Canalblog Tous les blogs Top blogs Emploi, Enseignement & Etudes Tous les blogs Emploi, Enseignement & Etudes
Suivre ce blog Administration + Créer mon blog
MENU
Formation Continue du Supérieur
11 mai 2013

Appel d’offre - étude « managers de proximité du Régime sociale des Indépendants (RSI) »

http://www.uniformation.fr/design/uniformation/images/logo.pngLe  Régime Social des Indépendant  est le 2ème régime de protection sociale français. Il assure la protection sociale de plus de 4 millions d’artisans, commerçants, professions libérales et de leurs ayants droit. La Commission Paritaire Nationale de l’Emploi et de la Formation Professionnelle (CPNEFP) de la branche du RSI a confié à l’Observatoire des Métiers et des Qualifications d’Uniformation la réalisation d’une étude relative « aux managers de proximité » du RSI. Cahier des charges manager de proximité avec propositions Uniformation.
Le champ de cette étude concerne la fonction de manager de proximité dans les organismes du RSI.
Il s’agit du manager qui:

    * anime une équipe,
    * encadre une équipe (ou plusieurs équipes) et/ou un service (ou plusieurs services), qui réalise les entretiens d’évaluation et de progrès.
Cette étude a pour objectifs de:

    * réaliser un diagnostic national approfondi de la fonction de manager de proximité
    * réaliser une étude prospective sur la fonction de manager de proximité
    * formaliser des recommandations pour accompagner les évolutions (du métier….)
    * présenter un rapport de synthèse de l’étude finale
La CPNEFP de la branche professionnelle du RSI
sélectionnera le prestataire en fonction des conditions détaillées dans le cahier des charges.
Date limite de retour des réponses vendredi 17 mai 2013 avant 18 heures.

Pour les réponses à cet appel à projet, les documents devront parvenir à Uniformation par courriel aux coordonnées suivantes:
A l’attention d’Anne Florence BOURDEL
Courriel : afbourdel@uniformation.fr.
Copie : nblanchon@uniformation.fr.
http://www.uniformation.fr/design/uniformation/images/logo.png Is é an Plean Shóisialta Neamhspleách an dara cosanta sóisialta na Fraince. Cinntíonn sé leas de níos mó ná 4 mhilliún ceardaithe, ceannaithe, daoine gairmiúla agus a gcleithiúnaithe. Dúirt Náisiúnta Comhchoiste um Fhostaíocht agus Oiliúna Gairmoideachais (CPNEFP) brainse IHR Ceirdeanna Réadlann agus Uniformation Scileanna déanamh staidéir ar "IHR na bainisteoirí áitiúla". Níos mó...

11 mai 2013

Les « études & conseils » du FAFSEA

http://www.fafsea.com/images/interieur100/logo.jpgDans le cadre de son programme Etudes & Conseils validé par ses partenaires sociaux, le FAFSEA informe les prestataires de ses appels à projets pour une mise en concurrence dans une rubrique dédiée sur www.fafsea.com. Ainsi, tous les détails des appels à proposition sont téléchargeables dans l’espace Prestataires > Prestataires Etudes et conseils.
Les prestataires sont invités  à consulter régulièrement cet espace pour suivre la mise en ligne et l'évolution des appels à projets.
En ce moment: En région Bourgogne, un appel à proposition de conseil pour une prestation dont le but sera d’élaborer un projet GPEC et faire le point sur les outils d’organisation du travail et de valorisation des compétences.
Plus de détails >>. Voir les appels à projets précédents >>.

http://www.fafsea.com/images/interieur100/logo.jpg As part of its program Studies & advice validated by its social partners, providers FAFSEA informs its call for proposals for a competition in a dedicated section on www.fafsea.com. Thus, all the details of the calls for proposals can be downloaded in the space Providers> Providers Research and consultancy. More...
11 mai 2013

