shows a ratio of over 4:1 for the calendar of events, over 3:1 for the

resources for staff training, and over 2.5:1 for the partner finding tool and shared space but a

ratio of a less than 1.5:1 for the members’ community and the discussion forum.

Analysis by type of provider shows considerable differences in the usefulness of functions

because of their organisations’ role. More specifically:

▪ A greater share of adult education providers and higher education / research

organisations would value a calendar of events and resources for staff training,

compared to other types of users;

▪ 81% of higher education / research organisations described a partnership tool as useful

or very useful, compared to 71% of all respondents;▪ 82% of LLP National Agencies rate an ePartnership Shared tool to be useful or very

useful, compared to 57% across all responses; an equally large share of LLP National

Agencies give the same rating to an eLearning Space tool.

Table 2.2 Answers to “How useful would this feature be to your organisation?”, percentage of total.

Function

Very useful- I

woulduse ita lot,

it would

helpme domy

job better

Useful - I

woulduse itregularly,

it would be a benefit to

my work

Not very useful - I

might use itoccasionally but it is not

critical tomy work

Notuseful

- I willneveruse

thisfeature

I

don'tknow how

usefulthis will

be

No

response

Valueratio(sum of

columns1 and 2

divided

by sumof

columns3 and 4)

Calendar of events

in the field of adult

education 39% 38% 15% 3% 3% 2%

4.3

Downloadable

Resources for

Teachers (such aslesson plans, course

material, videos etc) 38% 27% 21% 8% 4% 3%

2.2

Tool to find Partners

in other countries 35% 36% 21% 4% 3% 1%

2.8

Resources for staff

training 34% 36% 17% 6% 4% 2%

3.0

Downloadable

Resources for

Managers (such as

on recruiting

learners, bidding for

funding etc) 32% 32% 18% 9% 6% 3%

2.4

ePartnership Shared

Online Space (for

sharing resources 30% 33% 18% 7% 9% 3%

2.5




26

Function

Very useful- I

woulduse it

a lot,it wouldhelp

me domy job

better

Useful - I woulduse itregularly,

it would be a benefit to

my work

Not very useful - Imight use it

occasionally but it is notcritical to

my work

Notuseful- I will

neverusethis

feature

Idon'tknow how

usefulthis will

be

No

response

Valueratio(sum of

columns1 and 2

divided by sumof columns

3 and 4)

with partners)

"Ask an Expert"

feature with user

comments and

searchable lists of previous responses 27% 37% 20% 6% 8% 3%

2.3

eLearning Space /

Virtual Classroom 26% 31% 19% 13% 8% 3%

1.8

Online Members

Community 23% 28% 28% 9% 9% 4%

1.4

Discussion Forum 21% 28% 28% 11% 8% 3% 1.3

Source: GHK Online Survey

2.3 Participation / contribution

Stakeholders interviewed were hesitant about the extent of either their or others’ active

involvement in such a platform. Most said “I will wait and have a look at the platform before

deciding what to share” .

Survey respondents were more positive about undertaking participative actions that require

limited time commitment, such as uploading information about events, joining a partner-

finding tool and creating a profile in a secure community (Table 2.3). Fewer potential users

stated that they would be willing to contribute to more time-consuming activities, such as

uploading case studies and lesson plans. Translating content from or to their own language

was the least likely participative action, although nearly 4 out of 10 respondents were still

willing to do this.

When compared to responses about functional usefulness the proportions who would

actively participate do not all match up. Higher proportions say they would upload

information about events and a profile for partner finding, for example, much lower for sharing lesson plans and other learning tools. LLP National Agencies were most willing to

upload information about events with 91% indicating that they would do so. National/local

policy makers were less willing to undertake any type of participative action proposed.

Table 2.3 Answers to “Please tell us whether you would be willing to do the following”,percentage of total

Participative Actions Yes NoNoResponse Total

Upload information about events you are organising 84% 13% 3% 100%

Upload a profile of your organisation in a partner-finding tool 81% 15% 4% 100%

Become a member of a secure community and create a profile 75% 22% 3% 100%

Answer a question on a discussion forum 68% 27% 5% 100%

Ask a question on a discussion forum 68% 27% 5% 100%




27

Participative Actions Yes NoNoResponse Total

Make comments and submit feedback on news, articles, tools

etc 65% 30% 5% 100%

Create content such as news articles or case studies of your activities or policy developments in your country 63% 32% 5% 100%

Use virtual classrooms / eLearning Space 60% 35% 5% 100%

Upload photos and videos from your activities 57% 36% 6% 100%

Upload and share lesson plans and other learning tools 57% 37% 6% 100%

Translate content to your own language (from English or

another language) 38% 55% 6% 100%


Key factors influencing participation and contribution were time availability and what they

would get out of it. As one interviewee explained “ people will not be logging on to this

platform every day, several times a day. They will log on when they need information. Youcannot expect it to replace Facebook or email .” A survey respondent stated “This electronic

platform shouldn't add to our workload, require a permanent vigilance or overwhelm our

inboxes”.

Potential participants clearly need a rationale to undertake an action and participate. “Some

organisations will grasp the opportunity to advertise their events and activities because they

will gain from increased attendance at their events and boost their profile” .

2.4 Languages

Stakeholders interviewed had mixed views about the languages in which the platform should

be provided. Some told us that they believed that it should only be provided in English.

Reasons for this include:

− Most people have a working knowledge of English;

− Multi-lingual websites are confusing and off-putting;

− Multi-lingual websites are slow to load and cumbersome to navigate;

− Translation takes time and is costly.

Many indicated that if English is used it can be more easily used if content is written in plain

English and there is clear guidance on this. For content aimed at national policy makers and

pan-European networks / representative organisations (such as EAEA, EPEA etc) it was

broadly agreed that English would meet the needs of most users. Providing other content in

French, German and Spanish was thought to cover the needs of the majority of users.

However, for content aimed at adult education providers, some interviewees strongly

supported the view that this should be provided in all or as many languages as possible.

They explained that many providers in their countries and partners that they have met in

other countries, especially from Eastern and Southern Europe, do not have adequate

proficiency in English. Some may be able to navigate a website in English but would be

unable or unwilling to digest complex information about policy or funding in English or to

understand and translate materials for teaching and training.

This view appears to be broadly confirmed by the answers provided to the online survey. We

asked respondents in our e-survey to rank from 1 (most useful) to 10 (least useful) which

features from a list would be most helpful if they were available in their own language. The

results are presented in Table 2.4 below. These suggest that users mostly need to access

text in their own language if it is lengthy and requires in-depth understanding of context anddetail, such as case studies, resources for teaching and information about funding. They can

assess text in English or another common language that is shorter, such as calendar entries

and discussion forum contributions.




28

The differences between the actual average ranking scores are relatively small. But those

with average rank scores of around 4 (good practice and case studies in adult education

delivery and a partner finding tool) can be distinguished from those with an average ranking

score of over 6 (ask an expert, discussion forum and calendar of events) in Table 2.4 below.

The most significant differences between types of potential users are:

▪ More AE providers have given high ratings to accessing downloadable resources for

managers and teachers and resources for staff training in their own language, compared

to other types of potential users;

▪ Higher education / research organisation and national/local authorities have given higher

ratings to accessing good practice and case studies in both the delivery and practice of

AE in their own language, compared to other types of potential users.

Table 2.4 Ranking of answers to “which of the following features would be most helpful if provided in your own language?”

Feature / Function AverageScore

Overall rank (mostuseful to least useful)

Good practice and case studies on the delivery of adulteducation in European countries

3.98 1

Tool to find Partners in other countries 4.07 2

Information on funding available and awards 4.57 3

Resources for staff training 4.63 4

Good practice and case studies on adult education

policy in European countries

4.77 5

Downloadable Resources for Teachers (such as lesson

plans, course material, videos etc)

5.21 6=

Downloadable Resources for Managers (such as on

recruiting learners, bidding for funding etc)

5.21 6=

News on adult education in European countries 5.34 8

"Ask an Expert" feature with user comments and

searchable lists of previous responses

6.33 9

Calendar of events in the field of adult education 6.47 10

Discussion Forum 6.77 11

Source: GHK Online Survey, 2011

2.5 Online Events/Training

Table 2.5 below shows that the majority of respondents to the online survey would be

interested in participating in on-line events and training organised by EPALE. Only 14%would only do so if they were available in their own language (these respondents came from

across 24 different countries thus not indicating any particular need for the provision of some

languages over others).

Table 2.5 Answers to “would your organisation be interested in participating in online eventsand training organised through a European Electronic Platform for AdultEducation?”

Response No. of Responses Percentage of total

Yes, even if they are only

available in English 334 58%

Yes, but only if they areavailable in my language 82 14%

No 32 6%




29

Response No. of Responses Percentage of total

I don't know 122 21%

No response 3 1%

Total 573 100%


Reasons provided by those who indicated that they were not interested were:

▪ I do not need it (12)

▪ Lack of time (10)

▪ Lack of agreement from my manager (1)

▪ Lack of IT resources (2)

▪ Concern about the quality of the training (2)

▪ Prefer face-to-face contact (2)

The topic/content of the training is the most common factor which would attract potentialusers to online training and events (Table 2.6) followed by the low cost. In the open

response to this question, potential users listed a large number of topics that would be of

interest to them. These ranged from “clarification sessions about the filling in of funding

applications and forms”, to pedagogical theories and methods such as “group management

and conflict theory”, to specific areas of learning such as “arts and crafts” and “sustainable

building techniques”.

Table 2.6 Answers to "what key factors would make online training and events attractive to you"

Factor No. of Responses

A topic that interested me 460

Free / low cost 370

To network with other participants 294

To learn from other participants 257

Length and timing of event 210


Other factors to make such events attractive identified include:

▪ High quality / delivered by good experts;

▪ Provision of certification / recognition for CPD;

▪ Clear objectives and demonstrable applications to my work;

▪ Technology and software used should be easily accessible by all (including for thosewith slow internet connections and low specification technologies);

▪ Technological support – especially if something goes wrong during the training session.

2.6 Dissemination / Use of social media

Potential users identified Grundtvig National Agencies as well as other national bodies, such

as government ministries or adult education agencies, as their key sources of information

and engagement with other adult education providers and the sector more widely. Some are

felt to be good sources of information and also have good ways to promote the availability of

new information.

Most stakeholders felt that the Commission would have to invest in dissemination at the

outset because “ people working in AE don’t feel a connection with things going on at theEuropean level. To address this, the platform will have to work very hard to promote the

website”. This could perhaps mean advertising and requiring proactive promotion by National




30

Agencies (such as through creating local content, summarising policy developments and

providing training and support to potential users of the platform).

Most organisations and staff in the adult education sector rely on e-newsletters for keeping

up to date with news and updates (Table 2.7). Many told us that they believe that well-

targeted focused newsletters are also the best way to communicate with the sector becausethey “remind users that the platform exists”. Furthermore, well-written newsletters provide

summaries of news items and allow people to access further information on the platform

itself through a hyperlink. They suggested that newsletters on different topics should be

produced (for example, on developments in adult literacy and numeracy or on migrant

education) on a regular basis.

Social media are not so widely used though Facebook and Linkedin are used by over a third

of the survey respondents. Some stakeholders explained that their organisations are trying

to use social media to advertise events and for post-event sharing of learning between

participants, but that it is usually younger colleagues that use them.

Some respondents and interviewees expressed very strong opinions against the use of

“commercially closed platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Google+” because

they believe that a public platform should only use open source or open code tools. Others

did not wish to “mix their personal lives with the work lives” by using Facebook for work.

Facebook is seen by some to distract users from the main platform, rather than attract more

users to it.

Beyond newsletters, there appears to be more potential to use RSS feeds to disseminate

news and updates. Guidance and/or training for adult education providers on how to

effectively use social media for the purpose of promoting their work and/or engaging learners

was identified as being a useful service that EPALE could potentially provide, however.

Table 2.7 Answers to Question on tools for dissemination used and preferred

Social Media Tool

Tick the box if youcurrently use any of

the following toreceive news orupdates

Tick the box if you

would use any of the following to

receive news andupdates from aEuropean Adult

Learning Platform I don't know

Email newsletter 79% 33% 4%

Facebook 43% 18% 24%

LinkedIn 34% 16% 29%

RSS feed (news andblog aggregator) 22% 27% 32%

Twitter 19% 16% 36%

Calendar Synchronisation tool(such as Ical) 13% 23% 35%

Other 5% 5% 42%

Delicious 5% 9% 50%

Stumbleupon 2% 7% 53%





31

2.7 Need and rationale for a platform

As the responses to the survey show, the majority of respondents are generally positive

about the concept of a pan-European platform for the adult learning sector. This is supportedby the stakeholders in the main. This is because:

▪ Perceived low visibility of the adult education sector: it could help to raise the profile of

the sector within government at all levels;

▪ Large diversity of providers in the sector: it could provide an opportunity to bring the

many different providers and other stakeholders together in one place;

▪ Many organisations across Europe do not currently participate in or benefit from

European-funded initiatives: it could provide a means of engaging them and supporting

them “beyond formal project funding” structures;

▪ Capacity building required for the sector to contribute more to up-skilling adults: it could

improve knowledge and skills of educators and other staff including the use of ICT and e-

learning as well as sharing teaching practices;▪ Information about adult education and for the sector is available but is not found in one

place: it could become a “one stop shop for finding everything, or a springboard for

finding out more”.

A few have some reservations about its development. This includes:

▪ The availability of some content on another platform: some respondents and

interviewees mentioned other websites (such as Adam, Eve, European Shared

Treasure, Infonet, KSLLL and Facebook) which they believed provided some of the

needs proposed for EPALE;

▪ Too general: there is no need for a website that offers everything but specialises in

nothing; instead smaller websites that gathered resources and offered support to

educators in specific fields (such as consumer education, environmental education etc)or for particular target groups (such as disabled people, migrants, prisoners etc) would

be a better solution;

▪ Too EU-centric: some respondents fear that a Commission product would only reflect

EU priorities, funding opportunities and funded activities;

▪ Lack of capacity in the sector: some respondents, especially from Southern and Eastern

European countries, suggest that adult education providers would not be able to access

such a platform because they lack technical skills and knowledge, including language

skills. One interviewee stated “some providers I know in my country don’t know how to

switch on a computer”.

It was emphasised by many interviewees that with a multitude of information sources

currently available on the internet, there must be a clear rationale for the platform.

Interviewees told us that an answer as to “why should I visit this website?” needs to beimmediately obvious to anyone who accesses the front page.

2.8 Key messages emerging

The survey findings suggest that:

▪ Many stakeholders hope that EPALE could raise the profile of the sector and be a one

stop shop or springboard to the sector’s information resources but it needs a clear

reason to be a tool that the potential users would use;

▪ While a substantial majority of respondents are generally positive about the suggested

content of EPALE, a smaller proportion (around 15-20%) suggest that they would not

use it because other sources are available. A few stakeholders have cautioned that it

runs the risk of “being all things to all men” unless it has clear functions and being too

focused on EU funded activities;




32

▪ About three quarters of respondents indicate that they would use each of the features

suggested but many cautioned that the content would need to be identifiable (well-

tagged) and searchable and linked to other platforms;

▪ Respondents have more varied views on the functions suggested with much higher

proportions indicating that a calendar of events, resources for staff training, and a tool tofind partners in other countries would be more useful than a members’ community and a

discussion forum, for example;

▪ A function to enable event attendees to share material with other participants before and

after was suggested by quite a few respondents which could be part of a calendar of

events function;

▪ Adult education providers are slightly less interested in adult education policy and more

interested in calendars of events and staff training resources;

▪ The National Agencies and government bodies are more likely to have information from

other sources and need links and some resources less than adult education providers;

▪ National Agencies are significantly less interested in epartnership shared space andlearning space than adult education providers;

▪ Respondents would be much more willing to undertake participative activities that

required less time commitments, such as uploading event information and joining a

partner finding tool (over 80%) than translating content (under 40%) or uploading lesson

plans and other learning tools (under 60%) from which they would not personally gain;

▪ There are mixed views about the extent of content available in EU languages. Some

strongly believe that English would be adequate especially if plain English guidance were

applied; others that all EU languages are needed if the platform is to engage adult

education providers in Eastern and Southern Europe. This appears to depend on the

content and functions; with perhaps greater need for multi-lingual provision for good

practice information and for partner finding tools than for discussion forums andinformation for policy makers;

▪ There is considerable interest in on-line events and training even if they are only in

English; though this is a lower proportion than for most of the suggested functions that

respondents would find useful/very useful (under 60%);

▪ As with other content and functions, this would have to be delivered in a way to attract

users;

▪ Email newsletters are used by three-quarters of respondents and many would prefer this

for keeping up to date with the platform’s content and functions. Some have suggested

targeted newsletters as well for specific areas of adult learning;

▪ There are very mixed views on other social media tools but less contention over RSSfeeds than Facebook for example.




33

3 Learning from the experience of other websites

In this chapter what has been learnt from the experience of other websites is described and

assessed. It draws on the critical review of 11 established websites with platform

functionalities and some similar aims to EPALE and the interviews of website owners andmanaging agents about their development, management and impact, including the costs and

challenges. It also draws on the interviews of potential users where they made comments on

the development and implementation of platforms from their experience.

3.1 Other platforms

Most of the websites reviewed did not start life as web entities. They are the on-line faces of

organisations or projects so they are one of the activities that facilitate and enable the

dissemination of knowledge, understanding and skills. These cannot always be disentangled

in relation to costs and resourcing. In this section there is a brief overview of each of the

platforms. The standard information collected on these platforms is summarised in a table in

Annex 4.

3.1.1 eTwinning.net

eTwinning.net began as an action within the eLearning programme following a request of the

EU Council in Barcelona in 2002 for EU resources to be directed to facilitating networking

between schools. Initially, the website focused on enabling schools to find a partner to carry

out an “eTwinning project” online and to communicate information arising from these

projects. With the emergence of the social internet, the eTwinning action and website has

evolved to place greater emphasis on other networking opportunities beyond projects.

Teachers create a profile on the eTwinning portal to become members of the eTwinning

community. Once they are members they can access the eTwinning desktop which allows

the member to search for partners and participate in groups of teachers with similar interests

and share resources. If teachers choose to set-up a project then they are allocated a

TwinSpace and a Project Diary. These tools help the managers of the projects with the set-

up of the project, with sharing documents and learning resources and with communicating

through chat or messages. TwinSpace also allows students to participate through a “pupil’s

corner” where pupils can post messages to students in other schools (the post boards are

viewable by teachers). Projects have the option of becoming public which makes their work

viewable on the internet to anyone. Projects have to be approved by the eTwinning National

Support Service (NSS) and receive a “label” of recognition if they have received approval.

Projects can also apply to their NSS for quality marks and prizes. The best, prize winning

projects from across Europe participate in an annual eTwinning camp.

In addition to the above functions, members can download and rate resources (such as kits

and modules) developed by the eTwinning team which provide pedagogical tools to enable

eTwinning projects. Members can also upload and share learning resources from eTwinningto the Learning Resource Exchange website via a widget and participate in Learning Events

which are short, intensive training events on a variety of topics. They usually require 4-5

days of intensive online activity followed by 4-5 days of reflection and personal work which

are completed in the learners’ own time. Members can apply for events, participate in the on-

line activities and download resources through a function called LearningLab.

The development of the central eTwinning.net website was undertaken by a contractor,

European Schoolnet, chosen through an open call for tender. The first contract ran between

2004 and 2007. It was renewed, with the same contractor, in 2007. The annual cost of the

contract is €1 million per year, of which the cost of maintaining the website is approximately

€250,000. The Commission has formal meetings with the contractor five times a year,

although ad hoc communication is more frequent than that. The work programme for the

contractor is determined annually. However there is enough flexibility within the contract toallow work to respond to needs/requirements of the Commission, the NSS network and

users themselves.




34

This contract does not just involve the further development and maintenance of the website

but also the provision of a range of services to support the implementation of the eTwinning

action. The range of services includes: coordinating the NSS network, developing

pedagogical content (such as kits and modules for projects), offering a helpdesk service to

teachers participating in eTwinning, organising and designing teacher training (including on-

line learning events but also professional development workshops), communication andpromotions (such as organising conferences, camps and prizes) and undertaking monitoring

activities (such as selecting and identifying good practice). The other activities create content

to showcase on the website and bring users to the website.

In addition to the central support contract, the Commission also part-funds the NSS network.

