Technology Support Providers For Adult Basic Education, Consortium Development Project

Technology Support Providers For Adult Basic Education
Consortium Development Project

A Request for Stakeholder Input

The Canadian Consortium of Technology Support Providers for Adult Basic Education is a proposed network of organizations, groups and individuals interested in maximizing the potential of technology assisted delivery to address the adult basic education needs of learners across Canada. The consortium development process is being carried out with extensive stakeholder input. This discussion paper has been prepared to inform you about the project, solicit your feedback on the shape and desirability of the proposed consortium and explore partnership opportunities.

The Process to Date

The concept of a consortium was first raised at the 2005 Summer Institute of the Centre for Literacy of Quebec, which was co-sponsored with AlphaPlus, National Adult Literacy Database and a UK partner. The idea was taken forward as part of the AlphaPlus Centre’s AlphaRoute National Pilot and Delivery Project funded by the federal Office of Literacy and Essential Skills (OLES) in 2007. Initial consortium partners were the National Adult Literacy Database, the Centre for Literacy of Quebec, New Brunswick Adult Learning and Skills, and Parkland Regional Library in Saskatchewan.
A consultant was retained to support the process and the project work plan was discussed and finalized at a teleconference with the initial partners in January 2008.
On February 28, 2008, a group of 18 participants representing a cross-section of regions and sectors involved in adult basic education (Appendix A) participated in a full-day strategy development session in Toronto. They shared information on technology and learning/literacy supports in Canada, engaged in visioning activities and developed draft high-level goals for a possible consortium.

What Happens Next?

The next step of the consultation process begins with this discussion paper, which reflects the thinking of the participants in the process so far. This is "work in progress" that will evolve as we hear more from our various stakeholders. Please read it carefully and consider the focus questions posed.

It is important to reply by May 5, 2008.

The central ideas of the strategy development session summarized in this discussion paper will also be presented during a panel discussion at the Canadian Network for Innovation in Education (CNIE) conference in April and we also hope to have it mentioned during the CMEC Pan-Canadian Interactive Literacy Forum.

Based on the collected feedback and suggestions, the AlphaPlus Centre will issue a final report on the consortium concept before the end of May.

You may complete this form on-line below and it will go directly to the consultant. You will have a chance to edit your comments after you press "submit". Focus questions have been provided to guide discussion and feedback. Your responses must be received by Monday, May 5, 2008.

Issued March 31, 2008

THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONTEXT

The following "SWOT" analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) for technology and adult basic education in Canada was assembled from input at the February strategy session.

Strengths:	Good existing on-line resources and strong providers Creative and engaged practitioners Established literacy community in Canada Some government support Well educated population and workforce Increasing access to computers A major area of interest Innate advantages of on-line learning
Weaknesses:	Slow connections in some areas Access to computers for some learner groups Lack of critical mass for software developers Copyright restrictions Jurisdictional issues Disparities among provinces, locations and groups Lack of stable core funding No systematic framework for professional development Limited resources for special needs learners Need for research and evaluation
Opportunities:	Harvesting and networking of resources Partnering and collaboration Networking and communication through the Web Technological advances Proliferation of free on-line resources National leadership Addressing individual needs of diverse learners
Threats:	Loss of funding Provincial or sectoral silos Sustainability issues Changes in government policy Digital rights management and commercialization Competitive culture re: funding Rapid changes in technology and obsolescence Failure to keep up
Any initiatives undertaken by the proposed consortium will need to build on strengths, rectify weaknesses, capitalize on opportunities and address threats.

Focus Question:

Should any other strengths, weaknesses, opportunities or threats be considered?

Strengths:
Weaknesses:
Opportunities:
Threats:

VISION, PURPOSE AND GOALS OF THE CONSORTIUM

Vision

A vision describes the "preferred future state" of an organization and its stakeholders. The strategy session participants completed a visioning exercise to identify the following elements of a preferred future for the consortium and adult basic education in Canada

High national literacy rates achieved through advanced technology and access to literacy resources
Solid support for adult literacy initiatives from government and the private sector
Widespread application of innovative practices
Close collaboration and integration of literacy initiatives among regions and sectors
Recognized global leadership in technology based adult basic education

Focus Question:

Have any vision elements been overlooked?

Purpose

The purpose of the consortium is to maximize the potential of technology assisted delivery to address the adult basic education needs of learners across Canada by providing a coordinated approach for collaboration, support and sharing among educators, technology support providers and other key stakeholders.

Focus Question:

Does this capture the essence of the consortium concept?

Feel free to suggest revisions to the purpose statement.

Goals

The following high-level draft goals are emerging as possible directions for the proposed consortium:

Identify, evaluate, promote and market innovative programs and practices related to technology and adult basic education
Address barriers to learning to ensure the diverse needs of adult learners are addressed
Explore technology integration and improve technology capacity and access
Support training and professional development for educators
Promote accessible and inclusive research and evaluation practices
Continually advocate for resources and supports

Focus Question:

Are there any suggested revisions to the draft goals?

Have any important goals been missed?

What do you feel should be the most important priority for the proposed consortium in the next year?

CONSORTIUM STRUCTURE AND GOVERNANCE

Participants at the February strategy development session considered two different structural models for a proposed consortium:

Traditional Centralized
This would entail a traditional network or association structure with a central secretariat, a committee structure and formal governance arrangements.
Distributed Network
This would be a "mesh network" of organizations, institutions, groups and individuals who would engage in/with the network based on their particular interests and expertise.

Participants at the February meeting discussed the pros and cons of the two different models:

Traditional Centralized

Distributed Network

Pros

Clear mandate and purpose
Familiar and well understood
More visible
Efficient

Other Pros:

Unrestricted links and partners
Preserves member culture and identity
No boundaries
Cooperative not competitive
Members contribute based on capacity

Other Pros:

Cons

Dependent on funding
Work and time demanding
Potential for competition
Farther from the grass roots
More directive and restrictive

Other Cons:

Confusing to grass roots
Could become disjointed
Hard to make it work
Difficult to direct, control, lead

Other Cons:

Focus Questions:

Feel free to add to the list of pros and cons or comment on either alternative.

Which model do you prefer? Why?

Are there other organizational configurations that should be considered?

Your answers to this final series of questions will help us assess potential support and interest in the proposed consortium.

Organizations that join networks usually experience both costs (membership fees, time commitments, etc.) as well as benefits (networking, coordination, education, etc.) What would be the main costs and benefits of joining the consortium for you or your organization?

Costs

Benefits

What would be the likelihood of you or your organization joining or having some kind of formal affiliation with the proposed consortium?

Very likely Somewhat likely Not too likely
Not at all likely => Why?

Please make any additional suggestions regarding this project:

Name:
Organization:
Contact Information:

Your input is greatly appreciated.