9 mai 2013 - Journée de l’Europe

http://www.fafsea.com/images/interieur100/logo.jpgDans le cadre de la Journée de l'Europe du 9 mai, le FAFSEA remercie le FSE (Fonds Social Européen) pour les fonds alloués à de nombreuses actions de formation régionales de son réseau.
L’Union européenne est l’association de 27 Etats indépendants ayant décidé de coordonner leur politique.
Instauré par le Traité de Rome, le Fonds social européen (FSE) vise à faciliter la mobilité des travailleurs et l’accès à l’emploi au sein du marché commun grâce à un soutien financier aux programmes de formation professionnelle organisés par les États membres.
Le FSE a globalement 4 champs d’actions prioritaires:
    * la formation des salariés,
    * la sécurisation professionnelle (éviter que les personnes ne perdent leur emploi, et permettre leur retour rapide dans l’emploi si elles sont licenciées),
    * l’aide à la création d’entreprises via la formation et le tutorat des chefs d’entreprises et des créateurs ou repreneurs d’entreprises,
    * l'accompagnement des travailleurs en difficulté, c’est-à-dire des personnes qui cumulent des difficultés sociales et professionnelles rendant problématique leur accès à l’emploi.
En savoir plus sur le FSE: http://www.fse.gouv.fr/.
http://www.fafsea.com/images/interieur100/logo.jpg Mar chuid den Lá na hEorpa ar an 9 Bealtaine, FAFSEA buíochas a ghabháil leis an CSE (Ciste Sóisialta na hEorpa) le haghaidh maoinithe i go leor gníomhaíochtaí a líonra oiliúna réigiúnacha. Is é an tAontas Eorpach mar cheangal idir 27 stát neamhspleách tar éis a chinneadh a gcuid beartas a chomhordú. Níos mó...
11 mai 2013

The thorny issue of MOOCs and OER

http://jisc.cetis.ac.uk/common/images/cetis_fl.pngBy Lorna. Along with the news that GCU and the Scottish College Development Network are developing guidelines for the creation and use of open educational resources, another Scottish news item caught my attention this week. Finally, after weeks of speculation, it was announced that the Universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde will join the FutureLearn partnership alongside the University of St Andrews which had previously signed up. You can read the press release here.
As Amber Thomas memorably commented at the Cetis13 conference “it’s like MOOCs stole OER’s girlfriend.” Perhaps I am being overly pesimistic about FutureLearn’s commitment to openness, after all, the initiative is being led by the Open University, an institution that has unquestionably been at the forefront of OER developments in the UK. Read more...
11 mai 2013

New Activity Data and Paradata Briefing Paper

http://jisc.cetis.ac.uk/common/images/cetis_fl.pngBy Lorna. Cetis have published a new briefing paper on Activity Data and Paradata. The paper presents a concise overview of a range of approaches and specifications for recording and exchanging data generated by the interactions of users with resources.
Such data is a form of Activity Data, which can be defined as “the record of any user action that can be logged on a computer”. Meaning can be derived from Activity Data by querying it to reveal patterns and context, this is often referred to as Analytics. Activity Data can be shared as an Activity Stream, a list of recent activities performed by an individual. Activity Streams are often specific to a particular platform or application, e.g. facebook, however initiatives such as OpenSocial, ActivityStreams and Tin Can API have produced specifications and APIs to share Activity Data across platforms and applications. The Cetis Activity Data and Paradata briefing paper written by Lorna M. Campbell and Phil Barker can be downloaded from the Cetis website here: http://publications.cetis.ac.uk/2013/808. Read more...
11 mai 2013