The NSS network members help teachers and schools in their countries to participate in

eTwinning and deliver activities such as training, help and support, and communications and

engagement. NSS also approves members’ and projects’ applications – to ensure that they

are real teachers in real schools. Some NSS members maintain their own websites and

produce their own pedagogical and other material and reports. NSSs actively encourage and

train (hand hold) teachers to participate in eTwinning and, according to the Commission, are

key elements in the success of the action. The overall budget for NSS is €9 million a year –

of which approximately 80% is EU-funding, with national ministries providing 20% of costs.

The website owner explained that the success of eTwinning was unexpected. When the

action was first conceived in 2002, many believed that teachers/schools would not

participate in activities that did not involve receiving a grant or funding. In reality, the

opposite has been achieved with the eTwinning website receiving between 20,000 and

30,000 hits a day and the number of registered users multiplying by 1.7 every year. From the

website owner’s experience, teachers are willing to participate because they can see both

pedagogical benefits (language, ICT, geography, subject-specific skills) and benefits from

participating in a transnational initiative adding to the “status” of the school. Teachers are

more likely to participate in countries where the NSS is particularly active, where there is

enthusiasm for European projects, where the teacher population is young (and therefore

willing to engage with ICT) and where the school system allows teachers the time and

flexibility to participate in initiatives beyond delivering a core curriculum through traditional

lessons.

Based on the experience of eTwinning, the website owner believed that an electronic

platform for the adult education sector could also become popular. However, key differences

between the target groups may make the EPALE venture more challenging: school teachers

are a well-defined group compared to adult educators. It is relatively easy for NSS to verify

the identities of prospective members in their countries whereas it may be more difficult for

adult education. Similarly, schools understand what other schools in a different country do –

the differences in structures of adult learning may be too great for networking to work.

Finally, the website owners were surprised at how much school teachers have responded to

non-monetary award systems of prizes and quality marks.

3.1.2 SALTO-YOUTH

SALTO-YOUTH is a network of eight Resource Centres (RCs) supporting the youth work

funded by the Commission’s Youth in Action programme. SALTO stands for Support,

Advanced Learning and Training Opportunities. There are four thematic SALTO RCs (on

cultural diversity, training and cooperation, inclusion, and participation) which produce

resources (reports, documents) and undertake activities to build capacity in the youth sector

and raise the quality of learning. There are three regional SALTO RCs whose role is to run

activities (such as training), promote participation in these activities and enable organisations

and individuals in the sector to participate and gain access to European support. The eighth

SALTO RC (called “Information”) works behind the scenes to support the network by

maintaining the SALTO intranet and facilitating sharing of internal information.

While the SALTO-YOUTH network started life in 2000, a website for the entire network(rather than individual SALTOs) was launched in 2004 to be the online presence for

SALTOs. It initially served as a depository of the documents, reports, tools and good practice

produced by the SALTOs as well as a medium for advertising events, training opportunities




35

and disseminating news and funding opportunity information. It has recently (in 2011)

evolved to offer more dynamic functions because it was felt that the previous website did not

offer the users sufficient opportunities for interaction. Now, as described below, a personal

dashboard and a partner finding tool has been added to allow users to participate, network

and showcase their projects, tools and skills.

The website was developed and is led by the SALTO Training and Cooperation RC, which is

provided by the German NA for the Youth in Action programme. The German NA

commissioned a web development company to undertake initial development of the website

and to host it on a secure server. There is a specified staff member at SALTO Training and

Cooperation who is responsible for taking decisions about technical issues at the set-up and

maintenance phase – he is advised by a working group of staff from other SALTO RCs.

Each Salto RC is responsible for developing and uploading content for the website for their

own sections. For example, SALTO Inclusion RC is responsible for developing content for

the Inclusion section of the website. Responsibilities for specific features are split between

the RCs; for example SALTO Information RC is responsible for the Otlas partner finding tool

while the SALTO South and Eastern Europe RC is responsible for the good practice

database. Up to 25 staff across the network have a licence to upload content to the website.It is estimated that 2 or 3 full-time equivalent staff work on the website. The yearly cost of

hosting the website is approximately €2,160 and the cost of the CMS for 25 staff is €9,600.

Additional costs (such as development of databases, design, new / more secure programme

coding) are decided on a yearly basis; web engineers are contracted by the hour for these

tasks.

The Commission works closely with the SALTOs and provides suggestions and feedback

about the website; however the relationship is informal rather than contractual. As such, very

few resources are needed from the Commission’s side to manage the website. For the

Commission, the SALTO website represents “an example of what can be achieved with little

money”.

Functions currently available on the SALTO website are:

▪ SALTO Publications: repository of documents produced by the eight SALTOS, SALTO

network reports and evaluation reports;

▪ European Training Calendar: users can search for a training event and registered users

can “offer” a training event;

▪ Toolbox for Training: repository of training tools, registered users can upload their own

tools, rate other tools and make comments ;

▪ Good Practice Projects Database: users can search for projects by priority theme,

keyword, partner country (including a map) and project type;

▪ Otlas Partner Finding Tool: users can search for potential partners by location,

programme action or keyword; organisations can also register and share their own

profile;

▪ Trainers Online for Youth (TOY): online community for youth trainers; trainers upload aprofile which includes a description of what services they can offer.

All the above are supported by MySALTO, a personal dashboard for registered users. Once

a user becomes a member they can use MySALTO to upload a profile on Otlas, upload

tools, make training offers and upload a profile on TOY. While these tools are very new12

,

they are already proving popular amongst users: there are 1665 organisations registered on

Otlas and 150 trainers registered on TOY. The website as whole receives over 1,000,000

hits a year.

3.1.3 ELearningEuropa.info

ElearningEuropa.info aims to increase and improve the use of IT in the classroom and

especially of e-learning. It is owned by the Commission as part of DG EAC’s, Skills and

12Otlas was developed and launched last year by SALTO Information RC through a contract with a website

development company. It is still being tested. It is estimated that the cost of development was under €10,000.




36

Qualifications Unit. The website was launched in 2003 and was developed by PAU

Education, after winning an open call for tender. The initial contract ran from 2003 to 2008

and included development of the website, its content and its features and management and

maintenance for five years. In 2008, the contract was retendered for another five years and

was again won by PAU. The second contract required updating the website to include up-to-

date dynamic functions such as an on-line community. The reason for this development wasto make the website more user-centred by providing tools for participation, sharing and

discussion.

Functions currently available on ElearningEuropa.info are:

▪ Repositories of articles, news and resources; ranging from academic to practical

summaries, users can browse, filter by area of interest or search by tag word, they can

also provide a rating;

▪ Database of projects: users can filter by country, programme and area of interest or

search by tag word, they can also provide a rating – it is not a depository of best or good

practice;

▪ European event agenda: users can filter by country, city and area of interest, search by

tag word and provide a rating;▪ TV Channel: Collection of videos about ICT and education provided through links to

video hosting sites (such as YouTube and vimeo);

▪ Communities (Discussion Forum): Internet forum with discussions around themes, areas

of interest projects, events etc;

▪ People tool: Users can upload a profile which includes a short description, country,

profession and personal website. Members are awarded “kudos” points according to

their activities in contributing to discussion forums, suggesting new materials and rating

content. The aim of this tool is serve as a “professional network” rather than a formal

partner finding tool;

▪ Blogs: Registered users can write a short “blog” post for uploading onto this section of

the website;

▪ Elearning Papers13: digital journal on ICT in education across Europe.

Elearning papers is an on-line journal published five times a year. It is the most popular

feature of the website. It includes an editorial, articles, interviews and/or reviews. Quality

assurance for elearning papers is organised in the same way as other academic journals:

there is an editorial board made up of experts in the field and the EC project officer. All are

volunteers and are appointed for a year. Existing members of the editorial board may

suggest new members, usually well-known experts in the field and with a view to providing a

balance of expertise on the topics covered. The EC project officer has a final say in

approving the composition of the board. The editorial board chooses topics for each issue,

issues a call for papers on that issue and then selects the best articles for inclusion based on

a peer review assessment (peer reviewers may be members of the editorial board or

external peer-reviewers). The review criteria are:

▪ Innovation level: Does the article offer a landmark contribution to the field

▪ Connection with call for papers: Does the article reflect the topic expressed in the call?

▪ Content: Is the article an excellent, significant piece of research?

▪ Presentation: Is the article prepared for publication according to academic standards?

Registered users can shape the content of the website by “proposing” a new article, news

item, resource, project, event, video or blog post through submitting a short online form. The

editorial board has established some guidelines on selection of content: that is to focus on

the material covering the range of topics of interest to elearningeuropa.info. The database of

projects is not a selection of “best” or even “good” practice but aims to give users access to a

wide selection of what is available regarding ICT education in Europe.

13www.elearningpapers.eu




37

The overall value of PAU’s current contract is €300,000 a year, which includes the cost of

developing new features. In terms of staff, the PAU team has 9 some of whom are part time.

The Commission estimates that one officer spends about 3% of their time managing this

contract though this would be significantly greater during re-tendering. PAU’s contract

includes not only website-related development and maintenance costs but also includes

producing e-learning reports and papers (estimated 40% of time) and undertaking on-lineand off-line dissemination and communication activities (estimated 60% of time).

Elearningeuropa.info features a particularly strong discussion forum “community” tool with

many subgroups and discussion threads which are very well used. The largest online group

has 800 members. Both the owner and manager of the website believed that the level of

activity in these groups is related to the strong “off-line” relationships that individuals in these

communities have developed. The most actively supported communities have grown out of

EU-funded initiatives which continue their lives on the internet. The owner explained “It is not

the technology or the technicalities of the portal that make it work but the communities

behind it. And that requires communities that are engaged and interested and that it is not

easy...it has taken years to build up”. The website manager further explained that the

dissemination team spend considerable time in making people engaged and interested. For

example, they actively promote the on-line community at events so that participants make

the connection between the on-line and off-line activity. They also make personal contact

with users who make suggestions about content to encourage them to further contribute to

the website and to the community forums.

3.1.4 European Infonet

European Infonet AE was a Grundtvig network which aimed to provide information about

current developments in adult education from European countries and at the EU level. It is

managed by Akademie Klausenhof and maintains a network of around 25 correspondents

who contribute articles, news items, interviews and other content. Funding for Infonet ended

in September 2011, since when it has only maintained a basic information service.

The initial perceived target audience for the website was editors of educational publications.The idea was to allow people with an interest in education, as well as journalism and editing,

to share information and to keep updated with what was happening in other countries. The

target group changed over time because people with a general interest in adult education

visited the website. As such, both the layout and the content of the website were redesigned

to make it more friendly and readable by the general public.

The original website was coded by an external contractor in 2005. The cost for this was

about €25,000. Initial set-up also required the work of two people from an in-house team,

both spending approximately a third of their time on this. Tasks completed in house included

developing content and undertaking some of the technical set-up. The owner/manager

investigated commissioning all the hosting to an external contractor but decided against this

because the cost (€500 per month for the duration of the project) was too high for the

project’s budget.

Maintenance of the website is now done in-house by Akademie Klausenhof: one employee

devotes about a third of their time to editing and adding content, managing the network of

experts/authors, responding to queries and tweaking basic aspects of the website design.

The exception to this is security for which the coordinator pays an external contractor €30 a

month. Content is developed by a network of authors/experts: the cost of author fees is

about €10,000 a year.

Other than the website content described above, the only other features provided by Infonet

are a downloadable newsletter and a (static) database of European journals on adult

education. A discussion forum was initially trialled but it was discontinued because there was

very low usage.

Website statistics show that the website attracts around 4,000 unique visitors a month, themajority of which come through search engines. Around 10% of these are “extensive users”

who are experts in the field. There are 4,500 subscribers to the newsletter and each

newsletter is downloaded around 30,000 times a year. Infonet was well known among the




38

stakeholders interviewed and was mentioned by respondents to the online survey. Users told

us that European Infonet fulfilled its aims well; namely providing news and information about

policy developments in Europe and at a European level.

3.1.5 Learning Resource Exchange

Learning Resource Exchange (LRE) is, according to the website coordinator, “not a portal

but infrastructure for the repository of content” . The aim of the website is to showcase the

digital learning resources created by Ministries of Education and other content

providers/developers (regions, municipalities and other educational content and tools’

providers from both the public and private sectors) and share these with users in different

countries.

The LRE website is controlled by EUN Partnership aisbl, the legal name for European

Schoolnet. European Schoolnet is a network of 30 Ministries of Education in Europe and

beyond. LRE was developed by European Schoolnet and its supporting Ministries of

Education as a result of work in a number of Commission-funded projects (particularly

CELEBRATE, CALIBRATE and MELT). This resulted in the launch of the LRE as a publicly

available service in December 2008. Parts of the service, for example the activity arounddetermining the characteristics of digital learning tools which can “travel well”, are now

funded through Commission-funded projects eQNET and ASPECT.

The content has changed over time as different providers have come on board or left the

initiative – whether providers participate is largely driven by the requirements of the funding

streams secured. There are currently ten paying members who provide content.

LRE was initially managed by the European Schoolnet Steering Committee, where the

Ministries-Members are represented. Since 2010, a LRE Subcommittee was set-up to define

the strategy and operational rules of the LRE and to manage its ongoing development. The

Subcommittee allows content providers other than Ministries to have a say. The LRE

Subcommittee has a agreed a set of regulations14

which guide the responsibilities of both

European Schoolnet and the content providers.

The initial website design was undertaken by an external contractor and cost €12,000. LRE

also invested €100,000 upfront in reusable website architecture and €10,000 for translation

software.

The ongoing maintenance costs are low: each month a total of 6 to 9 working days are spent

on the website (divided between three team members). This includes security, moderation

and maintenance. Due to the initial investment in reusable architecture, the team can use

their in-house skills to make any changes to the website that are required without returning

to the external contractor.

LRE also invested in automated tr anslation software at the point of website design. This is

discussed in more detail in section 3.2.7. LRE does not create or host its own digital

resources. Instead, it provides links to resources hosted on developers’ and content

providers’ websites. It is up to the content providers to ensure that the content meets the

needs of schools and school teachers – the LRE’s role is to ensure that users can easily

access this content. A key task for the maintenance team is to test that the links to the

providers’ content work. This task is part of the responsibility of the software engineer (who

works part-time for LRE).

The main functions/features offered by LRE are:

▪ Depository of digital learning resources: these include both downloadable resources and

online resources; some of the resources are hosted on LRE but the majority are linked to

providers’ websites. It can be searched by keyword, country, subject area and content

provided. There is also a tag cloud. Users can make comments about learning resources

(although very few choose to do so);

▪

Discussion forum: where users can have discussions (it only has 27 posts and istherefore not well used);

14 http://lreforschools.eun.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_l_id=10970&folderId=12073&name=DLFE-201.pdf

http://lreforschools.eun.org/c/document_library/get_file?p_l_id=10970&folderId=12073&name=DLFE-201.pdf









39

▪ Member profile: Users who register can tag, rate and social bookmark resources. They

can also create a public profile which allows other members to “follow” them and get an

update on their preferences. The member profile section could theoretically be used as a

partnership finding tool (although it was not created for this purpose).

Because the website is to showcase content created by different providers the success of the website is not judged by the content of the resources (this is out of the platform’s control)

but by the use of downloaded material. The extent of this is not currently measured. Most

traffic to the website comes from Google and the origin of users is related to the languages

in which the content is provided. For example, there was an increase in visits from Brazilian

users when the Portuguese ministry joined the initiative and Portuguese content was made

available. LRE does not undertake any dissemination or advertising activities. It also does

not have a strategy to increase visits or numbers of downloads.

3.1.6 Scientix

Scientix.eu aims to share good practice and know-how in science education across the

European Union. It collects teaching materials and research reports from European science

education projects financed by the European Union under the 6th and 7th FrameworkProgrammes for Research and Technological Development (DG RTD), DG EAC and various

national initiatives. The target audience is teachers, researchers, parents and anyone with

an interest in science education.

The Scientix project started in 2009 and the website was launched later that year. DG RTD

is the owner of the website. It is managed by European Schoolnet who won the open call for

tender to deliver the service, develop the website, maintain and manage it. An external sub-

contractor was commissioned to undertake the initial design and set-up of the website itself.

The one-off cost for this was between €30,000 and €40,000. Usability of the website was

tested by a teacher panel. They were paid to review content material and help with local

dissemination. Testing usability with teachers showed that teachers are “not very used to

websites” : this led to website design that is straight-forward and simple to understand by the

user and for guidance to be provided for every function available.

The budget for the project overall is €1.6million over 3 years which includes managing and

maintaining the website, organising conferences, workshops, presentations and online

courses, undertaking dissemination activities and liaising with the translators and the teacher

panel. Estimated break-down of the costs over the 3 years are: just under €1million for staff

(a team of 3 full-time staff, others on ad-hoc basis and the fee for the teachers’ panel),

approximately €300,000 for conferences, approximately €350,000 for translation and around

€30,000 for advertising, communication and dissemination.

Functions/features currently available on Scientix.net are:

▪ Depository of projects: can be filtered by country, topic, target groups, programme, start

year and end year;

▪

Depository of resources: Divided into teaching materials, reports library, and trainingcourses. These can be filtered by subject, language and age range. It is also possible to

perform a keyword search. Users can also request a translation of the resource in their

own language (this is discussed further in 3.2.7);

▪ News: contains the Scientix newsletter, as well as other news such as on World

Teachers’ Day; EU contest for Young Scientists; Space Scoop Camp 2011;

▪ Conference: summary of and photos from the latest Scientix European Conference;

▪ Calendar of events listed by date. There is also a list where one can also filter by

country, topic, type of event, target groups and language;

▪ Community: users can fill in their profiles as well as contact information. Users can add

other users as “friends” who can then see when they are online and “chat” to (instant

messenger function). There are currently 1099 users;

▪ Discussion forum: registered users can discuss science education topics (currently 109posts across 35 categories);

▪ Moodle (Virtual Learning Environment): registered users can participate in on-line

training courses and add their own training course.




40

Scientix collects and distributes information about past and present science education

projects carried out in Europe. Priority is given to projects funded by the European

Commission but other publicly funded projects are also accepted. Projects must provide

accurate information about project goals, research and results. Preferably they also provide

links to public reports; any resources are displayed in the “resources” section.

The website managers recognise that the discussion forums are not as popular as they

would like. It requires active animation / engagement from the team, for which they do not

have the resources. Similarly, the instant message function is not widely used; the current

user group will not engage with online chat unless they have met in real life.

A user survey and feedback from the teacher panel has shown that users want more teacher

generated content. The website manager appreciates that the current website is top down,

rather than “community led”. The current contract does not enable teacher-led content.

However, there are thoughts to include this in the new contract to be commissioned in 2012.

3.1.7 CORDIS

The Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) aims to facilitate

transfer of knowledge and information between European researchers and among theEuropean research community. It is owned and managed by DG RTD. CORDIS principally

aims to:

▪ Facilitate participation in European research and take-up activities; and

▪ Improve exploitation of research results with an emphasis on sectors crucial to Europe's

competitiveness.

The website has been operational since 1990 and has recently undergone an upgrade to

include a partners’ space.

Features and functions currently available on CORDIS are:

▪ Information about news, events and funding;

▪ Depository of projects: results, reports and stories about projects funded by DG RTD (allprojects funded by the latest research frameworks and previous research programmes

since 1990 are included in this depository);

▪ Partner finding: allows registered members to browse a database and search for

research partners. Following a recent upgrade, users can now add researchers as

“friends” and write comments on their public profile;

▪ Go local: filters the site to show news, projects and researchers active in your country.

The recent upgrade to the partner finding tool has increased the popularity of the tool: there

are now 6,000 users compared to 3,000 before the change. CORDIS receives about

150,000 unique visitors a month, measured by IP address. At the time of interview they had

received 2.9million visits in 2011 and expected 3million by the end of the year. The figure for

pages consulted was 21million.The website is managed and monitored by the DG RTD publication unit who employ an

internal team of 16 staff. They also commission five separate sub-contractors to deliver

services related to the website. The overall budget for CORDIS is €7.9million per year which

covers all five contracts. Keeping the website up-to-date is outsourced to a contractor who

executes the core team’s editorial decisions. Assessment and moderation of dynamic

content is handled by both the internal team and a sub-contractor. In practice, the internal

team quality assure and sub-edit dynamic content to ensure that there is no commercial

activity and then pass on the content to the sub-contractor for uploading. The website owner

estimated that the budget is broken down as follows:

▪ 40% on developing editorial content, which includes translation costs of €500,000 per

year;

▪ 25% on project management, overheads and intrusion testing;

▪ 35% on software (ongoing license fees) and hosting charges.




41

The development of the “partners” social networking platform is estimated to have cost

approximately €500,000. This included €300,000 for start-up costs which went directly to a

sub-contractor and the costs of initial and ongoing testing.

There are other costs which are absorbed by the DG RTD budget, such as for dissemination

and events.In the past, the website was managed and updated by a single contractor (rather than the

five contractors used presently). The website owner’s moved to this arrangement of multiple

contractors because they felt that the single-contractor arrangement suffered from lack of

transparency and concerns about quality. As everything was included in the single-contract,

the owners were not able to ensure that every aspect required by the contract was taking

place and that the contractor was not cutting corners. The present arrangement allows the

owners to parcel out different aspects in distinct, smaller contracts. This has eliminated

reliance on a single-contractor. It also enables the owners to terminate or not renew

contracts with particular providers if there are concerns about quality – this was not as easy

with a single-contractor. It has also made monitoring of each contract easier for the owners;

although managing and coordinating the five different contractors requires more time from

the central team. Similarly, while not renewing a contract (or the threat of not renewing) withan established contractor helps in driving up quality, it also requires additional resources

from the central team in planning for the handover between contractors to ensure that there

is no delay in resumption of service as usual.

The website owners describe public procurement pressures as one of the biggest constraints

they face. There is pressure to award contracts to the lowest price bid, even though they

would often prefer paying more for a better service. They advise reducing costs and reliance

on contractors by hosting EPALE on Commission servers (which allows drawing on internal

support) and by developing IT expertise in house if possible.

3.1.8 iNet

iNET (International Networking for Educational Transformation) aims to support schools to

transform education through the sharing of best practice and innovation. It is owned andmanaged by The School Network, the Specialists Schools and Academies Trust which is an

independent, not-for-profit organisation based in the UK.

iNET was launched in 2004 and is a membership organisation with over 5,600 members in

35 countries, including most secondary schools in England. Member schools have to pay a

joining fee to access the content of the website, as well as other features of the service. The

membership fee depends on which country the school is based in and the school size. The

standard fee for a school in 2010/11 was €175 although this is higher for secondary schools

in England (as they can access a greater range of materials and support).

Functions available on the iNet website are:

▪

Partner finding tool: allows users to find and communicate with other schools in the

network and organise a variety of educational activities for their students;

▪ Calendar of events: information about real world events such as one day workshops and

seminars delivering training to teachers and international conferences on particular

themes;

▪ Educator online conferences: Teachers, school leaders and academics are invited to

submit presentations and case studies – these may be written papers, audio or video

presentations. Subjects have included practical case studies, such as describing the

development of a drop-in health facility, and more theoretical subjects such as ‘students

as agents of democratic renewal in Chile.’15

;

▪ Student online conferences: Like the educator conferences, these centre on materials

submitted in advance by participants – in this case written pieces, pictures,

presentations, videos or audio recordings to explain their point of view about teaching

and learning and their “role as a global citizen.” Subjects have included digital literacy,

15A full list of past conferences can be found here: http://www.ssat-inet.net/en-gb/resources/pages/olc.aspx

http://www.ssat-inet.net/en-gb/resources/pages/olc.aspx









42

students as global entrepreneurs and climate change as well as more informal topics

such as ‘what do you do for fun?’16

▪ Depository of publications: reports on education themes;

▪ Snapshots of projects: highlighting innovative education projects around the world;

▪

Case study archives: highlighting good practice in schools around the world, users areable to submit their own case studies;

▪ Opportunities for student collaboration: iNET organise worldwide competitions and online

conferences to allow students to develop an understanding of other cultures and

contexts. These include online debates about global citizenship and the role of ICT in

education and life, a digital art competition and virtual gallery, a website building

competition and a student voice (how can students have a say in their education).

In addition to the services available on the website, iNET produce a range of publication

reports, deliver online and offline conferences for teachers and students, training activities

for teachers and organise study tours to learn from educational practices in other countries.

There are additional charges for participating in these activities.

It was not possible to interview the owners and/or managers of iNET. As a result no

information was collected about the costs and the relative usage of the features offered bythe website.

3.1.9 TES

TES.co.uk is the website of the Times Education Supplement (TES). TES is a weekly

magazine published in the UK since 1910. It was initially published by The Times

newspaper, however the magazine, website and brand is now owned by a private equity

company. TES is a trusted brand among teachers in the UK and has a readership of about

400,000. It advertises itself as “the largest network of teachers in the world”.

The website was established in 1997 and was re-launched in 2007 to take its current form.

Material on the website is organised under four headings: jobs, teaching resources, forums

and TES magazine. The TES forums are a very active feature of the website. There are over 1.7 million registered users worldwide with around 1,500 made in the last 24 hours at the

time of writing. Forums are organised by subject area, education stage, role (such as

teacher, library, finance administrator) and include dedicated areas on careers and lifestyle

(topics include cookery, sport, health, pregnancy). There is also a special area of the forum

which allows users to “ask an expert” on topics such as job seeking, managing behaviour

and teacher training.

The Teaching Resources section currently includes over 130,000 learning materials

including lesson plans, games, teaching ideas and worksheets. These are aimed at school

level and are divided into early years, primary school, secondary school, whole school and

special educational needs. There is no material for adult learning. They are free for any

registered user. Registered users can also upload their own resource material. TES also has

agreements with 140 content partners, ranging from Unicef to Google. Partners agree toprovide links to their content on the TES resource database. Teacher TV videos are also

included in these resources. These are a selection of TV programmes commissioned by the

UK Department for Education to raise educational standards in schools.

Users can browse resources by educational stage, subject area and type of resource. They

can also search for resources, save their searches, save their favourite resources, adapt

resources and follow education providers that interest them. TES Resources also applies a

“popular” tag to those resources that have been accessed many times.

Some users become members of TES social panels. Social Panels are made up of users/

teachers from the online community who volunteer their time to undertake social panel

activities. Each social panel focuses on a specific subject and school phase; for example

Secondary School History or Primary School Maths. Larger Social Panels such as TES

16A full list of past conferences can be found here: http://www.ssat-inet.net/en-

gb/onlineconferences/studentonlineconferences/Pages/Past-student-conferences.aspx

http://www.ssat-inet.net/en-gb/onlineconferences/studentonlineconferences/Pages/Past-student-conferences.aspx









43

Secondary English17

have around 20 members. Other social panels, such as Secondary

Citizenship, only have about 5-10 members. Members to the social panel are recruited

informally through posts in the relevant community discussion forums. A particularly active

member of the forum may be asked by the TES Content Manager (a professional staff

member) to head a group and seek volunteers. The Social Panel members then review

teaching and learning material shared by teachers on TES Resources and apply a”recommend” label to those which they decide are the best Essentially this is a form of peer-

review. Additionally, members of the panel have the opportunity to provide feedback and

suggestions on the structure and content of the TES website, the magazine and newsletter.

TES refused to participate in our research and it was not possible to capture information

about the website’s development and management processes and costs.

3.1.10 Adult Learning Australia

Ala.asn.au is the online presence of Adult Learning Australia (ALA), a not-for-profit

organisation that represents and serves the adult and community education sector in

Australia. ALA is funded by the Australian Ministry of Education, through membership feed

and revenues from projects and subscriptions. The target audience of the website iseveryone involved in adult learning including learners, teachers, community providers and

learning organisations throughout Australia.

The current website was developed in 2005 to replace a previous website which was felt to

be too static. The aim of the re-design was to create a website which allowed user

participation and quicker dissemination of information. OSKY, a computer consultancy

company based in Canberra, was commissioned to undertake the redesign. OSKY has

continued to be employed on a monthly retainer to maintain the technical aspects of the

website and improve the design (so that it remains up to date) since then. Day-to-day

maintenance of the content is undertaken by ALA staff members: there is a simple and

straight-forward content management system (CMS) which allows any ALA staff member

(even those without any technical knowledge) to upload or change material to the

appropriate section of the website.The process of developing the website took about six months. At this point, OSKY worked

closely with ALA to ensure that the final product fitted the needs and expectations of ALA.

OSKY held focus groups and workshops with ALA staff and potential users to explore what

features/functions were really needed and, once the website was developed, to test the

website’s usability among users.

The website offers four entry points for each type of user: learner, community education

provider, adult learning professional and learning organisation and communities. The

learners section allows users to search for courses and to download learning resources.

The other two entry points offer an introductory text which is tailored to each group and then

links to sections of the website. These links are the same for both groups (although the order

in which they are presented differs slightly). The linked sections are: Australian Journal of

Adult Learning, Quest magazine (quarterly magazine on lifelong learning), policy and

representation (information about), learning tools and resources and professional

development (providing links to three other websites rather than a repository).

Fee-paying members of ALA can participate in webinars. The webinars are popular and

allow members to ask questions and discuss issues with the trainer and other participants

through a chat bar. To develop and deliver the webinars ALA uses external (paid)

contractors or volunteers. Often academics, students and policy makers are keen to promote

their activities so deliver content voluntarily without charge to ALA. Additionally, they have

also purchased webinars from a US-based company called LERN18

. LERN arranges the

delivery at a time to suit Australian-based learners. Two staff members are involved in the

management of webinars: one person offers technical support for one day a week while

17 www.tes.co.uk/tesenglishteaching

18 http://lern.org/edctr/upcoming_online/upcoming_online.cfm

http://www.tes.co.uk/tesenglishteaching


http://lern.org/edctr/upcoming_online/upcoming_online.cfm










44

another person spends about a day every two weeks on administrative tasks such as

arranging bookings.

In addition to webinars aimed at learning providers and staff, ALA provides webinars directly

targeted to adult learners. These include the Broadband for Seniors projects which trains

older people in ICT skills through a network of 2000 kiosks across Australia. Two individualsare employed on this project: one person spends half a week delivering webinars while

another person is employed for half a week to put the webinars together.

The webinars are delivered through a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) using software

called Elluminate. The website manager commented that the software “seems very robust to

us and user friendly”, but also added that they understand that other software has been

developed recently that may offer similar advantages.

In addition to the main website, a micro-site was created to allow members to use a forum,

create a blog, share information and post questions. The micro-site is moderated by ALA. It

is not heavily used – the website contractor explained that there does not seem to be any

appetite for these functions.

ALA and OSKY were not able to provide information about the costs of developing andmaintaining the website.

3.1.11 British Council Schools Online

The British Council Schools Online website aims to enhance and support partnerships

between schools and teachers in the UK and in developing countries. It is owned and

managed by the British Council, the UK’s international organisation for cultural relations and

educational opportunities.

The British Council project manager explained that the website is intended to enhance and

support a range of training activities which are delivered on-the-ground in the UK and in

developing countries. Staff delivering these activities encourage participants to continue the

relationships they have developed on-line through the interactive components of the website

(forum, project space). They believe that personal contact encourages people to use theinteractive tools: they invested considerable time and effort to build a critical mass of active

users at the outset of the project. The initiative is still in its early stages: they do not yet know

whether the initial work invested will be enough to sustain the on-line activity or whether they

will need to continue engaging and animating users through “real world contact”. The

website was launched in its current format at the beginning of 2011 and combines functions

from three previous websites. The website was designed with users in developing countries

in mind. As such, they ensure that the website loads quickly and that downloadable material

is “as light as possible” so that users with slow internet connections are not prohibited from

accessing these. They plan to develop a low bandwidth version of the website in the future.

Features and functions provided by the current website are:

▪ Information and guidance: this is mainly aimed at UK teachers, it includes “how-to”guides on setting up an international project, a template partnership agreement and

advice on forming a partnership safely; information about international school awards

and funding is also provided;

▪ Partnership finding tool: registered schools can search for other schools on the

database; schools need to apply to register and the website manager contacts the

applicant to check that the school exists before accepting the registration;

▪ Project space: where partner schools can share messages, discussions, documents,

videos, photos and other materials; all the material is kept in one location so that any

teacher from the partnership schools can access it;

▪ Discussion forum: both UK and non-UK teachers who are registered with the website

can participate in discussions.

The website has 60,000 registered users in total. In October 2011 it had 52,000 visits,

36,000 of which were unique and 300,000 page views. The majority of users are from the UK

(28%); 8.3% from the US (which is slightly surprising because the site is not geared towards

the US), then (in order) India, Turkey and Bangladesh. They observe little correlation




45

between website usage and content provided in other languages: translated content is

provided for those countries which tend to have poor internet access, or are not part of

communities for which there is a culture of online engagement and therefore use of

translated content is limited.

Interviewees from British Council Schools Online were not able to provide information aboutcosts and resources expended for the development of the website or required for its

maintenance.

3.2 General platform characteristics

In this section some of the considerations about basic issues for platform development are

discussed.

3.2.1 System architecture

Most website owners did not have in-depth knowledge or preference for a particular type of

website architecture. However, some lessons can be learned from their experiences about

the considerations for selecting a content management system (CMS):

▪ Ease of use of CMS: for websites, such as Infonet, where a small in-house team is

responsible for maintaining the website it is important to have a CMS that is easy and

straightforward to use. LRE have recently adopted Life Ray, after difficulties with using

other systems (ColdFusion and JSF). They have found that they can now easily edit

content and create new web pages while keeping the same menus, images and colour

schemes. This allows the website to be updated more frequently without confusing users

as the interface looks the same.

▪ Open source software: Several interviewees mentioned the benefits of choosing a CMS

that is open source (such as Life Ray or Drupal). Open source software allows

developers from all over the world to use and improve the code. As such, they are more

likely to stay up to date with the latest changes in technology and are cheaper or free to

use. Furthermore, it allows the owner of the website more flexibility as it does not tie thewebsite to one software provider and makes retendering to new contractors easier.

However, finding experienced developers for open source software may be more difficult

and/or costly than with a licensed product.

▪ Fit for purpose: Some CMSs are better suited than others to support multilingualism and

dynamic content and applications. CORDIS, for example, uses open source software

Life Ray which allows a website to support a suite of applications, such as blogs, instant

messaging and message boards. Similarly, Elearningeuropa.info use Drupal because of

its ability to support content in many languages.

Our website-development experts have identified five CMSs which can offer strong support

to multilingualism. We present the pros and cons of each in Annex 5.

3.2.2 Interoperability

Most websites examined try to ensure that information is accessible to those using the most

popular browsers in the marketplace. As a consequence, some do not work with older

browsers, such as older versions of Internet Explorer, and some owners/managers admitted

that they had not fully tested their platforms for non-Microsoft operating systems, such as

Macintosh and Linux. Few, such as CORDIS, have developed versions for mobile users,

although not all functions are available on these versions.

Websites will now need to take into account the various types of devices that users may use

to access them. Below is a list of factors that should be taken into account when developing

for various devices:

▪ Desktop PC’s – Monitor sizes may vary from 15 to 23 inches. Depending on monitor capabilities screen resolutions can vary from 800 x 600 to 2048 x 1536. The life span of

a PC can be several years which may mean that some users are using older browsers.




46

▪ Smart Phones – Screen sizes can often vary from 2 to 5 inches. Web browsers on

these devices tend to be fairly modern due to the products having a shorter life span of 1

to 2 years. Common browsers used on these devices include Internet Explorer, Opera,

Safari and FireFox. The use of Macromedia Flash is not recommended as support for

this technology is varying. The speed of web pages should be taken into consideration

as these devices are often used in low bandwidth environments.

▪ Tablet Devices – Screen sizes vary from 7 to 11 inches, usually to a fixed resolution.

The use of Macromedia Flash is not recommended as support for this technology is

varying. Websites should be designed to allow for touch sensitivity. and take into

account the dynamic keyboard layout. Due to their practicality these devices are

becoming popular learning aids.

▪ Laptops, Net-books, Ultra-books - These devices can vary in screen size from 8 to 17

inches with varying resolutions. Ultra-books may also have very similar characteristics

as Tablet devices.

▪ TV – Internet TV is an emerging technology and is currently going through a phase of

convergence. The current use of this method will be limited and is somewhat unknown,

however such factors should not be ignored when developing a new platform.

The website architecture and coding can help improve the array of devices and platforms a

modern website has to support. This includes the use of W3C compliant code and using

modern HTML5 coding standards. However, the Europa Information Provider Guide (IPG)

does not mention the use of HTML5 as its preferred coding standard. As such it is

recommended that DG EAC communicates with Europa before launching a procurement

process.

3.2.3 Accessibility

The Web Accessibility Initiatives (WAI) encourages the use of the AAA grading scale to

measure the accessibility of a website. Triple ‘A’ compliance is the highest compliance

grade. Complying with each level (A, AA, AAA) is based on meeting various coding criteria,

ranging from page layout, use of colours, to input devices used by the end user. Ultimately awebsite should aim to adhere to the highest WAI standard of AAA, particularly if the website

is offering a public service. However, achieving this may result in higher costs. Examples of

where added costs may occur are:

▪ The design of the website requires greater attention, encouraging the use of Cascading

Style Sheets (CSS) for presentation;

▪ Complying to higher levels of accessibility can sometimes make a website less visually

appealing. Designer can sometimes find it challenging to keep a website ‘text’ based

and can opt to use more aesthetically pleasing methods of presentation;

▪ The use of less accessible programming techniques such as JavaScript can give a

website a less ‘polished’ feel;

▪ Websites can often be populated by Content Management Systems (CMS) by content

providers that do not have a technical understanding of accessibility. Often the code

generated by CMS’s can find it difficult to adhere to AAA levels. Thus the design of the

website may comply to AAA standards but when populated with content it does not.

A website should aim to build in Accessibility from its conception rather than trying to ‘bolt it

on’ once the website has been built. Taking this approach can reduce the development

overhead and costs.

Only the British Council Schools website reported testing for compatibility with screen-

readers for the visually impaired. They are currently considering installing a “browse aloud”

function to help users with visual impairments.

Compliance with the Web Accessibility Initiatives (WAI) guidelines to Level A was a

requirement for elearningeuropa.info and eTwinning.net in their calls for tender. The

specification for elearningeuropa.info required the creation of a text-only version of the

website. However, this does not seem to have materialised. The British Council Schools

website is currently developing a text only version to enable users with low internet

connections (such as those in developing countries) to access content more easily.




47

3.2.4 Search

Many website owners and managers identified search to be a challenging aspect of their

websites. Website owners report that “searching is the key problem reported by users. Users

don’t know what stuff we have and this partly emerges from the difficulty in classifying

content”. Users become frustrated when their searches yield too few or too many results or when the results are not what they are looking for. This may be because the search function

available is not “deep” enough: it only searches names of documents rather than their

content. It may also only search particular sections of the website; such as only the

repository of documents rather than the news section. A key problem of current websites

used by the Commission to showcase good practice (such as European Shared Treasure or

Eve) is that search functions work best when the user already knows the name of the project

they are looking for. It works less well when they are interested in a topic, for example

migrant education, but do not have prior knowledge of what European projects have been

funded in that area.

Many have had to improve the tools they have to make content searchable. For example,

CORDIS offers a comprehensive search facility (by filter, by category and a professional

search) which allows use of Boolean operators (AND/OR) in a user-friendly way. Thesoftware used for the search function is Autonomy Enterprise (which offers the option of

indexing multi-media such as video and audio files).

Examples of good practice for search include:

▪ Tag based search: Elearningeuropa.info recently redesigned their website and included

a search function that uses a system of key word tags. This allows users to collectively

view different types of information under the same tag category rather than browsing

through different sections of the website to access it. The website’s tag cloud, as

demonstrated in Figure 3.1, gives an indication to users of what the most popular

searches are and therefore what other material is available on the website that may be of

interest to them.

Figure 3.1 Image of Elearningeuropa.info’s Tag Cloud

▪ Map-based search: eTwinnings and CORDIS19

allow search for partners, projects and

results and by country and/or by region using a map. These give users a more “visual”

representation of ongoing activities.

19CORDIS is currently offering this function in a beta “test” version.




48

▪ Saved searches: CORDIS allows users to “save” their search and automatically receive

email notifications when the website has been updated with information which would be

relevant to their search. LRE plan to offer this function soon.

3.2.5 Personal data and privacy

Stakeholders expressed concerns about having an open access process for registering on

an on-line community or partner finding tool. The following issues were identified:

▪ Commercial organisations may register on the portal in order to spam forums and other

members;

▪ Commercial organisations may put themselves forward as partners in order to gain

financially from participating in projects even though they are not providers of adult

education;

▪ The diverse nature of the adult learning sector means that there are difficulties verifying

whether an organisation is an adult education provider when funding applications are

received by Grundtvig National Agencies. It would be difficult for a platform contractor to

verify organisations.

Making members of a community feel secure about their privacy when participating in an on-

line platform was identified as a key factor in the success of eTwinning.net. In order to

register on the platform, interested teachers/schools must submit a registration application

which is then vetted by the national eTwinning support service team. This ensures that the

only members of eTwinning are other schools / other school teachers. Similarly, British

Council Schools verifies every registration by contacting the education institution to check

that they exist. Until the registration is approved, the registree can access content on the site

(such as downloadable material) but cannot participate on the forums or contact partners.