The MOOC Quality Project

http://efquel.org/wp-content/themes/efquel/images/logo.jpgMOOCs represent the latest stage in the evolution of open educational resources. First was open access to course content, and then access to free online courses. Accredited institutions are now accepting MOOCs as well as free courses and experiential learning as partial credit toward a degree. The next disruptor will likely mark a tipping point: an entirely free online curriculum leading to a degree from an accredited institution.
MOOCs are moving from an early entrepreneurial stage into the reality of more and more educational institutions. Gaining participants, visibility and a growing community worldwide in many occasions the question rises to the surface: Are MOOCs the new model of online education for all? Are they fit to democratize education? and above all – what is a good quality MOOC?
The MOOC Quality Project, an initiative of the European Foundation for Quality in E-Learning (www.efquel.org), addresses the latter question not by trying to find one answer which fits all, but by trying to stimulate a discourse on the issue of Quality of MOOCs. A series of BlogPosts  of worldwide visible experts and entrepreneurs  of MOOCs  will address the issue from each particpant’s viewpoint. After each BlogPost we will allow a one week period of time to react and comment on the post made available. At the end of the week  the discussion will be shortly summarized and made available to all. Read more...
11 mai 2013

5 reasons to do a MOOC & 5 reasons not to

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/5395330609_6966f83bef.jpgI gave a presentation last week with the above title. In my preparation it wavered between 10 reasons to do one, and 10 reasons NOT to do one, which indicates my ambiguous take on MOOCs, so I settled for half and half.
By "do a MOOC" here I mean for an instructor or an institution to offer one, rather than a learner take one, although you can infer some of the learner reasons also. Later in the week I followed the uniteMOOC session up at Newcastle via Twitter and some very similar responses were being given there. My presentation is below, but actually, you'd be better off looking at Sheila MacNeill's splendid Prezi on the subject, which was part of the Newcastle event. Read more...
11 mai 2013

The MOOC wars

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4102/5395330609_6966f83bef.jpgI admit it, I'm slow on the uptake, but I had a lightbulb moment David Kernohan pointed me at Donald Clark's post on MOOCs "More action in 1 year than 1000" (no hype there then). As Brian Lamb has reported a wikipedia edit battle around MOOCs to remove the early MOOCers such as David Wiley and George Siemens from the picture has also taken place. Initially I thought this was just a bit of ignorance, but Clark's post made me understand - it is part of a wider narrative to portray MOOCs as a commercial solution that is sweeping away the complacency of higher education.
So Clark dismisses the impact of early MOOCers, claiming it was Khan that caused it all: "It took a hedge fund manager to shake up education because he didn’t have any HE baggage." Why? Because it appeals to the narrative to have a saviour riding in from outside HE to save education. If you acknowledge that these ideas may have come from within HE then that could look like venture capitalists latching on to a good idea in universities and trying to make money from it. That doesn't sound as sexy and brave. Read more...
11 mai 2013

The pedagogical foundations of massive open online courses

http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewFile/4350/3673/36066By David George Glance, Martin Forsey, and Myles Riley. Abstract
In 2011, the respective roles of higher education institutions and students worldwide were brought into question by the rise of the massive open online course (MOOC). MOOCs are defined by signature characteristics that include: lectures formatted as short videos combined with formative quizzes; automated assessment and/or peer and self–assessment and an online forum for peer support and discussion. Although not specifically designed to optimise learning, claims have been made that MOOCs are based on sound pedagogical foundations that are at the very least comparable with courses offered by universities in face–to–face mode. To validate this, we examined the literature for empirical evidence substantiating such claims. Although empirical evidence directly related to MOOCs was difficult to find, the evidence suggests that there is no reason to believe that MOOCs are any less effective a learning experience than their face–to–face counterparts. Indeed, in some aspects, they may actually improve learning outcomes.
Introduction