Other platforms have adopted more open approaches to registration. There is no verification

on SALTO Youth, either on the Otlas partner-finding tool or on the Trainers Online for Youth

tool. This is also true for elearningeuropa.info and Scientix. While Salto and

elearningeuropa.info allow visitors to browse the directories of members without the need tobecome members, Scientix requires registration first. All these websites have said that their

communities have high numbers of registered users and continue to receive registrations

every month. For example, elearningeuropa.info has 38,000 registered users with 50 new

users registering every month.

Other elements of good practice in protecting data and privacy include:

▪ Guidance notices on Privacy and Use and Collection of Data and identifying a data

controller. For example, within the CORDIS platform there are different notices for the

platform itself 20

, the Participant Portal21

and the Electronic Proposal Submission

Service22

;

▪ CAPTCHA tests (which tests whether the response comes from a human or a computer)

in registration forms and comment forms;

▪ Spam filter and catcher tools for forums, blog posts and news stories (which analysetexts to block spammers)

23;

▪ Monitoring forums by platform management staff because spam tools cannot capture

everything;

▪ Encoding of email addresses so that they cannot be captured by spam bots.

20 http://cordis.europa.eu/guidance/legal-notices_en.html

21 http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/appmanager/participants/portal

22 https://www.epss-fp7.org/epss/download2s;jsessionid=5cf9e423bf110a9bb74776f6dd115a26ebc7b2df289ae0dbffe69c15caa3475f.e38Qbx8Mbh0PbO0Lay0?downType=helpF&fileType=SSPS 23

Such as the Mollom module, http://mollom.com/

http://cordis.europa.eu/guidance/legal-notices_en.html


http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/appmanager/participants/portal



https://www.epss-fp7.org/epss/download2s;jsessionid=5cf9e423bf110a9bb74776f6dd115a26ebc7b2df289ae0dbffe69c15caa3475f.e38Qbx8Mbh0PbO0Lay0?downType=helpF&fileType=SSPS





http://mollom.com/

http://mollom.com/

http://mollom.com/

http://mollom.com/

http://mollom.com/

http://mollom.com/









49

3.2.6 Security

For most platforms reviewed, website security and testing is included as part of the

maintenance contract. Practice around this varies; some undertake proactive intrusion

testing by trying to hack into the website while for others this is limited to ensuring firewalls

are in place. The content of these websites is not considered to attract threats from hackers – and interviewees suggested that this would also be the case for EPALE.

There are no direct security threats that should affect an Adult Education website. However

common web threats such as SQL injections, cross site scripting, denial of service and brute

force attacks should be tested for.

It is also advised to keep the use of unnecessary cookies to a minimum, and only use

cookies that are deemed strictly necessary by the website. The European Cookie Directive

introduced in May 2011 requires a website to prompt users when non vital cookies are used,

this includes Google Analytics or equivalent statistics packages that might use cookies.

3.2.7 Languages

All EU languagesETwinning.net offers the most comprehensive multilingual service. The website architecture

and (most) of the website content is available in 25 languages (all LLP participating

countries’ official languages including Maltese). Owners of the platform considered this

decision carefully – mainly because they feared that it would be very expensive. However,

they decided to invest in this languages-max option because they believed that their target

group (school teachers) would not be confident in participating in “anything serious in a

language other than their mother tongue” . The most popular languages in which the website

is accessed are ES and PL, closely followed by RO and TR. These results partly reflect how

active national support points are in each country and partly how much interest there is from

teachers in seeking on-line partnerships. Website owners believe that these statistics justify

their decision to invest in a multi-lingual platform because they can serve the needs of their

user groups.eTwinning.net has a contract with European Schoolnet for the cost of the central support

services function, which includes translation into 25 languages of all content produced

centrally (except reports) but not of material produced by national support services or

generated by users. The contractor employs or has sub-contracts with professional

translators. The cost for translation is €82,000 a year. Adding an additional language to the

service would cost €9,00024

.

Elearningeuropa.info offers its website architecture and web page information in 22

languages. However, news and uploaded material are predominantly available in the

language in which they were initially uploaded (mostly English, some in French and some in

other languages). The contractor, PAU Education, makes video content available in several

languages. However, this was not the case for the videos we tested. The decision to offer

these languages was made by the Commission on the basis that “ the website is not for

experts. It must be translated”. The cost for translations is €60,000 a year.

Key EU languages

The CORDIS website is available in six languages (DE, EN, ES, FR, IT, PL). This includes

the architecture, news items and information on most web pages. However, research reports

available in their depositories are almost exclusively in English because “English has

become the international language of the research community”. CORDIS decided to use the

six most commonly used languages in the EU because beyond these there are diminishing

returns in additional coverage.

24 The call for tender (Reference No EACEA/2007/2012 required a quotation for the cost of adding an additional

language to the portal.




50

Similarly, Scientix also offers website architecture and webpage in the same six languages.

Dynamic content, such as comments in the forums are not translated. Downloadable

resources, such as education tools, are available initially in the language in which they have

been uploaded. However, the user can “request” that the tool is translated in any of the 22

EU official languages, as shown in Figure 3.2 below. Scientix has a list of freelance

translators, in addition to limited in-house translation capacity (used to quickly translate shorttexts to the six languages). Translation by freelancers usually takes a week. The budget for

translations is €350,000 for a 3 year period, or €116,667 a year.

Figure 3.2 Screenshot from Scientix.eu

Machine translations

An alternative to paying for a formal translation and proofreading service is to use a Machine

Translator, such as the Google Translate and Microsoft Translator 25

widgets. These tools

automatically translate text into several world languages.

Learning Resource Exchange (LRE) uses the SYSTRAN machine translator software to offer

content in eleven languages (EN, DE, ES, FR, IT, NL, PT, CS, FI, LT and NO). The choice of

languages is largely related to what languages the software can support as not all 22 EU

languages are available through SYSTRAN. Translation includes all architecture, web pages

and tags. News feeds and downloadable tools (such as videos and learning tools) remain in

the language in which they are uploaded. LRE’s licence for SYSTRAN costs €10,000 for

eight languages.

The benefit of using Machine Translation tools is that the translation is not costly and is

automatic. However, the translation produced does not result in perfect translations;

sentences are often not grammatically correct and/or the meaning is not always what was

intended by the original author. This is particularly true for long pieces of text. This may

make the website look unprofessional and may annoy users reading badly-written text intheir mother tongue. LRE explain that they do not pretend that the translation is perfect,

users accept inaccuracies as they are able to comprehend the meaning of machine-

translated text.

One stakeholder with experience of using Machine Translation tools, explained that these

tools work best when the original text is written in short sentences and in plain English, with

jargon avoided. It was suggested that any professional contributors to the platform should

receive training in writing for websites in plain English26

. If appropriate, guidance on how to

write effectively in plain English/other language should be provided to “lay” contributors.

English only

25 http://www.microsofttranslator.com/

26For example, such as courses provided by the Plain English Campaign http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/



http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/










51

The other websites examined provided content only in English. For some, there was no

obvious rationale to provide translations as their target group is an English speaking

audience (e.g. Adult Learning Australia and TES).

Content on Infonet-ae.eu is only available in English. This decision was made after a trial

offering 10 languages. During the trial, the website owners found that the translation was toocostly, the quality of translation was variable and it was difficult for the editorial board to

quality control content in many languages. They decided to opt for a high quality product in

one language.

3.3 Usage and value of features and functionalities

Interviews and desk reviews of the platforms revealed the following issues and lessons

about features and functions:

Partner finding tool: SALTO-YOUTH.net has recently introduced a partner finding tool

which appears to be well used to date. Each user/organisation can create a short profile to

showcase their interests: it provides more information than a simple “directory” and is seen

to promote partnership by allowing potential partners to select more effectively. However,

managers and owners of other platforms advised that EPALE should provide simple and

clearly written guidance to users such as a step-by-step “how to” guide in order to encourage

usage. For example, the eTwinning General Guidance document27

includes step-by-step

guidance on “creating a profile”. For most websites reviewed, the partner finding tool is

integrated with the online community (and therefore further learning on this function is

discussed below).

Online community: The experiences of CORDIS, LRE and SALTO-YOUTH suggest that

users are generally willing to create profiles and share information about themselves and

their organisations. Interviewees suggested that the growing popularity of social networking

websites such as Facebook means that the general population is now increasingly familiar

and comfortable with using such tools. However, as with discussion forums, online

communities are strongest were they are a continuation of offline / real life events such astraining events (eTwinning, British Councils Schools), conferences (Scientix, CORDIS) and

other events (such as eTwinning camps). Many websites have considerable offline networks,

based in member states which engage with beneficiaries locally by organising offline events,

delivering face-to-face training and producing locally-relevant content (such as the SALTO

regional centres and the eTwinning national support network). Nonetheless, some websites

take active measures to promote participation in their on-line community by offering rewards

(Elearningeuropa.info offers kudos points) or by organising prize competitions (such as

eTwinning.net).

Discussion forum: eLearningeuropa.info has an active discussion forum (and

accompanying online community). However, the website’s owners were keen to point out

that the high level of activity is directly related to offline activities that are organised

elsewhere and from ongoing animation and dissemination activities from the website’s team.Infonet tried to provide a discussion forum but it was removed because of low usage.

Similarly, Scientix recognise that the use of their discussion forums is low because it is not

actively managed. Online discussions do not happen organically: they need human

resources behind them.

Downloadable Resources (good practice, funding and awards, resources for teachers

and managers, training materials): Some websites such as eTwinning, SALTO and British

Council Schools create and present their own resources. Producing these resources are part

of the core functions of the managing organisations – which in some cases preceded the

website. Other websites, such as LRE, Scientix and TES collect and aggregate links to

resources created by other organisations and in many cases are hosted elsewhere. Both

options require active management and categorisation of resources to ensure that a user

can easily find what is relevant to them (rather than be presented with too much irrelevantinformation). LRE allow users to comment about resources (although very few choose to do

27 http://resources.eun.org/etwinning/80/eTwinning_GENERAL_GUIDELINES_2010_EN.pdf

http://resources.eun.org/etwinning/80/eTwinning_GENERAL_GUIDELINES_2010_EN.pdf









52

so) while TES uses a select panel of teachers to rate resources and apply a “recommended”

tag to those highly rated.

E-partnership space: eTwinning provides this function (Twinspace) for its users. It appears

to be well-used; although partners do use other tools to share documents (such as email).

Twinspace provides a framework or template which partners can use to set-up their virtualpartnership; ensuring that all partners have access to the same information and creating a

visual presence or tangible (virtual) product. It allows different users (such as different

teachers in the same school) to access the partnership without relying on a lead teacher.

This improves the sustainability of the partnership: expertise is shared among different

teachers (not just the language teacher who usually tends to lead on such partnership) and

reduces the risk of the partnership ending if the lead teacher leaves the school. However,

some interviewees warned against creating a tool that already exists. As an alternative, one

interviewee suggested that EPALE could encourage users to collaborate in groups using

established tools (such a Yahoo or Google group) and provide guides and guidance on how

this could be done.

Online Training sessions / eLearning Space: eTwinning and Adult Learning Australia both

provide online e-training. These are seen to be effective ways of providing short andstructured sessions on specific topics of learning. Both websites use VLE software that

allows learners to ask questions to the trainer and to other learners.

Ask an Expert: Of the websites reviewed, only TES.co.uk offered an Ask an Expert function.

This function is integrated within the discussion forum section. TES refused to participate in

our research so we were not able to gather information about how this function is organised

and managed. However, GHK knows from experience of providing this function for other

websites (European Migration Network) that providing this function for an audience of

experts is relatively easy and straightforward to provide once a network of experts has been

identified.

3.4 Dissemination and communication

In this section the main ways to effectively increase use of different key features and

functions and how social media integration can bolster use (or not) are considered.

3.4.1 Increasing usage

The platforms reviewed have used different ways to successfully attract and retain users,

which could be considered for EPALE. These include:

▪ Information control: CORDIS has 2.9million visits a year, with 150,000 unique visitors

a month. This is partly because DG RTD has held until recently a monopoly on

information about calls for proposals from 1987 so every researcher interested in

European research funding had to visit CORDIS for this information. This information is

no longer provided by CORDIS; however many users continue to use the platform

because it has become established in the research community. Similarly, TES hascaptured the teacher market by establishing itself as the most complete database of

teacher-related job adverts.

▪ Contractual requirement: several stakeholders suggested that using EPALE should be

a contractual requirement for all organisations receiving or applying for European

funding. This could take many forms, such as requiring that membership of the

community is an eligibility requirement or requiring that final products or reports are

uploaded on to the platforms. Interviewees suggested that if EPALE becomes

compulsory then other requirements, such as using European Shared Treasure are

dropped to avoid duplication and reduce unnecessary burden on providers.

▪ Search engine optimisation (SEO): these are techniques used to improve the visibility

of a website in search engines28

. The aim is to improve the ranking of a website or

28SEO techniques aim to improve the rank of a website within a search engines’ search algorithm. This will result

in the website appearing earlier




53

webpage in search results. Some platforms reviewed have used SEO because they

recognise the high percentage of traffic which originates from search engines.

▪ Networks and Partners: Elearning Europa has a series of media partners who promote

the website and host their logo on their websites. Scientix network could see scope for

collaboration with the new EPALE portal because they identified that the target audience

for the two websites may overlap.

▪ E-newsletters: these can disseminate content and draw users to the website by

providing information directly to a user’s inbox. They serve as a reminder to users that

the website exists (even if they have not visited in a while). Elearning Europa, for

example produces a monthly newsletter in 33 languages. The website owners

acknowledge that this is costly (although they were not able to identify the exact cost).

However they believe that it is important to have it as it disseminates information, even if

readers to the newsletter to do visit the website itself. Some websites, such as the

Cedefop website, produce several newsletters focusing on different aspects of their work

and allow users to select which ones they subscribe to, according to their interests.

▪ RSS feeds: like newsletters RSS feeds deliver news and the latest information from a

website directly to the user, without the user having to visit the site itself. RSS feeds

automatically create notifications as the new items are posted to the website. They donot, therefore, require any additional resources from the website team as (unlike

newsletters) do not require editing or designing.

▪ Real world activities: many of the websites reviewed draw users by undertaking face-

to-face activities in the real world. These range from ongoing training and events relating

to building the capacity of their target user group (such as by eTwinning, SALTO, British

Council Schools On-line) to annual conferences (such as the one organised by Scientix).

These are seen to be particular important for the interactive/social functions to work as

users do not seem to spontaneously engage in online/virtual relationships and

networking without a prior face-to-face meeting.

▪ Reward systems: eTwinning and elearningEuropa both employ reward systems to

encourage participation and improve quality of online user-generated products. For

eTwinning this takes the form of “quality marks” and competitions with prizes for the besteTwinning projects, which can be displayed on the project’s space. The very best

projects are rewarded by participation in a conference, however the website owners

have found that their user group (school teachers) do respond to non-financial rewards

as well (quality marks). ElearningEuropa use kudos points to reward active contributors.

It does not penalise non-active contributors (by restricting access to content if you have

not accumulated enough points for example). These systems appear to appeal to the

user group even though there are no financial benefits to be had from gaining kudos

points.

3.4.2 Social media

The platforms reviewed generally do not have a coherent social media strategy. As such,

use of social media appears to be opportunistic and its impact is not well understood. Theextent of social media engagement is set out in Table 3.1 below.

Table 3.1 Social media

Website Newsletter Facebook Twitter RSS Other

eTwinning Youtube –

“How to”

videos

CORDIS Yes Yes Yes Yes – “popular” Search

results

updates to

your inbox

LRE X X X

Scientix X Partly X X




54

Website Newsletter Facebook Twitter RSS Other

SALTO X X X Social

Bookmarking

TES Social

bookmarking

iNET X

Infonet X X

Elearning

europa

X X Sharing

LinkedIn

ALA X X Youtube

channel (not

used)

British

Council

X X X Vimeo

A key problem with the use of social media is replicating the content in alternative form andpotentially diverting users away from the platform, rather than drawing people in.

This may be particularly true of Facebook. One stakeholder interviewed believed this would

definitely be the case if EPALE created a Facebook page: information displayed on a

Facebook page would not add any value to the information already available on EPALE

itself. For example, any discussions / conversations that could take place on a Facebook

page discussion board could feasibly take place within a EPALE discussion forum. Platforms

such as Scientix and British Council Schools use Facebook selectively, for example to raise

awareness of events. However, the LRE owner believes that Facebook is a more effective

medium than advertising (the LRE Facebook page has 104 likes).

Twitter is seen as a quick and inexpensive way to communicate quickly to the user group. Its

short, text format ensures that content does not distract from the main portal. CORDIS hasbenefitted from its established large user group and has quickly gained 1,579 followers on

Twitter even though it had only made 87 tweets at the time (October 2011). A dedicated

staff member in the DG RTD marketing unit is tasked with managing the CORDIS Facebook

and twitter accounts – it was estimated that they spent 10% of their time on these activities.

Other websites use social bookmarking to enable users to share content on external social

media platforms, through incorporating sharing widgets. Social bookmarking boosts the

platforms’ visibility among a user’s online social network. For example, the SALTO Youth

Partners’ Finding Tool allows users to “like it” on Facebook. This action will then appear on

the users’ Facebook page and be visible to their friends and followers. These friends may in

turn, be inspired to find out more about this and visit the SALTO website themselves. TES

allows users to share its videos and other content via email, Twitter or Facebook using a

sharing widget from Addthis.com. This particular widget supports a large number of socialmedia platforms. This means that the host platform can integrate with almost all social media

platforms without committing to those that are currently popular (not picking a winner) and

not excluding those that are popular only in certain countries29

.

29For example, Xing is currently primary popular among business users in Germany, Austria and Switzerland

while Badoo is popular in Spain, Italy, France and Latin America.




55

Figure 3.3 Examples of social bookmarking sharing widget style

3.5 Key messages

3.5.1 General approach

Useful learning for establishing EPALE appears to be:

▪ Having a clear set of purposes (expected outputs and outcomes linked to increasing

target users’ knowledge, skills and abilities) and a menu of content and functions toachieve these is more likely to focus attention and lead to successful development;

▪ Establishing ownership at the outset is critical for development and re-tendering; and

▪ Not duplicating resources and materials which are available on other websites which can

be signposted.

3.5.2 Initial and continuing developments

The experience of other platforms tells us a little about the costs for development as well as

development considerations in relation to contracting and the creation of specific features

and functionalities.

Useful learning for setting up EPALE appears to be:

▪ A few have had short set up contracts but most with wider ambitions have had initial

contracts for several years (3-5 years) to set up/launch within a year and continue

development with management activities; few have done this in-house;

▪ Costs of development range from €10-40,000 to €100K-1million but the scale is clearly

linked to the ambitions and when initial development merges with management and

maintenance;

▪ One has clearly been a bottom-up development which has ensured some more

immediate response to users. It has also meant that funding is not specifically allocated

to the platform but to a range of objectives; others have been closely steered by the

Commission and other government clients;

▪ Some have been incremental but many have been designed to service a potential fixed

range of purposes and functions linked to these (and re-designed periodically). Contracts

require flexibility to enable evolution of functions and content;

▪ Making the decision about whether the website should be multi-lingual early on is

important as it is difficult to add a language functionality at a later stage. Adding an

additional language on a website that is already multilingual is not as problematic; and

▪ The chosen CMS should be straightforward to use but the final choice should reflect the

uses of the platform including the languages available30

.

Other useful learning for the process of development appears to be:

30DG EAC should discuss website architecture with DG DIGIT as we understand that DG DIGIT has a strong

preference for using content management system “Documentum” for the set-up of their websites.




56

▪ Potential users can test and provide feedback on the website as a whole, as well as for

each new feature;

▪ Testers should represent the demographic of the target group; this should include staff of

small adult education providers, older workers and staff with limited experience of online

portals;

▪ Build in means of monitoring, such as counting downloads of resources, at the outset so

that outputs can be measured and evaluated;

▪ A WAI Level A accessibility requirement should be met at the outset; and

▪ EPALE could potentially use the LRE resource hosting platform rather than create one

from scratch.

3.5.3 Maintenance and management

The experience of other platforms tells us a little about the costs for maintenance and

management as well as considerations in relation to contracting and specifying these

activities.Useful learning for EPALE appears to be:

▪ Most have included maintenance and management with continuing development and

have flexible contracts (3-6 years) to enable priorities to be agreed between client and

contractor on a regular basis;

▪ Costs of maintenance and management are not always distinguished from other related

activities (such as dissemination, organisation of events, developing content, editing/

reviewing new content, organisation of training activities and delivery of training) but it is

not generally believed to be necessary to separate them contractually;

▪ Functions tend to increase management costs more than features though both need

active management if they are to be useful to large numbers of target users. Activemanagement ranges from developing and commissioning new material to exploiting

content (editing and disseminating) and targeting potential users;

▪ Most have specified these additional activities partly to ensure that content is up to date

and functionality is enhanced and partly to make the content relevant and useful or to

increase and maintain take up;

▪ Costs range from €250K to several millions a year but these seem to be related to scale

and the extent of roles and responsibilities;

▪ Several have networks as well as a contractor with the network members (in Member

States) required to do local dissemination and to produce local material;

▪

Most have contracted out the work but a few have in-house teams undertaking some of the active dissemination and updating of content, for example, in addition to contract

management; one has several contractors with different responsibilities but

acknowledges that this requires coordination; and

▪ Some successfully use panels or groups of users to check new materials and propose

content.

3.5.4 Features and functions

The experience of other platforms tells us a little about the development and management of

specific features and functionalities.

Useful learning for EPALE’s potential features and functions appears to be:

▪ A critical mass of users is needed for some functions, such as partner tools and

discussion forums, to be viable. Discussion forums can generally only flourish when a

website has become established or has developed a community of users who have

established relationships at events or visits;




57

▪ The various school partner finding tools support the creation of virtual professional

networks and exchanges by enabling the sharing of information and resources;

▪ Many functions enable a legacy from events, exchanges and visits to be built because

they will bring in other users of the knowledge and understanding gained;

▪ Content such as materials for teaching and ‘good practice’ need to have search functions

and ought to have editorial controls and quality standards if they are to be useful;

▪ Discussion forums, online communities and ask an expert functions need active

management too if they are to be used and provided resources for other users;

▪ Some features and functions are already available through other means (such as E-

partnership space) or existing websites (such as Infonet); and

▪ Some features are available on websites in some Member States and in some

languages. Examples of national websites offering resources for teachers are the

Norwegian Agency for Lifelong Learning http://www.vox.no and the Association of

Austrian Adult Education Centres http://www.vhs.or.at.

3.5.5 Dissemination

The experience of other platforms tells us a little about the effective means to inform and

engage users in a platform and in using specific functions. Useful learning for EPALE’s

potential features and functions appears to be:

▪ A ‘have to use’ or ‘must use’ feature can increase usage though neither necessarily bring

users to all other features and functions;

▪ This needs to be supplemented by SEO and active dissemination. Most of the platforms

demonstrate that active management and dissemination increase use and can

significantly increase take up of features/functions such as downloadable teaching

materials, partner finding tools and discussion forums;

▪ Some activities bring in users, such as regular e-newsletters and RSS feeds;

▪ Rewards and quality marks for active participation are appreciated and may support

active contributions from users; and

▪ There are mixed views about registering and restricting access and having open access;

some of the most successful have open access.

3.5.6 Languages

The experience of other platforms tells us that:

▪ The languages available for resources bring in new users but also restrict users to the

languages they can work in;▪ While the use of plain English will help (which then requires editorial control and

guidance), some features, such as resources, benefit considerably from being translated;

▪ The cost of translation depends on the scale of translation required; those providing

material in six or more languages only translate the material which is centrally generated

or for some features/functions; and

▪ This can be supplemented by translation on request and machine translation software

availability.

http://www.vox.no/



http://www.vox.no/

http://www.vox.no/





http://www.vox.no/




58

4 Assessment of features and functionalities

In this chapter there is a systematic assessment of each of the potential features and

functionalities of the proposed platform and a consideration of languages.

The following guidance was used to rate each of the features/functions (High/Medium/Low):

Contribution: this is the extent they contribute to the likely future Commission’s programme

aims and targets through the knowledge, skills and abilities they would be expected to

increase.

Gap: this is the extent that there is not suitable electronic information available across the

Member States.

Target groups: this is the extent that all the target groups will make use of the information or

function; it should indicate if there is greater value to specific groups.

Achievement: this takes into consideration the ease of development (tried and tested) and

the ability to make it work effectively learning from others’ practice (HIGH is therefore the

easiest to achieve).

Cost of development: this should reflect difficulty to achieve an effective resource; if it can

be achieved by linkage to an existing function/feature then the costs will be lower. As a guide

LOW is under €100K euro; MEDIUM €100-€500K; HIGH over €500K.

Net cost of management and maintenance: this is the cost to achieve an effective

resource on an annual basis netted by any savings achievable elsewhere; costs should

include dissemination; LOW, MEDIUM AND HIGH as above.

Overall rating: a judgement of the average rating for columns 1-4/columns 5-6.

4.1 Assessment of features

Tables 4.1 has an assessment of each of the potential features. It is clear that some featurescould have a relatively bigger contribution to the aims and objectives of the Commission’s

future programme for adult learning and the achievement of EU2020 than others, such as

news and a library of documents. Good practice in the delivery of adult learning and

information about events and learning opportunities should increase the number of

beneficiaries by widening audiences and increasing the sharing of good practice that should

be expected to enhance the quality of teaching in adult learning.

By and large the features proposed can be found from other sources at least in some

Member States. Some though are more likely to fill a bigger gap in potential users’

knowledge than others because of what is currently available and how accessible it is.

Information on funding and awards is already available and accessible whereas some

information on good practice is available but not accessible. Other information, such as

about events, is only available in some countries.Some features could have a higher value to target groups than others. The highest in terms

of range of groups and size of groups would be good practice in the delivery of adult learning

and the calendar of events. There is a low rating for a library of documents and good

practice on adult education policy because it is less likely to be widely used.

Most of the features could be developed to meet needs with little risk though the ability of

several to work effectively would be dependent on the design and extent of management

support provided. These include good practice in the development of adult learning and the

news and calendar features.

Development costs are generally not high for features. The exception is probably the library

of documents. Management and maintenance would be relatively higher for some such as

good practice, because they need tagging, moderation and translation to be effectively used.




59

Table 4.1 Assessment of Features

Feature Type Contributionto European Agenda for

AdultLearning and“Erasmus for

All”programme

Gap inelectronicinformation

being filled

Potential value totarget groups

of user

Likeliness of successfully achieving

value/fillinggap

Cost of development

Net cost formanagementand

maintenance

Good practice

on the delivery

of adult

education

High: potential

to improve the

quality and

efficiency of

adult education

and lifelong

learning

system and to

adopt new and

effective

practices and

systems

High: no other

comprehensive

and definitive

source of

information

(although

national bodies

provide for

some countries

but not all)

High: most

valuable to

learning

providers.

Medium:

collecting

examples of

practice is

straightforward;

assessing what

is “best”, what

can “travel well”

and

communicating

practice

effectively is

challenging.

Low: cost of

assembling a

network of

experts is low;

low technical

costs (requires

effective search

and tagging

function).

Medium: most

effective if

content is

provided

professionally

translated – this

is costly.

Good practice

on adult

education

policy

High: potential

to contribution

to policy

dialogue and

mutual learning

and support to

open method of

coordination ;

potential to

improve

knowledge

base and

monitoring in

the AE sector

Medium:

Infonet partly

provided this

service up to

September

2011; some

information also

available

through EPEA

and other

organisations.

High: most

useful to

policymakers,

representative

organisations

and

researchers/

academics.

Medium:

reporting

practice is

straightforward;

assessing what

is “best”, what


and

communicating

practice

effectively is

challenging.

Low: Low set-

up and

technical costs

(requires

effective search

and tagging

function).

Low: Infonet’s

experience

suggests that

system of

reporters can

provide this at

low cost.




60


AdultLearning and

“Erasmus for All”programme


being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Funding and

awards

information

Medium:

should enable

learning

providers (and

potentially

teaching staff

and learners) to

access

opportunities

Medium: NAs

currently

provide this

information

effectively to

existing

network of

contacts; gap

for AE may be

higher under

Erasmus for All

Medium: most

useful for

learning

providers.

Medium:

Information can

be easily

provided and

communicated;

requires

collection of

information

from EC,

national and

other sources.

Low: Low start-

up and

technical costs.

RSS feed

should be

integrated (this

is not costly).

Low: collation

and

communication

of information is

easy to achieve

once the

information

sources have

been identified;

NAs currently

provideinformation in

home

languages.

Adult education

news

Low: Not

essential in

meeting

programme

aims but could

be useful in

raising profile of

AE.

Medium:

Infonet (until

September

2011) and

some national

websites

provide this

information.

Medium: useful

– to some

extent - for all

identified target

groups.

Medium:

identifying what

news is most

interesting to

the audience is

challenging.

Low: Low start-

up and

technical costs.

RSS feed

should be

integrated (this

is not costly).

Low: Infonet’s

experience

suggests that

system of

reporters can

provide this at

low cost.




61


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Calendar of

events

High: potential

to improve

quality and

efficiency of

education and

training through

facilitating

mobility of staff,

policy makers

and other

stakeholders.

Medium:

information

provided

through other

websites –

however it is

spread between

too many

locations.

High: useful to

all identified

target groups;

most useful

feature to

learning

providers in

survey.

Medium:

challenging to

overcome risk

of providing too

much or too

little

information.

Low: Low set-

up and

technical costs

(requires

effective

system of

search/tag; ical

facility

incorporated).

Medium: some

coordination

costs; some

moderation

costs required if

users are

allowed to

upload/suggest

own events.

Learning

opportunities

for staff in

European

countries

High: potential

improvement

quality and

capacity of

adult learning

sector

workforce

leading to

improvements

in quality and

efficiency.

Medium:

Comenius/Grun

dtvig Training

Database and

NAs provide

limited

information

already – this is

difficult to

navigate at the

moment.

High: most

useful to

learning

providers (as

identified in

survey).

Medium:

EPALE would

raise visibility /

awareness of

opportunities

(although some

information

already

presented

elsewhere)

Low: Low set-

up and

technical costs

(design needs

to improve on

current Training

Database)

Medium: Low

maintenance

costs; some

moderation

costs required if

users can

upload own

events; some

translation

costs.




62


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Library of

documents on

adult education

Low: no direct

contribution to

agenda or

programme;

possibility of

indirect

contribution e.g.

documents for

policymakers.

Medium: users

requiring this

information

most likely to

use internet

search engines

to identify exact

information; no

comprehensive

database

exists.

Low: of some

value but users

actively seeking

information

likely to find it

through internet

search engines.

Medium:

providing this

feature is not

challenging to

achieve.

Medium:

considerable

resources

required initially

to populate

library and

categorize, low

technical costs

(effective

search and tag

facilityrequired).

Low: some

maintenance

costs; some

management /

moderation

costs required if

users can

upload own

resources.

Catalogue of

useful links /

bookmarks on

adult education

Low: no direct

contribution to

agenda or

programme;

possibility of

indirect

contribution e.g.

documents for

policymakers.

Medium: no

comprehensive

database

currently exists;

users likely to

find required

information

through internet

search engines.

Medium:

potential value

to all target

groups.

Medium:

catalogue can

easily be

provided.

Low: some

initial start-up

costs; Low

technical costs.

Low: some

ongoing

maintenance of

links required.




63


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance


AdultLearning and“Erasmus for

All”programme


being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Good practice

on the deliveryof adult

education

High: potential

to improve thequality and

efficiency of

adult education

and lifelong

learning

system and to

adopt new and

effective

practices and

systems

High: no other

comprehensiveand definitive

source of

information

(although

national bodies

provide for

some countries

but not all)

High: most

valuable tolearning

providers.

Medium:

collectingexamples of

practice is

straightforward;

assessing what

is “best”, what


and

communicating

practice

effectively is

challenging.

Low: cost of

assembling anetwork of

experts is low;

low technical

costs (requires

effective search

and tagging

function).

Medium: most

effective if content is

provided

professionally

translated – this

is costly.




64


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Good practice

on adult

education

policy

High: potential

to contribution

to policy

dialogue and

mutual learning

and support to

open method of

coordination ;

potential to

improve

knowledgebase and

monitoring in

the AE sector

Medium:

Infonet partly

provided this

service up to

September

2011; some

information also

available

through EPEA

and other

organisations.

High: most

useful to

policymakers,

representative

organisations

and

researchers/

academics.

Medium:

reporting

practice is

straightforward;

assessing what

is “best”, what


and

communicating

practice

effectively ischallenging.

Low: Low set-

up and

technical costs

(requires

effective search

and tagging

function).

Low: Infonet’s

experience

suggests that

system of

reporters can

provide this at

low cost.

Funding and

awards

information

Medium:

should enable

learning

providers (and

potentially

teaching staff

and learners) to

access

opportunities

Medium: NAs

currently

provide this

information

effectively to

existing

network of

contacts; gap

for AE may be

higher under Erasmus for All

Medium: most

useful for

learning

providers.

Medium:

Information can

be easily

provided and

communicated;

requires

collection of

information

from EC,

national andother sources.

Low: Low start-

up and

technical costs.

RSS feed

should be

integrated (this

is not costly).

Low: collation

and

communication

of information is

easy to achieve

once the

information

sources have

been identified;

NAs currentlyprovide

information in

home

languages.




65


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Adult education

news

Low: Not

essential in

meeting

programme

aims but could

be useful in

raising profile of

AE.

Medium:

Infonet (until

September

2011) and

some national

websites

provide this

information.

Medium: useful

– to some

extent - for all

identified target

groups.

Medium:

identifying what

news is most

interesting to

the audience is

challenging.

Low: Low start-

up and

technical costs.

RSS feed

should be

integrated (this

is not costly).

Low: Infonet’s

experience

suggests that

system of

reporters can

provide this at

low cost.

Calendar of events

High: potentialto improve

quality and

efficiency of

education and

training through

facilitating

mobility of staff,

policy makers

and other

stakeholders.

Medium:information

provided

through other

websites –

however it is

spread between

too many

locations.

High: useful toall identified

target groups;

most useful

feature to

learning

providers in

survey.

Medium:challenging to

overcome risk

of providing too

much or too

little

information.

Low: Low set-up and

technical costs

(requires

effective

system of

search/tag; ical

facility

incorporated).

Medium: somecoordination

costs; some

moderation

costs required if

users are

allowed to

upload/suggest

own events.




66


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Learning

opportunities

for staff in

European

countries

High: potential

improvement

quality and

capacity of

adult learning

sector

workforce

leading to

improvements

in quality and

efficiency.

Medium:

Comenius/Grun

dtvig Training

Database and

NAs provide

limited

information

already – this is

difficult to

navigate at the

moment.

High: most

useful to

learning

providers (as

identified in

survey).

Medium:

EPALE would

raise visibility /

awareness of

opportunities

(although some

information

already

presented

elsewhere)

Low: Low set-

up and

technical costs

(design needs

to improve on

current Training

Database)

Medium: Low

maintenance

costs; some

moderation

costs required if

users can

upload own

events; some

translation

costs.

Library of

documents on

adult education

Low: no direct

contribution to

agenda or

programme;

possibility of

indirect

contribution e.g.

documents for

policymakers.

Medium: users

requiring this

information

most likely to

use internet

search engines

to identify exact

information; no

comprehensive

database

exists.

Low: of some

value but users

actively seeking

information

likely to find it

through internet

search engines.

Medium:

providing this

feature is not

challenging to

achieve.

Medium:

considerable

resources

required initially

to populate

library and

categorize, low

technical costs

(effective

search and tag

facility

required).

Low: some

maintenance

costs; some

management /

moderation

costs required if

users can

upload own

resources.




67


AdultLearning and



being filled


of user


value/fillinggap

Cost of development


maintenance

Catalogue of

useful links /

bookmarks on

adult education

Low: no direct

contribution to

agenda or

programme;

possibility of

indirect

contribution e.g.

documents for

policymakers.

Medium: no

comprehensive

database

currently exists;

users likely to

find required

information

through internet

search engines.

Medium:

potential value

to all target

groups.

Medium:

catalogue can

easily be

provided.

Low: some

initial start-up

costs; Low

technical costs.

Low: some

ongoing

maintenance of

links required.




68

As a consequence the assessment suggests that most of the features are low cost/low risk

except a library of documents. Most though would have a relatively low impact. The

exceptions are the calendar, learning opportunities for staff and the selection of goodpractice on policy and the delivery of adult education. This indicates that a website which is

not interactive will not have a significant impact though it would be easier and less costly to

develop and maintain. It also indicates that to have a greater impact the costs of maintaining

some of these features would be greater.

4.2 Assessment of functionalities

Table 4.2 below has an assessment of each of the potential functions.

It is clear that some functions could have a relatively bigger contribution to the Commission’s

future programme for adult learning. Resources for teaching and managing adult education

and on-line training should contribute to enhancing the quality of teaching and enlarging the

potential beneficiaries of resources to widen innovation in formal and non-formal learning. E-partnering tool should help to broaden the scope of partnerships and cooperation in

developing innovation and good practice if the experience of the schools tool is any guide to

inspire such activities. Functions like discussion forums and “Ask an Expert” are less likely to

have any such direct or widespread impact.

By and large none of the functions are widely available or accessible across Member States

for adult learning. But there are greater gaps in relation to some than others. For example,

there is no partner finding tool or resources for teaching and staff training except in a few

countries, nor an on-line members’ community.

Some functions could have a higher value to target groups than others. This is particularly

evident with the partner finding tool, resources and the on-line training sessions. A

discussion forum and on-line members’ community would have a low value because thebenefits are not so clear to adult learning providers and policy makers.

All of the functions can be developed to meet needs with little risk though the ability of

functions, such as the partner finding tool, resources and on-line training resources to have

an effective impact would be more challenging. These as the experience of other platforms

shows would require good design and management support to tag and moderate material,

provide translations and , in the case of the partner finding tool, a critical mass of users.

Development costs are higher than for features. Save for the discussion forum and ask an

expert they are each over €100K. Management and maintenance costs are also relatively

higher because teaching and training resources and a partner finding tool need to have

active management (moderation, dissemination and translation).

As a consequence, the assessment suggests that several of the low cost functions wouldhave lower impacts, such as the discussion forum and ask an expert. Those with the higher

impacts tend to have higher costs: partner finding tool, resources for teachers and staff

training, and training sessions/e-learning. In between are the e-partnership spaces,

resources for managers and the online members’ community which have relatively high

costs but lower impacts.




69




70

Table 4.2 Assessment of Functions

Function

Type

Contribution to

European Agenda for

Adult Learningand “Erasmusfor All”programme

Gap in

electronicinformation

being filled

Potential

value totarget

groups of user

Likeliness of

successfully achieving

value/filling gap

Cost of

development

Net co

managand

mainte

Partner

finding tool

High: key to

encouraging

cooperation and

partnerships for

innovation and

good practices,

key in enabling the

adult education

sector to engage

and participate invirtual mobility.

High: some NAs

and other large

organisations

have their own

databases but

they are out of

date and not

comprehensive.

High: most

useful to

learning

providers; also

valued by NAs

because will

make their

current roles

easier.

Medium: requires

critical mass of

organisations

signing-up to

encourage

sustained use of

tool.

Medium:

CORDIS’s

experience

suggests technical

costs may be

around €300,000;

dissemination

commitment

required (to

encourage criticalmass of users to

create profile at

early stage);

SALTO estimates

under €10,000.

Medium

mainten

modera

dissem

(active

encoura

users to

profile)

require

consideresourc




71

FunctionType

Contribution toEuropean Agenda for

Adult Learningand “Erasmus

for All”programme


being filled

Potential value totarget

groups of user


value/filling gap

Cost of development

Net comanagand

mainte

Resources

for teaching /

teachers

High: very useful

in enabling

adopting of

innovation and

good practice to

improve the quality

and efficiency of

AE education and

training; resources

on particular topics

could aid

promoting of equity, social

cohesion and

active citizenship.

High: some

material available

through national

ministries and

other national

bodies in some

countries but

provision not

comprehensive;

some material

available on

OpenEducational

Resources but

hard to find.

High: most

useful to

learning

providers.

Medium: risk that

adult learning

teachers will not

take up resources

due to lack of

language skills,

technical capacity

or time

constraints.

Medium: initial

commitment of

resources required

to collect and

categorize existing

material; cost of

translation high;

cost of subtitling

technology for

videos may be

required.

Medium

cost of t

high; so

modera

users c

own ma

and/or c

some

dissem

costs if

to be en

to post materia

Resources

for managers

High: very useful

in enabling

adopting of

innovation and

good practice to

improve the quality

and efficiency of

AE education and

training;

Medium: some

material already

available

elsewhere

through

Grundtvig

networks and, in

some countries,

through national

bodies.

High: most

useful to

learning

providers.

Medium: need to

be pitched at

appropriate level;

language and

technical capacity

may be an issue.