In 2011, the respective roles of higher education institutions and students worldwide were brought into question by the rise of the massive open online course (MOOC). MOOC platforms Coursera (2012a), edX (2012) and Udacity (2012) have partnered with 33 universities, offering more than 200 courses to over two million students in 196 countries (Coursera, 2012b). Courses offered have attracted enrolments of up to 160,000 students (Fazackerley, 2012) lending the “massive” portion to the name MOOC. These courses are also free or “open”. Given that these courses are being offered by some of the most prestigious of universities, the potential disruptive nature of MOOCs was recognised early on. After all, if a student could take a course from Princeton University for free, why would they pay for an identical course given by their local (less famous) institution? Given the growth in availability of MOOCs, the question could be extended to why someone wouldn’t do an entire degree programme in this way. Of course, there are a number of practical issues that need to be resolved before this happens. Providing proctored examinations to students who have had their identities verified being the most salient. However, a more fundamental question has been raised on both sides of the argument. Namely, do MOOCs represent a pedagogically sound format for learning at a tertiary level? Claims for and against the pedagogical foundations of MOOCs have been made by a variety of interested parties (Association for Learning Technology, 2012; Baker, 2012; Moe, 2012) but these claims have been backed with only a scant amount of evidence or indeed agreement as to the defining characteristics of a MOOC and the pedagogical foundations it rests upon.
For the purposes of our study, we have taken the representative format of MOOCs as they exist on sites such as Udacity (2012), Coursera (2012a) and edX (2012). These courses exhibit common defining characteristics that include: massive participation; online and open access; lectures formatted as short videos combined with formative quizzes; automated assessment and/or peer and self–assessment and online fora for peer support and discussion. There is no absolute definition of each of these characteristics, however. Even the concept of massive is open to interpretation. Although claims have been made to large registrations of up to 160,000 participants (Fazackerley, 2012), the number who complete the course is typically much lower, of the order of 5–15 percent of initial enrolees (Korn and Levitz, 2013). Realistically, in order to qualify as massive, the participation at any point during the running of the course should be large enough that it couldn’t be run in a conventional face–to–face manner.
The pedagogical foundations claimed for MOOCs follow on from their attributes and in part are justifications for those attributes. So it has been argued that online learning is particularly effective, formative quizzes enhance learning through the mechanism of retrieval practice, short video formats with quizzes allow for mastery learning and peer and self–assessment enhance learning. Further claims have been made that short videos complement the optimal attention span of students (Khan, 2012) and that discussion forums provide an adequate replacement of direct teacher–student interactions that would be considered normal for a class delivered on campus. The justification of pedagogical benefits of MOOCs is in all likelihood teleological. The benefits have been retrofitted after the fact to a course format pioneered by Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig (2012). The fact that their original course and others that have followed have proved so popular, however, would suggest that there are positive aspects to the way they have been presented. The structure and format of MOOCs is being adapted as more experience is gained with their delivery and so it is important to understand in a systematic manner their benefits and shortfalls.
The purpose of this review is to examine the evidence regarding the pedagogical foundations of MOOCs and indeed validate that these foundations actually relate to the attributes of MOOCs as they are currently envisioned. These attributes and their pedagogical consequences are shown in Table 1. A difficulty with the analysis of MOOC structure and its pedagogical foundations is the question of how similar a MOOC is to existing online courses offered for distance learning or as an extension of face–to–face delivery of courses as part of a so–called blended delivery. In some ways they are not and so the analysis of MOOCs is inherently not that different from research examining the benefits of online delivery of courses generally. The difference lies in the particular combination of the underlying characteristic components of MOOCs, their massive participation and the fact that they are open. The subtlety in the novelty of MOOCs is not the point of this paper, however, and will be left for exploration in future work.
Contents

Methodology
The efficacy of online learning

The importance of retrieval and testing for learning

Mastery learning

Peer and self–assessment

Short format videos

Online forums and video discussions

Conclusion
.
11 mai 2013

The Hijacking of MOOCs

http://www.insidehighered.com/sites/all/themes/ihecustom/logo.jpgBy Kevin Bell. The recent announcement from the California State University System regarding its embrace of edX massive open online courses (MOOCs) is interesting and depressing at the same time. As with many aspects of the MOOC phenomenon, it comes packaged with good and bad aspects bundled up together. Instructors will offer a "special 'flipped' version of an electrical engineering course ... where students watch online lectures from Harvard and MIT at home." So the good is the flipped part because it's more interactive and dynamic and there's less lecture-based didacticism in the classroom due to watching videos at home? Really? The 1970s just called: they want their Open University courses back. Read more...
Newsletter
53 abonnés
Visiteurs
Depuis la création 2 803 162
Formation Continue du Supérieur
Archives