Medium: initial

commitment of

resources required

to collect and

categorize existing

material; cost of

translation high.

Medium

cost of t

high; so

modera

users c

own ma

and/or c

some

dissem

costs if to be en

to post

materia




72

FunctionType



for All”programme


being filled


groups of user


value/filling gap

Cost of development

Net comanagand

mainte

Resources

for staff

training

High: potential

improvement

quality and

capacity of adult

learning sector

workforce leading

to improvements in

quality and

efficiency.

High: some

provision by

national bodies

and through LLP

funded activities;

no definitive

and/or

comprehensive

source of this

material exists

currently.

High: most

useful to

learning

providers.

Medium: risk that

adult learning

teachers will not

take up resources

due to lack of

language skills,

technical capacity

or time

constraints.

Medium: initial

commitment of

resources required

to collect and

categorize existing

material; cost of

translation high.

Medium

cost of t

high; so

modera

users c

own ma

and/or c

some

dissem

costs if

to be en

to post materia

Discussion

forum

Low: may be

useful in

encouraging

cooperation about

learning providers;

unlikely to lead to

formation of new

sustainable or

strategic

partnerships.

Medium: some

opportunities

available

currently through

some LLP project

websites and

informal networks

such as

Facebook

groups.

Low: survey

responses

gave the

lowest rating

least required

feature

according to e-

survey.

Low: other

platforms’

experiences

suggest that

forums require

resources for

animation and

prior face-to-face

contact to be

effective.

Low: low technical

costs; initial

dissemination

costs required but

these are likely to

be low.

Low: re

needed

encoura

to partic

some m

costs.




73

FunctionType



for All”programme


being filled


groups of user


value/filling gap

Cost of development

Net comanagand

mainte

Online

members’

community

Medium: some

potential in

encouraging

cooperation and

partnerships for

innovation and

good practices,

potential to enable

AE sector to

engage in virtual

mobility

High: no

definitive online

community for

the sector (some

activity on

Facebook but

scattered).

Low: unclear

what benefits

participation

would bring to

users directly

(rather to the

community as

a whole).

Medium: Risk that

users will not

participate;

participation could

be promoted

through “events”,

prizes and

competitions.

Medium:

Dissemination

commitment

required (to

encourage critical

mass of users to

create profile at

early stage)

Medium

mainten

modera

dissem

(active

encoura

particip

to requi

conside

resourc

Ask an

Expert

Low: some

potential to

encourage take up

of innovative and

best practice and

improve the quality

and efficiency of

the sector.

Medium: some

advice on

available in some

countries through

national bodies

and on various

internet sites.

Medium:

potential value

to all user

groups

(however,

experts should

be targeted to

specific user

group needs)

Low: providing

this information is

not challenging to

achieve, risk that

users will not

engage with the

feature.

Low: some initial

costs to establish

network of experts;

low technical

costs.

Medium

mainten

manage

costs; s

translat

dissem

required

is to be

used.




74

FunctionType



for All”programme


being filled


groups of user


value/filling gap

Cost of development

Net comanagand

mainte

EPartnership

Space

High: key in

encouraging

cooperation and

partnerships for

innovation and

good practices,

key in enabling the

adult education

sector to engage

and participate in

virtual mobility.

Medium:

function itself

already provided

through other

sources (e.g.

Yahoo / Google

groups and or

email) – however

not tailored for

use of adult

learning

providers.

Medium: most

valuable to

learning

providers who

participate in

LLP funded

activities in the

first instance;

potential value

to learning

providers if

virtualpartnerships

are enabled.

Low: works in

schools through

eTwinning (but

dependent on

extensive network

of offline resource

such as national

support network)

however lower

technical capacity

and opportunities

in AE; will notwork

spontaneously.

Medium:

considerable

resources required

creating user-

friendly shared

space, testing it

and providing

guidance to users;

incorporating

translation

technology may

increase cost.

Medium

support

likely to

required

dissem

costs w

needed

encoura

up.




75

FunctionType



for All”programme


being filled


groups of user


value/filling gap

Cost of development

Net comanagand

mainte

Online

Training

sessions /

Elearning

Space /

Virtual

Classroom

High: potential to

encourage take up

of innovative and

best practice and

improve the quality

and efficiency of

the sector,

potential to

improve

knowledge base in

AE, useful in

enabling AE sector to participate in

virtual mobility.

Medium: some

e-training

available through

other sources

such as existing

and old

Grundtvig

projects, national

initiatives and

private providers

of CPD for adult

learning staff.

High: high

potential value

to all target

groups

(especially for

staff who

cannot commit

time and funds

to face-to-face

training).

Medium: risk of

low take-up

because of lack of

technical capacity

in the AE sector.

Medium: cost of

technical set-up

high, testing

required to ensure

e-training session

“works” for users;

investment in

automating

translation should

be considered.

Medium

costs of

develop

deliverin

training

costs of

and diss

of traini

conside




76

4.3 Assessment of languages

Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 below have an assessment of the options for language provision.

Each of the features and functions is considered against the impact on reaching the target

group intended to arrive at a rating. Generally the costs and impacts rise for each feature or

function as the number of languages increases.

It is clear that some features have a significantly lower impact if they are only available in

English than if they are available in the six major languages or 25 languages. This includes

good practice in the delivery of adult learning and information on funding and awards.

For some features there are fewer significant gains with the availability of other languages,

such as the calendar of events and for some there are fewer significant gains in having the

25 languages professionally translated, such as adult education news, because this would

introduce delays and short pieces of information would not bring large benefits if translated.

With the functions too, it is clear that the availability of information in more languages will

increase impacts because it will enable resources to be shared and used across language

barriers. This is clear from the survey and the experience of other platforms; but it will be

costly.

With functions such as a discussion forum or ask an expert, English would be more practical.

Table 4.3 Assessment of Language Options - Features

Feature English only Six MajorLanguages (EN,FR, DE, ES, PL,

IT)

25 Languages: AutomatedMachine

Translation

25 Languages:ProfessionalTranslation

Good practice

on the delivery

of adult

education

Low: target audience

(learning providers)

unlikely to benefit

because of nature of content (complex,

nuanced, lengthy

text).

Medium: large

share of learning

providers able to use

feature – likely tomiss many who only

speak smaller

languages.

Medium: content

meaning may be lost

by machine translation

reducing usefulness.

High: identified to be

the most important

feature to have in own

language in the survey;relatively easy to

arrange translation of

coherent sections of

text.

Good practice

on adult

education

policy

Medium: target

audience (policy

makers, academics,

researchers) likely to

be able to use feature.

High: likely to be

effectively used by

large majority of

target audience.

Medium: content

meaning may be lost

by machine translation

reducing potential use

of feature.

High: complete

coverage of potential

audience; relatively

easy to arrange

translation of coherent

sections of text.

Funding and

awards

information

Low: majority of target

audience (learning

providers) unlikely tobenefit because of

nature of content

(complex, nuanced,

detail text).

Medium: target

audiences in smaller

countries (learningproviders) unlikely to

benefit; translations

already likely to be

provided by NAs.

Medium: content

meaning (complexity,

details) may be lost bymachine translation

reducing usefulness.

High: information in

own language rated

highly in survey;translations already

available through NAs.

Adult education

news

Medium: short,

ephemeral information

in English likely to be

adequate for majority

of target audience.

Medium: greater

coverage of target

audience; added

complexity of

arranging

translations.

High: short,


– meaning likely to be

adequately translated

for the purpose.

Medium: complete

coverage for user

group; length of time

required to arrange

translations may mean

that news becomes old

news.




77

Calendar of

events

Medium: short,


– target audience

likely to be able to

understand broad

meaning and useinformation.

High: greater

coverage of target

audience; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and managetranslation of very

short pieces of text.

High: short,


– meaning likely to be

adequately translated

for the purpose; needs

to be incorporated inthe design of feature.

Medium: complete

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of very shortpieces of text.

Learning

opportunities

for staff in

European

countries

Medium: most

opportunities likely to

require knowledge of

other language,

usually EN.

High: most

opportunities likely

to require knowledge

of other language;

likely to meet needs

of target audience.

High: automated

translation likely to

enhance usage by

target group.

High: complete

coverage; complexity of

management system

depends on format of

information.

Library of

documents on

adult education

Medium: Documents

provided in English or

original language in

which they are written – complex content

may not be useful to

target audience.

Medium: majority of

users likely to use

feature – high costs

of translating alldocuments).

Medium: content


details) may be lost by

machine translationreducing usefulness –

although mother

tongue readers should

be able to ascertain

key points of text.

Medium: complete

coverage; cost and

complexity of

translating alldocuments likely to be

very costly.

Summary of

document and

link to

document in

original

language

(Library of

documents)

Medium: Although

summary will be more

accessible than full-

document it is likely

that many users will

not be able to access

complex content.

Requires resources toproduce summary.

High: Majority of

users likely to use

feature – requires

resource to read

document and

produce summary.

Medium: content



machine translation

reducing usefulness –

although mother


be able to ascertainkey points of text. Still

requires resources to

produce summary.

High: lower cost than

providing translation of

entire document, likely

to be sufficient for most

users. Requires

resource to produce

summary.

Catalogue of

useful links /

bookmarks on

adult education

Medium: majority of

users should be able

to access bookmarks

(which will not be

translated in all

languages).

High: Only website

infrastructure

requires translating,

this is easy to

achieve.

High: Only website

infrastructure requires

translating, this is

easy to achieve.

High: Only website

infrastructure requires

translating, this is easy

to achieve.

Table 4.4 Assessment of Language Options - Functions

Function English only Six MajorLanguages (EN,

FR, DE, ES, PL,IT)

25 Languages: Automated

MachineTranslation

25 Languages:Professional

Translation

Partner finding

tool

Medium: survey users

indicate that this is

function this most

useful in their own

language; however

nature of content

(short text) should

allow most users to

navigate and use tosome extent.

Low: greater

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of very

short pieces of text /

dynamic content.

High: rated as most

important function to

be provided in own

language in survey,

automated translation

could render meaning

of short text useful for

the purpose of the

jobs; needs to beincorporated into

design of tool.

Medium: complete

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of very short

pieces of text.




78

Function English only Six MajorLanguages (EN,FR, DE, ES, PL,

IT)


Translation


Resources for teaching /

teachers

Medium: Resourcesprovided in English or


which they are written

– complex content


target audience.

Medium: majority of users likely to use


of translating all

resources.

High: Summary of

resources offered in

6 languages (Could

be further enhanced

with request for

translations as

offered by Scientix).

Medium: contentmeaning (complexity,


machine translation


although mother



key points of text.

Medium: completecoverage; cost and

complexity of

translating all

resources likely to be

very costly.

Medium: summary of

resources is provided

in all languages - lower

cost of translation but

requires someone to

produce summary.

(Could be further

enhanced with request

for translations asoffered by Scientix).

Resources for

managers

Medium: Resources

provided in English or



– complex content


target audience.

Medium: majority of

users likely to use


of translating all

resources.

Medium: content



machine translation


although mother



key points of text.

Medium: complete

coverage; cost and

complexity of

translating all


very costly.

Resources for

staff training

Medium: Resources

provided in English or original language in


– complex content


target audience.

Medium: majority of

users likely to usefeature – high costs

of translating all

resources.

Medium: content

meaning (complexity,details) may be lost by

machine translation


although mother



key points of text.

Medium: complete

coverage; cost andcomplexity of

translating all


very costly.

Discussion

forum

High: identified as

least helpful function

to be provided in own

language;

multilingualism on

forums may stiflediscussion rather than

promote it and create

“language” silos.

Low: greater

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of veryshort pieces of text /

dynamic content.

Medium: this option

may enhance

experience for those

with weaker language

skills. Unclear

whether technologyfor this is available /

works.

Low: complete

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of very shortpieces of text / dynamic

content.

Online

members’

community

High: multilingualism

may stifle interactions

rather than promote

them and create

“language” silos.

Low: greater

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of very

short pieces of text /

dynamic content.

Medium: this option

may enhance

experience for those


skills. Unclear

whether technology

for this is available /

works.

Low: complete

coverage; may be

complicated and

cumbersome to

arrange and manage

translation of very short

pieces of text / dynamic

content.




79

Function English only Six MajorLanguages (EN,FR, DE, ES, PL,

IT)


Translation


Ask an Expert Medium: not identifiedas a priority to be

provided in own

language in survey;

majority of users

should be able to

access information.

High: greater shareof users will be able

to access

information;

relatively easy to

arrange translation.

High: experienceenhanced by provision

of this option; allows

speakers of less

popular languages to

access information.

High: completecoverage; relatively

easy to arrange

translation.

EPartnership

Space and

Elearning

Space:

Website

architecture

only

Medium: majority of

potential

users/learners likely to

communicate in

English – should meet

needs of most users.

High: helpful to

encourage use of

tools and not difficult

to achieve.

Low: looks

unprofessional / cost

savings do not out

way benefits.

High: translation of

function architecture

only (one off rather

than ongoing cost):

helpful to encourage

use of tool and not

difficult to achieve.EPartnership

Space: partner-

generated

content only

Not applicable –

users generate own

content in language of

their choice

Low: translation of

all user generated

content is too

complex and

expensive.

Medium: capacity

within tool for

automated translation

may make e-

partnerships easier

and encourage use.

Low: translation of all

user generated content

is too complex and

expensive.

Online Training

sessions /

Elearning

Space / Virtual

Classroom:

Delivery of

Training only

Medium: only 14%

survey respondents

would participate in e-

training only in their

own language – 58%

would definitely

participate even if theyare only in English.

This option should

meet need of majority

of users.

Low: delivery of

training in six/many

languages

simultaneously: very

complex and

expensive to

achieve.

Medium: facility to

translate documents

and text (e.g.

questions by other

learners) in own

language may

enhance learningexperience for those


skills. Unclear

whether technology

for this is available /

works.

Low: delivery of

training in all languages

simultaneously: very

complex and expensive

to achieve.

As a consequence, the assessment suggests that for some functions to be used by their

intended users across Member States higher cost options need to be considered. This is

particularly the case with information on: good practice on adult education delivery and

policy; funding opportunities; and learning opportunities for staff. For some functions and

features, such as the library of documents and the selection of resources, there is a case for

investing in translation of the website architecture and in providing summaries of these in alllanguages. The usefulness of these could be further enhanced by offering a system of on-

demand translation (as offered by Scientix). Machine translation provides the best option for

other functions (such as the partner finding tool and the calendar).

4.4 Key messages

The assessment indicates that EPALE could significantly contribute to some of the key aims

of the adult learning agenda and the proposed Erasmus for All programme, especially to

improve the quality and extent of cooperation, widen the beneficiaries of resources produced

and to strengthen the sector by supporting innovative better quality teaching. It could also

drive transferring knowledge and expertise in the adult education field for both teaching and

raising participation and achievement both by enhancing and by expanding the opportunities

for exchanges and sharing for mutual learning and collaboration.

Principally because some of the features and functions could be expected to have a greater

impact than others and make a more significant contribution to the aims and targets of the




80

adult learning agenda and the Commission’s future programme, the highest priorities should

be:

▪ Good practice on adult education policy;

▪ Partner finding tool;

▪ Resources for teaching / teachers;▪ Resources for staff training;

▪ Calendar of events;

▪ Learning opportunities for staff; and

▪ On-line training / e-learning space.

The following would only be secondary priorities:

▪ Good practice on delivering adult education;

▪ Resources for managers;

▪ Catalogue of useful links;

▪ Funding and awards information;

▪

On-line members community; and▪ E-partnership space.

And the following should not necessarily be considered for EPALE: adult education news,

library of documents, discussion forum, and Ask an Expert, unless they provided value to

any of the highest priority features and functions by increasing traffic to the platform or

providing resources to users.

The highest priority features and functions would benefit from the following arrangements for

languages:

▪ Professional translation in 25 languages:

– Good practice on adult education policy

– Learning opportunities for staff

– Summaries of resources for teaching and staff training▪ Machine translation:

– Partner finding tool

– Calendar of events

▪ English only:

– On-line training events / e-learning space.




81

5 Assessment of approaches

In this chapter there is a systematic assessment of the approaches for development and

management and the choices about dissemination approaches for establishing an effective

EPALE drawing on the interviews of those responsible for other similar platforms.

5.1 Development and management

By and large platforms are developed and managed by third parties though a few have in

house staff who undertake more than contract management such as monitoring and

appraising contractors’ work. These include staff to undertake some promotion and

creation/updating of information.

Development and management activities generally fall into one of three groups. These are

described below though these would vary depending on the features and functions selected

for EPALE.

Development management and maintenance (DMM):

▪ Design of website layout (at set up stage);

▪ Establish and maintain navigation;

▪ Check usability and use; seek user feedback;

▪ Any registration service

▪ Create and upload website content;

▪ Update redundant content;

▪ Collation and categorisation of resources and uploading onto database with search

function;

▪ Manage partner-finding tool database;

▪ Manage delivery of webinars/online training (delivery likely to be provided by external

contractors);

▪ Maintain calendar of events and search function;

▪ Promotion of website through web advertising or links to similar websites;

▪ Production of newsletter;

▪ Manage social media presence (e.g. Facebook group or Twitter account);

▪ Manage and moderating forums and other user-generated content;

▪ Support users with technical problems remotely (though email or feedback forms) and

provide help desk;

▪ User training and guidance;

▪ Manage network of translators and uploading translated content (if multi-lingualism is

supported).

Resource support and development (RSD):

▪ In-house knowledge/expertise in education and adult education and/or virtual

partnerships;

▪ Production of publications and reports (e.g. research on a specific theme such as

prisoner education);

▪ Production of specialized newsletters (focusing on particular communities within adult

education, e.g. basic skills, prisons, environment etc)

▪ Identification and production of educational and partnership material (e.g. lesson plans,

teaching materials for virtual cooperation between adult education groups);

▪ Assessing good and best practice examples, producing case studies, assessing learning

tools;

▪ Organisation of European events (e.g. report launches, conferences) or other

dissemination and engagement activities (e.g European/worldwide competitions);▪ Organisation of training (both webinars and offline), including developing training

content;




82

▪ Promotion of website through participation in stakeholders’ conferences and other

events; campaigns.

Network support (NS):

▪ Local presence (in each country or in regions) by establishing a physical office or

creating a National Agency (awarded through an open procurement process);

▪ Offer support to users through the provision of a helpline;

▪ Design and delivery of face-to-face training to potential users on how to access the

website;

▪ Production of locally-relevant publications (e.g. local newsletter, reports);

▪ Organise local events (e.g. conferences) or other dissemination/engagement activities

(e.g. competitions for the best shared space);

▪ Production of locally-relevant content for the website (e.g. policy update from

country/region, interviews with national stakeholders, case studies from local practice,

uploading of local events on central calendar, maintenance of local page on website);

▪ Promotion of website and its activities through participation in local events, press

releases and media engagement;▪ Promotion of website through engaging with local social media (e.g. posts on national

group Facebook page);

▪ Translation activities.

As a consequence the options are more about the scale of activity than the division of

activities between client and contractor and there are three broad options which are used by

platforms based on the groups of activities described above; though there are choices then

about the extent that single or several contractors are used. The broad options are:

Development, management and maintenance (DMM): this could be a single central

contractor with the expectation that the platform’s features and functions are operational and

effective. This would require administration, such as registering users, mediating discussion

forums and quality assuring downloadable materials, the scope and scale of which woulddepend on the features and functions selected and the extent of administration required.

DMM and resource support and development (RSD): this adds responsibility for

developing and organising activities outside the platform which would also contribute to the

platform’s broad objectives and provide material for the website’s users. This could include

organising events which would provide new materials for non-attendees or encourage new

users after the event, and/or organising competitions and searches for materials to be

available for downloading, for example. This can make up for the limited contribution which

users could be reasonably expected to make.

DMM, RSD and network support (NS): this adds responsibility for network support which

would supplement centralised DMM and RSD probably with a presence in each Member

State. This could be training in use, translation, delegated quality assurance, and obtaining

new materials. This could ensure wider participation across Member States and ensuredissemination and support was targeted to meet different Member States’ needs.

In all options dissemination activities can be included in the requirements; indeed NS is

mainly about dissemination activities.

A broad assessment of each option is set out in Table 5.1 below. Because the cost of the

options is plainly very different and the scope of each option depends on the choices of

content, functions and dissemination activities, the assessment focuses on how each option

would affect the effective development and delivery of these.

In broad terms:

▪ DMM would develop operational features and functions. Provided that development is

enhanced to cover a range of management and administration activities, it should ensurethat potential features and functions go some way to meet potential users’ needs (user

support, highlighting popular good practice downloads, coordination of forums and

calendars), the platform is promoted to attract users, and some material is translated.




83

▪ RSD could significantly enhance the effectiveness and impact of many of the features

and functions as well as the extent of dissemination and support the language availability

needed by some functions. This is needed to:

– Review and moderate submitted material;

– Identify/classify material, such as resources and good practice;

– Produce newsletters, especially targeted and more sophisticated dissemination

tools;

– Provide e-training;

– Create material and encourage users with off-line activities; and

– Quality assure translated material

NS could provide a further enhancement with more focused dissemination and active

identification, collection and translation of resources.

As a consequence, the assessment suggests that most of the desired features and many of

the functions for EPALE can be delivered through the DMM option. An RSD allows for the

creation, moderation and production of new material and events so that the website can

evolve to offer a core “service” rather than function as a depository of material and

information created elsewhere. This has the potential of attracting new users to the site; aswell as generating return traffic from existing users. This is vital for many of the potential

functions. The addition of NS would allow EPALE to directly engage with the target audience

in their own country and in their own language and therefore increase the likelihood of

“community” functions being taken up. This would not be needed until the platform is

established.




85

Broadoptions

Achievement of effectivefeatures

Achievement of effectivefunctions

Achievement of effective dissem

DMM,

RSD and

NS

Ability to provide “content” and

encourage users to provide

content for all features from themember state (e.g. production of

case studies, production of

summary of news and policy

developments, uploading of events

onto EPALE calendar).

Ability to tailor resources to local

needs.

Ability to organise and deliver on-lineand off-line events and training

activities.

Ability to animate, encourage and

support adult education

organisations on the ground to use

functions such as online member

community.

Enhanced dissemination activities (a

above) by enabling these to be spec

targeted to the requirements of the aeducation sectors in the member sta

Through NS, EPALE could raise awa

of its activities undertake local adver

participate in events organised in me

states and join localised Facebook g

More likely to achieve the engageme

EPALE of those adult education

organisations and staff that are not c

engaged in LLP-funded activities thro

NAs.




86

5.2 Dissemination

Active management is as important as active dissemination in encouraging larger volumes of

users and active users who will participate in interactive functions. For EPALE, active

dissemination could include providing exclusive content or functionality, SEO and links to

other platforms, targeted paid advertising, targeted e-newsletters and RSS feeds, rewards

and quality marks, and social media links.

In Table 5.2 below each of these is considered against the potential scale of use by target

users and costs using a High/Medium/Low rating.

It shows that dissemination activities are necessary to increase traffic and use of potential

features and functions. Exclusive content would direct users to EPALE and potentially attract

users to other content and functions. E-newsletters can achieve similar effects though it

helps if they are targeted and have a known on-line market. SEO should not be neglected

because many people use a search engine not a site search.

Some activities would have lower impacts but could be significant supplementary

dissemination activities, such as RSS feeds, other social media and rewards. The costs of

rewards and quality marks would be relatively higher than other dissemination activities with

lower returns though they might be useful for specific functions such as teaching resources.

Table 5.2 Assessment of Dissemination Activities

Activity Scale of PotentialTraffic / Hits

Costs Overallassessment

(Scale andinverse of costs)

PotentialEPALE activity

Exclusive

content or

functionality

High: routing every

Grundtvig applicant

through EPALE would

create guaranteedaudience.

Low: requires simple

webpage to host

downloadable forms –

some additional costsin

High Application forms

(downloadable or

online)

Partner-finding tool

SEO High: many interviewees

and survey respondents

reported using search

engines to find what they

need. SEO would harness

search result clicks.

Low: has become

standard practice in

developing websites;

websites reviewed do

not report high costs.

High Whole website

Many languages

Link-ups

with other

websites /

activities

Medium: raises

awareness amongst

those already active in

European projects.

Low: requires

investment in initial

link-up; no technology

requirements.

Medium Whole website

Targeted

(paid)

advertising

Unknown: Effectivenessof Google AdWords or

other paid online

advertising for target

group not known.

Low: Google AdWords allows

setting of maximum

budget so costs can

be kept under control.

Unknown Whole websiteMany languages

Targeted e-

newsletters

High: potential users and

other websites report that

this is an effective way of

disseminating information

and generating returning

traffic.

Low: requires editor /

editorial teams.

High Whole website

Different

(thematic) sections

of the website




87

Activity Scale of PotentialTraffic / Hits

Costs Overallassessment(Scale and

inverse of costs)

PotentialEPALE activity

RSS feeds Medium: used by some

potential users / some

websites report that it is

effective

Low: technology itself

is not costly – requires

uploading of

(interesting)

syndicated content.

Medium News and Articles

Funding and

Awards Updates

Reports

(potentially)

Blogs (potentially)

Rewards Medium: other websites

report that these are

effective in encouraging

participation among

similar target user groups.

Medium: partly

incorporated in

development cost of

online members’

community; requires

testing of reward

system

Low Online Members’

Community

Quality

marks

Medium: other websites

report that these provide

useful guidance to users

Medium: requires

either internal team or

panel of experts to

judge / assess

contributions.

Low Resources

uploaded by users

Virtual

Partnerships and

their products

Social media Medium: used by some

potential users; used by

similar websites with

mixed results; risk of

diverting hits away from

EPALE to other website.

Low: requires team

member to be

responsible for social

media strategy.

Medium Events

Online Training

News

Funding and

Awards updates

As a consequence this assessment suggests that creating a source of exclusive content,SEO and targeted newsletters are likely to be the most effective methods in terms of

potential to attract visitors to the site and low costs. Most dissemination activities suggested

do not carry high costs in themselves, however many rely on one or two staff members in a

RSD function contributing to this activity for a few days every month.

5.3 Key messages

The assessment suggests that most of the desired features and many of the functions for

EPALE can be delivered through the DMM option. An RSD allows for the creation,

moderation and production of new material and events so that the website can evolve to

offer a core “service” rather than function as a depository of material and information created

elsewhere. This has the potential of attracting new users to the site; as well as generating

return traffic from existing users which would be necessary for the platform to ensure acritical mass of users. The addition of NS would allow EPALE to directly engage with the

target audience in their own country and in their own language and therefore increase the

likelihood of “community” functions being taken up. Creating a source of exclusive content,

SEO and targeted e-newsletters are likely to be the most effective ways of attracting visitors

to the site at relatively low cost.

In relation to the priorities for EPALE and language provision suggested in the conclusions to

chapter 4 EPALE would require DMM and RSD in the first instance to create an adult

education learning community and ensure the functions were effectively used and met users’

needs. A RSD would also ensure that dissemination could include targeted e-newsletters

which should be one of the priorities for dissemination. NS would be a necessary

enhancement in some Member States to promote and enable use of resources and a partner

finding tool.




88

6 Conclusions

The Commission expected the study to:

▪ Identify the most useful features and functionalities of EPALE;

▪ Identify the costs and benefits of such features and functionalities;

▪ Consider the models for providing EPALE and associated costs;

▪ Consider the approaches to disseminating information about EPALE; and

▪ Provide estimates of the potential costs to establish, promote and maintain EPALE.

The material set out in chapters 2 to 5 identify the most useful features and functions and the

cost benefits of each as well as the approaches to dissemination and management and

maintenance and the relative costs of these. In this final chapter the models for providing

EPALE are set out and considered.

In this chapter there is therefore a consideration of the key findings in chapters 2 and 3

against the Commission’s initial expectations of EPALE and the agenda for adult learning, as

well as the proposed programme of Erasmus for All. This is drawn together to make the case

for an EPALE. The findings of chapters 4 and 5 are then drawn on to set out some broad

options for EPALE with indications of costs over the next few years and the likely

contributions they can make to the Commission’s agenda for adult learning.

6.1 What is the case for EPALE

At the outset it was considered likely that EPALE could:

Support the process of building a European adult learning community by providing good

quality information about policy and practice and learning products from the range of

providers of non-vocational adult education;

Enhance and speed up the process of building closer cooperation, networking and

exchanges of information and people that currently largely take place through workshops

and events;

Capitalize on the results of Grundtvig projects, products and activities and those funded

by Member States by disseminating them more widely, in particular evidence of best

practice to address specific problems in adult learning; and

Support the process for developing as well as implementing European adult learning

policies.

It is clear that it could play a key role in transferring innovative and well tested practices in

teaching and training in adult learning to strengthen the adult learning sector across Europe

and create a wider learning community for mutual benefits. It could provide a sustainablenetwork for dissemination and the exploitation of knowledge and understanding to a much

wider range of beneficiaries. It would be feasible to establish the platform since the features

and functions have been developed elsewhere and it is evident that learning can be drawn

on to ensure they are developed to meet the adult learning community’s needs.

Table 6.1 below adapts a PEST analysis to summarise the findings which support the case.




89

Table 6.1 The case for EPALE

Policy relevance Economically effective

The Agenda for Adult Learning includes raising

the quality of teaching and learning in adult

education; increasing the participation of adultsin learning

Erasmus for All could expect an IT support

platform to provide opportunities for peer learning

exchange, training and open resources, and

enlarging the group of beneficiaries of partner

activities and learning events

Opportunity to spread resources and practice to

less developed adult education providers to

increase availability of innovative teaching and

ways to increase participation in adult learning

especially for the low skilled and older people

Provides for open educational resources

Functions such as downloadable resources and

shared space for e-partners attract users who

would otherwise not participate in sharing andusing new materials because of the cost

New resources obtained by practitioners and

policy makers at less cost than developing them

themselves

Tools to enable cooperation and sharing provide

‘virtual mobility’ at low cost

Opportunity to exploit the legacy of resources

and materials from Grundtvig and other

programmes

Learning available about the development of

tools by other platforms with features and

functions planned for EPALE

Social benefits Technically feasible

Very high proportions of potential beneficiaries

believe they would use features and functions

Recognition by many potential beneficiaries that

it could address needs for training and better

teaching materials

Gaps in current electronic resources for adult

learning which it could fill, especially for teachingresources

Difficulties with current resources to retrieve

good practice and legacy materials

Similar platforms are operational and have

similar features and functions

Lessons can be learned from the experience of

other platforms about what works

Language translation can be carried out for

features and functions that would benefit from

being multi-lingual

As a consequence the development of a platform should be supported because it:

▪ Directly contributes to fulfilling many of the ambitions of the Agenda for Adult Learning;

▪ Fills a gap in what is generally available to increase the knowledge, understanding, skills

and competencies of adult learning providers;

▪ This is recognised by the majority of potential users;

▪ Provides cost effective means to increase sharing and use of information and resources;

▪ Could create a learning community across Europe for adult learning managers and

practitioners in particular with the remit to transfer and share resources which could

raise the quality of teaching, enhance participation, and encourage effective investment

in adult learning; and

▪ It is not a high risk in terms of technical requirements.

6.2 What are the broad options

The broad options are more about different scales of development than mutually exclusive

choices between different features and functions because the assessment points to features

and functions which should be a greater priority than others. The features and functions tobe developed in turn have implications for the management and maintenance arrangements

necessary as well as the dissemination and language requirements.




90

Table 6.2 below therefore sets out the requirements and estimated costs for three scenarios.

The first focuses on the highest priority features and functions, the second a wider range of

higher priority features and functions; the third brings in some which are a lesser priority.

In grouping the package of features and functions in each option, key considerations have

been: Providing content which will provide potential users a reason to visit the website;

Reflecting on the need to provide resources and partnering opportunities when the

Grundtvig programme comes to an end in 2014;

Reflecting on the assessments in chapter 4 which highlighted the features and functions

that were the highest priority;

Considering the views of beneficiaries and other platform owners about the features and

functions most likely to make a difference, contribute to the agenda for adult learning,

and fill a gap in what is available; and

Building a critical mass of users to enable a partner finding tool to be useful.

As a consequence the first scenario groups the features and functions most likely to

contribute to the planned programme for adult learning and have an impact on its key aims.

The associated management and maintenance, dissemination and languages proposals for

each option reflect:

The degree of need for active management and dissemination;

The limited extent users are likely to be active participants and the wish to exploit

resources and materials that already exist;

The indication that multi-lingualism (25 languages) will encourage the use of shared

resources for teaching and training; and

The criticality of raising awareness and generating traffic if the e-partner finding tool is to

draw in users across the Member States.

Additionally, we assumed that the website would:

▪ Be built using a CMS which can support content in many languages;

▪ Comply with at least the A level WAI accessibility standard but aim for Triple “A”

compliance;

▪ Be suitably coded so that it can be accessible on a range of devices;

▪ Have effective security and personal data safety provisions in place; and

▪ Include a “how to” section which would offer step-by-step guidance to users on how they

can participate in the various tools.There are opportunities for collaboration with existing websites and their functions which we

have not included in our assumptions. For example, instead of creating a new database of

learning resources EPALE may wish to engage in a partnership with LRE or with Open

Education Resources31

so that adult education material is uploaded onto their existing

database. This may result in cost savings and offer the possibility of a larger, worldwide

audience for the material. However, it might also mean that adult education material is “lost”

on these larger databases among the large number of other resources that are available32

.

As a consequence the estimated costs are based around the costs of other platforms with

adjustments to take account of the scale of EPALE proposed compared to these. This is not

31 http://www.oercommons.org

32For example, Open Education Resources filters material in its database by post-secondary grade which covers

more than adult learning.








91

an exact approach to costing but should indicate the relative scale of different scenarios and

their components.

It should also be noted that:

▪ Some of the annual costs (2014 onwards) could start before the launch of the platform;

for example the National Support network should be established before the website is

launched;

▪ There will be contract management costs falling on the Commission as well as a

considerable cost to lead and support development in the first two years. The former

have not been estimated; and

▪ Staffing estimates for RSD and NS have led the costing.

In considering the scenarios the Commission should balance costs against budget and what

package of features and functions will achieve its ambitions from 2014 onwards. The highest

priority scenario includes features and functions which should have the biggest impact on the

aims of the Agenda for Adult Learning. Other platforms suggest that the creation of EPALE

can be achieved by 2014.

6.3 Way ahead

Once the Commission has considered the business case made for EPALE and the features

and functions for development in the first stage if it is to go ahead, the Commission should

consider drawing on the lessons of other platforms particularly their experience in developing

and delivering similar features and functions and the challenges that have arisen in making

them effective some of which are drawn out in section 3.1. It should also make decisions

about the related packages of management and maintenance, dissemination and languages

as set out in the scenarios above and whether any opportunities for collaboration should be

explored.




92

Table 6.2 Scenarios for Development

Package of features andfunctions

Languagerequirements

Disseminationrequirements

Management andsupportrequirements

Costs 1 July 2012to 31 December2013

Aa

Highest priority Good practice on

AE delivery

Good practice on

AE policy

Learning

Opportunities for

staff

Partner-finding

tool / Online

Member

Community

(integrated)

Resources for

teachers/teaching

Resources for

staff training

Calendar

25 languages for

website

architecture

(including

architecture

functions)

25 languages

professional

translation for

good practice on

delivery and

resources for

teaching / staff

training

At least 6

languages for

good practice on

policy

Newsletter

Social

bookmarking

SEO

RSS feed

(calendar +

learning

opportunities)

Networks and

partners

Reward systems

through online

member

community

DMM + RSD + NS

is the most

effective option

DMM only could

provide these

activities but

probably could not

provide

assessment of

good practice

Network of

translators in 25

languages a

necessity

Website

architecture:

€150k to €500k

depending on cost

of partner tool /

community (team

of 3-10 staff)

Development of

content:

€50k (basic

upload of material

collected) to

€200k

(categorisation

and assessment)

(team of 1-4 staff)

Testing: panel of

potential users

(est. €10-20k for

arranging

managing

feedback process)

(staff included in

above + potentialuser time)

Significant

Commission staff

team at set-up

stage,

W

(D

€

s

li

S

p

o

€

N

p

o

C

re

m

s

s

w

d

m

in




93






Aa

procurement,

deciding onlayout, content etc

(team of 2-3 part-

time staff)

High and highest

priority

As above plus:

Funding and

Awards

Resources for

Managers

Online training

As above plus:

At least 6

languages for

resources for

managers

English-only for

training (plus

automatedtranslation with

virtual classroom

environment if

possible)

As above plus:

RSS feed (funding

& new training)

(Real life

dissemination

events if NS is

established)

DMM + NS +

more substantial

RSD would be the

most effective

option to deliver

online training

As above plus:

Cost of Online

Training / VLE /

Moodle licence

Cost of

developing initial

training offer

(team of 2 staff)

W

(D

€

s

li

L

p

o

€

N

p

o

C

re

m

s

s

w

d

m

in

Medium, high and

highest priority

As above plus:

AE News

As above plus:

Summary of items

in library in 25

Real-life training

on “how to use”

partnership space

(as offered by

DMM + RSD +

NS: would be the

most effective

option in order to

Cost of

developing

epartnership

space (team of 1

C

to

€

n




94






Aa

Catalogue of links

Library of

documents

Epartnership

Space

languages

Automated

translation (if

possible) for

Epartnership

space

eTwinning.net) improve

participation ininteractive

features across

countries

– 2 staff)

Cost of coding

additional

database for

library of

documents (team

of two staff)

m

pe

s

tr

b




95

Annex 1 Glossary of Technical Terms

Accessibility: Accessibility in the context of a Web site is the degree to which that Web site is usable

by people with disabilities.

Blog: short for web log, a personal journal published on the web consisting of discrete entries (called“posts) typically displayed in reverse chronological order so that the most recent post appears first.

Brute force attack: also known as exhaustive key search, is the strategy of systematically checking

all possible keys until the correct key is found to enter an encryption system.

CAPTCHA: part of a web form that attempts to ensure that the person filling out the form is indeed a

person, and not a computer. The goal of a CAPTCHA is to reduce the amount of spam received. The

term CAPTCHA is trademarked by Carnegie Mellon University and stands for Completely Automated

Public Turing test to Tell Computers and Humans Apart.

Chat bar: tool bar where web users can engage in instant text-based communication.

ColdFusion: a website application for rapid development and maintenance most often used for data

driven sites; can handle SMS and instant messaging.

Content Management System (CMS): A tool for managing content, usually on a Web site, that

separates the design, interactivity, and content from one another to make it easier for content authors

to provide content.

Cookies: A cookie on the web is a line of text that is saved to a computer's hard drive that can be

accessed and written by websites.

Cross-site scripting (XSS): A type of computer security vulnerability typically found in Web

applications that enables attackers to inject client-side script into Web pages viewed by other users.

CPD: Continuing professional development, learning by which people maintain their knowledge and

skills related to their professional lives.

Denial of service attack: An attempt to make a computer or network resource unavailable to itsintended users.

Documentum: is content management system, which allows a virtually endless repository of

documents to be build. It can be used to create a website. It is used by large companies and

organisations as content can be shared across the organisation easily.

Drupal: a free software package that allows easy organisation, management and publication of web

content. It is maintained and developed by a community of users and requires no programming skills;

some user concerns about usability and backward compatibility.

eLearning Space: page and functions on a website that allows user to participate in eLearning.

Google Adwords: words specified on the Google Advertising service which lead to the generation of

targeted advertisements on a wide range of websitesInstant message: real time direct text-based chatting communication between two or more people on

personal computers or other devices.

Intrusion testing: Also know as penetration or pen testing, a method of evaluating the security of a

computer system or network by simulating an attack from malicious outsiders (who do not have an

authorized means of accessing the organization's systems) and malicious insiders (who have some

level of authorized access).

IP address: The numerical designation of a computer attached to the Internet.

Java Server Faces (JSF): a web development application designed to simplify the development and

integration of web-based user interfaces.

Liferay: a free and open source portal written in Java to power websites; the portal enables users toset up website features.

Microsite: individual web page or a small cluster (around 1 to 7) of pages which are meant to function

as a discreet entity within an existing website or to complement an offline activity.




96

Moodle: a type of VLE (see below).

Open source software: is computer software that is available in source code form, the source code

and certain other rights normally reserved for copyright holders are provided under a free software

license that permits users to study, change, improve and at times also to distribute the software.

Personal Dashboard: Web page that displays key information about every function of the websitewhere the user has participated;

RSS (Really Simple Syndication) feed: Content from one website produced on another website, It

allows readers of the website to stay informed easily about changes on that website because the

information is collected in a standard format and is readable by many different types of RSS tools and

RSS readers.

Search Engine Optimisation (SEO): the process of improving the visibility of a website or a web

page in search engines via the "natural" or un- search results.

Social bookmarking: A method for Internet users to organize, store, manage and search for

bookmarks of resources online.

Spam bot: An automated computer program designed to assist in the sending of spam. Spam botsusually create fake accounts and send spam using them, although it would be obvious that a spam bot

is sending it. Some spam bots, however, can crack passwords and send spam using other people's

accounts.

SQL injections: a form of attack to the security of a website by inputting code in a web form to get a

badly designed website to perform operations on the database (often to dump the database content to

the attacker) other than the usual operations as intended by the designer.

Tag cloud: Also known as word cloud or weighted list is a visual representation for text data, typically

used to depict keyword metadata (tags) on websites, or to visualize free form text.

Virtual Learning Environment (VLE): an education system based on the Web that models

conventional real-world education by integrating a set of equivalent virtual concepts for tests,

homework, classes, classrooms, and the like, and perhaps even museums and other externalacademic resources.

Web 2.0: a term associated with web applications that facilitate participatory information sharing, user-

centric design and collaboration.

Webinars: seminars or conferences that occur online to allow events to be shared with remote

locations.

Widget: a generic type of software application comprising portable code intended for one or more

different software platforms.




97

Annex 2 Online Survey

An Electronic Platform for Adult Education inEurope

This survey is about your views on an Electronic Platform for Adult Education in Europe.

The European Commission - DG Education and Culture has asked GHK Consulting Ltd, a researchorganisation, to undertake this survey and other work to find out whether an Electronic Platformwould be feasible and what features are most needed.

This survey has 15 questions and should take no longer than 15 minutes to complete.

For any questions or if you have any technical problems, please contact GHK Consulting [email protected] or contact Stephanie Charalambous at +44 20 7611 1106.

We are happy to receive responses to open questions in your own language.

Thank you for your time. Your contribution is greatly valued.

1.

Please let us know:

Your Name: ____________________________________________________________

_______________________________________ Name of your Organisation:

____________________________________________________________

_______________________________________

Job role: ____________________________________________________________

_______________________________________

2. Your Country (select one):

Austria

Belgium

Bulgaria

Croatia

Cyprus

Czech Republic

Denmark

Estonia

Finland

France

FYROM

Germany

Greece

Hungary

Iceland

Ireland

Italy

Latvia




98

Liechtenstein

Lithuania

Luxembourg

Malta

Netherlands

Norway

Poland

Portugal

Romania

Slovakia

Slovenia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

Turkey

United Kingdom

Other

2 If other please state:

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________

3. How would you describe your organisation's role (select all that apply):

Provider of Adult Education

National or Local Authority responsible for Adult Education Policy

LLP National Agency

Body providing Guidance about learning and/or careers

Higher Education Institution (Research in the field of Adult Education)

Media / Press

Other

3.aIf you clicked 'provider of adult education' please indicate which type:

School Workers Education Organisation

Further Education College Provider of Vocational Education and Training

University / Higher Education Institution Private or independent training provider

Community or voluntary group

Other

Municipal / Local Authority Adult Education

3.b

If you clicked 'National or Local Authority responsible for Adult Education Policy', pleaseindicate which type:

National Ministry

Municipal / Local Authority

Regional / Federal Ministry

Other

3.c

If other please describe:

________________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________




99

Useful Features

4. Would your organisation use a European Electronic Platform to find information on thefollowing? (select one answer per row)

Yes - I can't find thisinformation

anywhere else

No - I don't need thisinformation / it is not of

interest to me

I don't think so - I canfind the information I

need somewhere else Good practice and casestudies on the delivery of adult education in Europeancountries

Good practice and casestudies on adult educationpolicy in European countries

Information on fundingavailable and awards

News on adult education inEuropean countries

Calendar of Events in the fieldof adult education

Learning opportunities for staff in European countries

Library of documents on adulteducation

Catalogue of useful links /bookmarks on adult education

5. How useful would this feature be to your organisation? (select one answer per row)

Very useful - Iwould use it a

lot, it would

help me do my job better

Useful - I woulduse it regularly, it

would be a

benefit to mywork

Not very useful - Imight use it

occasionally but it is

not critical to mywork

Not useful -I will never

use this

feature

I don'tknow how

useful

this willbe

Tool to find Partners inother countries

DownloadableResources for Teachers (such aslesson plans, coursematerial, videos etc)

DownloadableResources for Managers (such as onrecruiting learners,bidding for funding etc)

Resources for staff training

Discussion Forum

Online Member'scommunity

"Ask an Expert" featurewith user commentsand searchable lists of previous responses

eLearning Space /Virtual Classroom

ePartnership SharedOnline Space (for sharing resources with

partners)

Calendar of events inthe field of adulteducation




100

Useful Features (continued)

6.Please rank from 1 (most useful) to 10 (least useful) which of the following features would bemost helpful if provided in your own language? You can only use each number once.

1 - Mostuseful

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - Leastuseful

Downloadable Resources for Teachers (such as lessonplans, course material, videos etc)

Downloadable Resources for Managers (such as onrecruiting learners, bidding for funding etc)

Resources for staff training

Good practice and case studies on the delivery of

adult education in European countries

Good practice and case studies on adult educationpolicy in European countries

Information on funding available and awards

News on adult education in European countries

Discussion Forum

"Ask an Expert" feature with user comments andsearchable lists of previous responses

Calendar of events in the field of Adult Education

Online Events

7. Would your organisation be interested in participating in online events and trainingorganised through a European Electronic Platform for Adult Education? (select one)

Yes, even if they are only available in English

Yes, but only if they are available in my language

No

I don't know

7.aIf your answer is no, please explain why not (select all that apply)

Lack of time

Lack of agreement from my manager / hierarchy

I do not need it

Other

7.b

If other, please specify




101

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

___________________

8. What would be key factors in making these events attractive to you? (select all thatapply)

Free / low cost

Length and timing of event

A topic that interested me

To learn from other participants

To network with other participants

9.

Please list any other factors which would make these events attractive to you in the boxbelow:

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Your contribution

In this section we want to find out whether you have the time and resources toactively contribute to an Electronic Platform

10.Please tell us whether you would be willing to do any of the following:

YesNo

Become a member of a secure community and create a profile

Make comments and submit feedback on news, articles, tools etc

Upload information about events you are organising

Ask a question on a discussion forum

Answer a question on a discussion forum

Upload a profile of your organisation in a partner-finding tool

Use virtual classrooms / eLearning Space

Upload and share lesson plans and other learning tools

Upload photos and videos from your activities

Create content such as news articles or case studies of your activities or policy developments inyour country

Translate content to your own language (from English or another language)

11. Is there anything else you would like to be able to do with an Electronic Platform?




102

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

_________________________

News and Updates about Adult Education

12. Tick the box if you currently

use any of the following toreceive news or updates

Tick the box if you would use any of

the following to receive news andupdates from a European AdultLearning Platform

I don't

know

Email newsletter

RSS feed (news andblog aggregator)

Calendar Synchronisation tool(such as Ical)

Facebook

Twitter

LinkedIn

Delicious

Stumbleupon

Other

12.1

If other, please specify:

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________

Your Comments

13. Are there any other comments you would like to make?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

_________________________

DG Education and Culture and GHK Consulting may wish to contact you againby email or telephone to find out more about your views on adult education. If you are happy for us to contact you please complete the following (optional):




103

14. Email:

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________

15. Telephone number (including country code and area code):

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________

Thank you for your time. Please click 'submit' to send your answers to GHK.




104

Annex 3 Survey: Detailed Analysis Tables

A3.1 Breakdown of Responses to Question “Would your organisation use aEuropean Electronic Platform to find information on the following?”

Table A3.1 Responses by Provider type for option: Good practice and case studies on thedelivery of adult education in European countries

Response HigherEducation

Institution

LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal

Authority Responsiblefor Adult

Education

Provider of Adult

Education

NoResponse

Total (Allresponses)

Yes 79% 73% 100% 78% 80% 77% 79%

No 0% 0% 0% 4% 5% 3% 4%

I don’t thinkso 19% 18% 0% 10% 13% 18% 14%

No

response 2% 9% 0% 8% 2% 2% 2%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.2 Responses by Provider type for option: Good practice and case studies on adulteducation policy in European countries


Institution

LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal


Education

Provider of Adult

Education

NoResponse


Yes 86% 82% 100% 78% 76% 71% 76%

No 0% 0% 0% 2% 9% 11% 8%

I don’t think

so 14% 18% 0% 12% 14% 17% 14%

No

response 0% 0% 0% 8% 1% 1% 2%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.3 Responses by Provider type for option: Information on funding available andawards


Institution

LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal


Education

Provider of Adult

Education

NoResponse


Yes 76% 36% 100% 64% 75% 69% 73%

No 7% 0% 0% 10% 4% 2% 4%

I don’t think

so 17% 45% 0% 16% 18% 25% 20%




105

Response HigherEducationInstitution

LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal

Authority

Responsiblefor Adult

Education

Provider of AdultEducation

NoResponse


No

response 0% 18% 0% 10% 2% 4% 3%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.4 Responses by Provider type for option: News on adult education in Europeancountries


Institution

LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal

Authority


Education

Provider of Adult

Education

NoResponse


Yes 76% 64% 100% 64% 78% 76% 76%

No 5% 0% 0% 2% 6% 6% 5%

I don’t think

so 17% 27% 0% 22% 12% 17% 14%

No

response 2% 9% 0% 12% 4% 1% 4%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.5 Responses by Provider type for option: Calendar of Events in the field of adulteducation


LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal

Authority


Education


NoResponse


Yes 76% 73% 0% 64% 78% 73% 75%

No 7% 0% 100% 4% 7% 8% 7%

I don’t think

so 14% 18% 0% 20% 11% 17% 13%

No

response 2% 9% 0% 12% 4% 2% 4%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.6 Responses by Provider type for option: Learning opportunities for staff inEuropean countries




106


LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal

Authority


Education


NoResponse


Yes 69% 64% 0% 62% 76% 66% 72%

No 10% 0% 100% 14% 7% 12% 8%

I don’t think

so 17% 27% 0% 14% 14% 18% 15%

No

response 5% 9% 0% 10% 4% 4% 4%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.7 Responses by Provider type for option: Library of documents on adulteducation


LLPNational

Agency

Media /Press

National orLocal

Authority

Responsiblefor AdultEducation


NoResponse


Yes 76% 91% 100% 62% 77% 74% 75%

No 7% 0% 0% 6% 6% 5% 6%

I don’t think

so 17% 0% 0% 24% 16% 19% 17%

No

response 0% 9% 0% 8% 1% 2% 2%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Table A3.8 Responses by Provider type for option: Catalogue of useful links / bookmarkson adult education

Response Higher

EducationInstitution

LLP

National Agency

Media /

Press

National or

Local Authority

Responsiblefor AdultEducation

Provider of

AdultEducation

No

Response

Total (All

responses)

Yes 79% 91% 100% 64% 82% 77% 79%

No 0% 0% 0% 4% 4% 8% 4%

I don’t think

so 19% 0% 0% 22% 13% 14% 14%

No

response 2% 9% 0% 10% 2% 1% 3%

Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%




107

Annex 4 Summary of Information about Other Platforms

N a m e

Status Key Dates /Developmen

t

Contractual Arrangements

Set-up Maintenance

Cost Staff Cost Per Year Staff

E t w

i n n i n g . n e t

Owner: DG EAC

Contractor: EuropeanSchoolsnet

Firstconceived in2002

First contract:2004 – 2007

Secondcontract:2007 – 2013

EuropeanSchoolnet is thesole contractor for set-up,management anddevelopment.

Set-upcosts notavailable

Set-up staff requirementsnot available

Cost of website isapproximately: €250,000

Overall cost of contract: €1m for centralservices and €9m for national supportcentres

EuropeanSchoolsnetTeam.

Commissionimpact tomonitor workcontractors aprovide stratdirection.




108

N a m e

Status Key Dates /Development


Set-up Maintenance


S a l t o - y o u t h . n e t

Owner: DG EAC

SALTO Training andCooperationResource Centre(RC) takes lead onmanaging website

Each SALTOresponsible for developing anduploading content totheir own sections.

SALTOs shareresponsibility for specific functions:e.g. SALTOInformation RC isresponsible for developing andmaintaining OTLASwebsite.

Programmestarted life in2000

Websitelaunched in2004

Dynamicfunctionsadded in 2011

The German NAis the contractholder for SALTOTraining andCooperation RCwhich is theSALTO that leadson the website.

The German NAholds hold acontract with aweb company for

server (which onlyhosts German NA,SALTO andYouthpasswebsites) and for CMS license andweb development.

No figurefor initialset-upavailable

Estimatefor development of OTLASdatabase: under €10,000

SALTOTraining andCooperationstaff member led ondevelopment; took mostof decisionsabouttechnicalaspects withadvice fromworking

group of colleaguesfrom allSALTOs.

Server costs €2,160approx per year (secure hosting)

Content ManagementLicense for 25 staff costs €9,600

Additional ad-hoccosts based on year plan (e.g. design,coding) paid by thehour

Estimated ab2 or 3 full-timstaff across aSALTOS todevelop contadminister network,managedatabases et

Commissionusually involvat all in

developmen




109

N a m e



Set-up Maintenance


E u r o p e a n I n f o n e t

Grundtvig Network

Owner/ Manager: Akademie Klausenhof

Set up in 2005

Funding endedin 2011

AkademieKlausenhof issolely responsiblefor the set-up andmanagement of the website. Hepays a contractor for security, andcontracted anexpert for thecoding wheninitially setting upthe website

Other than thestaffingcosts(nextcell)therewas aone off cost of €20,000to €25,000

for coding

1/3 FTE for projectmanager,1/3 FTE for acolleaguewith goodtechnicalknowledgeof setting upa website

Security - €30 / month

Translation - €10,000

/ year (roughly €100

per document)

Writing authors fees -

€10,000 / year

1/3 FTE for project mana

C O R D I S

Owner/manager: DG RTD

Contractors: 5different contractors

Websiteoperationalsince 1990

‘Partners’socialnetworking

programme arecentdevelopment

Five contractors,handling: editorialpolicy, enforcingmoderation of dynamic content,maintenance of website

Launched 1990so“impossible” toestimate

Set upcost of “Partners” socialnetworking = €300,000

Launched1990 so“impossible”to estimate

€7.9million per year including all fivecontracts

16 staff on thinternal DGRTD team pl5 contractors(about 50 stain these teamin total)




110

N a m e



Set-up Maintenance


B r i t

i s h C o u n c i l S c h o o l s

Owner/manager:British Council

Launched init’s currentform in 2011:taken over from threelegacywebsites.

British CouncilSchools teamowns website anddevelops content.

Noinformationprovided.

Informationnotavailable.

No informationprovided.

Information navailable.

S c i e n t i x

Owner. DG RTD

Managed byEuropean Schoolnet

Project startedin 2009 andwebsitelaunched later same year

Subcontractor commissioned for initial design andset-up of website

€30-40,000

Subcontractor

€1.6m over 3 years.No estimate for website

3 full-time,others on adhoc basis pluteachers’ pa

i N E T

Owner / Mgr: TheSchool Network

Launched in2004

Not able to findthis information

Information not

available.

Informationnot

available.

Information notavailable.

Information navailable.




111

N a m e



Set-up Maintenance


e l e a r n i n g e u r o p a

Owner: DG EACManager: PAUEducation

Launched in2003.New contractin 2008:introduction of new dynamicfunctions suchas the onlinecommunity.

PAU won firstcontract for 2003 – 2008.PAU won secondcontract for 2008 – 2013.

Developmentcosts notavailable – costsfor newfeatures(post2008)includedin themaintenance cost.

Informationnotavailable.

€300,000 per year,includingmanagement,developing of newfeatures, e-learningreports and papersand organisation of online and offlineevents anddisseminationactivities.

PAU employstaff on thiscontract – sopart time.

60% of timespent oncontent(papers/repoand 40% ondisseminatiovents

EU Commissproject manaestimates thashe spends 3of her time omanaging.




112

N a m e



Set-up Maintenance


L e a r n i n g R e

s o u r c e E x c h a n g e

Website is controlledby EUN Partnershipaisbl, the legal namefor EuropeanSchoolnet. EuropeanSchoolnet isEuropean Schoolnetis a network of 30Ministries of Education.

Some “research-type”activities, such as

identifying contentthat “travels-well”funded through EUfunded projects, e.g.eQNet and ASPECT.

Public websiteset-up in 2008.

Website waslegacy of EU-fundedprojects insharing digitalcontent(particularlyCELEBRATE,CALIBRATEand MELT).

LRESubcommittee of the EuropeanSchoolnetresponsible for managingwebsite.

Content providersprovide content –LRE Regulationsdefine copyrightand technical

issues aroundsharing of content.

Sub-contractors for websitedesign - €12,000Sub-contractor for implementation of website - €100,000

(this isbecausebuyingreusablecontent ismoreexpensive upfront).Translation:Systransoftware €10,000

for translation intoeightlanguages.

The websiteset-up wassub-contracted(seepreviouscell)

All websitemaintenance costsare staffing costs (seenext cell).

2-3 daysworking time3 staff membper month(webmaster,content contand systeminfrastructureThis includessecurity,moderation amaintenancethe website




113

N a m e



Set-up Maintenance


A d u l t L e a r n i n g A u s

t r a l i a

Adult Learning Australia (ALA) – aGovernment fundedorganisation.

OSKY (privatewebsite developers)were contracted torebuild the websiteand offer technicalsupport.

2005 – OSKYasked to buildon previous ALA site.Updatedwebsite andadded webbasedpaymentsystem for members andautomatedtracking

system.

OSKY havebeen offeringconstantsupport sincethen.

ALA owns thewebsite and isresponsible for thecontent.

OSKY rebuilt thewebsite, andprovides technicalsupport to ALA.OSKY do notprovide day to daymanagementservices, or

moderationservices for thewebsite.

Notavailable.

A team of 4 – 5, notworking fulltime on thewebsite, for around 6months.

Not available. OSKY suppois decided onannual basisand varies, bthe bestestimate is acouple of daysupport / moThe value ofworker (feesdepends on type of supporequired.

ALA staff areresponsible fdevelopingcontent andmaintaining /moderatingwebsite throua CMS.

T E S

Web interface of Times EducationSupplement (TES), aweekly magazine.

TES magazinehas beenpublished inthe UK since1909.

Private company. Notavailable.

Notavailable.

Not available. Not available




114

Annex 5 Pros and Cons of 5 Content Management Systems(CMS)

Pros Cons

Drupal – www.drupal.org

Open Source

PHP-Based

▪ No software licensing cost

▪ Adding features is as easy as plugging

in one of over 10k community provided

modules.

▪ Drupal's “placeless” content architecture

lets you reuse content freely without

worrying about synchronization or

content duplication.

▪ Multi-Lingual Capabilities with strong

developer/multi-lingual support

community

▪ The administrative and delivery screens

are fully theme-able to allow for a user-

friendly experience for both end-users,

content contributors, and administrators.

▪ Due to nature of open source products,

finding experienced developers can be

more difficult and/or costly than with a

licensed product

▪ Major version upgrades do not provide

backwards compatibility

Umbraco – www.umbraco.com

Open Source

.NET-based

▪ No software licensing cost

▪ Large European network of certified

integration partners

▪ Multi-Lingual Capabilities

▪ Simple, customizable content editing

tools

▪ Due to nature of open source products,

finding experienced developers can be

more difficult and/or costly than with a

licensed product

Ektron- www.ektron.com

Licensed

.Net-based

▪ Robust Multi-Lingual Capabilities

▪ Easy and intuitive user interface for

non-technical content authors

▪ Rich Social Networking and CommunityBuilding tool set

▪ Provider model for integration with other

platforms (Omniture, Web Trends,

Google Analytics, SalesForce, etc)

▪ Additional functionality licensed by

module, increasing costs

▪ Some customers report frequent

updates, as well as some challengeswith customer support

Adobe – www.adobe.com

Licensed

Java-based

▪ Easy to use, web-based contributor

interface with in-context page editing

with a large number of pre-build

contribution components

▪ Integration with Adobe Test & Target

and Site Catalyst for managing visitors'

web experience through targeting, multi-

variant testing, and analytics reporting.



▪ Java Resources required for extending

the platform (More expensive than .Net

or PHP resources)

▪ Designed to run in a multi-tier

environment (Additional hardware and

licensing costs required)

http://www.drupal.org/



http://www.umbraco.com/



http://www.ektron.com/



http://www.adobe.com/









▪ Includes several extensible workflows

out-of-the-box (including translation)

with visual workflow editor interface

▪ Multi-Site Manager (MSM) and

Language Manager options available for

managing translated and localized

versions of websites

Sitecore – www.sitecore.net

Licensed

.NET-based

▪ Integrated Analytics platform for

tracking visitor behaviour

▪ Robust Multi-Channel Customer

Engagement Platform



▪ It has been suggested that the user

interface is not as user friendly as other

competitive systems

http://www.sitecore.net/


