Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society

Against the background of the increasing penetration of social computing
and social networking into all aspects of modern life, the Links-up project
investigates whether and under what circumstances ‘Web 2.0’ technologies
can support lifelong learning for people who experience social exclusion or
who are ‘at risk’ of social exclusion.This report, which covers the initial phase
of the two-year project, draws together the evidence from research studies,
evaluations and case studies of initiatives to present the main features of
the ‘landscape’ of ‘Web 2.0 for inclusive learning’.
Links-up identifies ‘what works for whom under what circumstances’ and con-
sidershowtheoutcomesandimpactsof usingWeb2.0forinclusivelearningcan
be measured. Finally, on the basis of the ‘lessons learned’ and the pitfalls
experienced in developing and implementing Web 2.0-based support for
excluded groups, the Report provides practical recommendations for policy-
makers and practitioners in order to help make future programmes and
projects in this field more effective.
MOBILEGEMEINSCHAFTEN–ErfolgreicheBeispieleausdenBereichenSpielen,LernenundGesundheit
ISBN 978-3-902448-28-6
Links-up–Learning2.0foranInclusiveKnowledgesociety–UntderstandingthePircture
This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.This
publication reﬂects the views only of the author(s), and the Commission cannot be held
responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive
Knowledge Society –
Understanding the Picture
Photos: Fotolia.com © Coka, Franz Pﬂuegl, Jason Sitt, Miroslav, Mosquidoo,Yvonne Bogdanski
Edited by Guntram Geser, Salzburg Research
Authors: Davide Calenda, Clare Cullen, Joe Cullen, Thomas
Fischer, Guntram Geser, Renate Hahner, Martijn Hartog,
Damian Hayward, Wolf Hilzensauer, Else Rose Kuiper,
Veronique Maes, Bert Mulder, Katharina Nasemann, Sandra
Schön, Diana Wieden-Bischof
www.links-up.eu

Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society –

Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society –
Edited by
Guntram Geser
Authors
Davide Calenda, Clare Cullen, Joe Cullen, Thomas Fischer, Guntram Geser,
Renate Hahner, Martijn Hartog, Damian Hayward, Wolf Hilzensauer,
Else Rose Kuiper, Veronique Maes, Bert Mulder, Katharina Nasemann,
Sandra Schön, Diana Wieden-Bischof
Copyright
This work has been licensed under a Creative Commons License:
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Project information
Links-up
Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society – Understanding the Picture
Lifelong Learning Programme
Sub-programme: KA3-ICT
Action: KA3 Multilateral Projects
Project Number: 505544-LLP-1-2009-1-DE-KA3-KA3MP
http://www.links-up.eu/
Work Package 2 – Case Study Report on inclusive Learning 2.0
Deliverable 2.1 – Report on in-depth case studies of innovative examples of the use of
Learning 2.0 and Web 2.0 for inclusive lifelong learning.
ISBN 978-3-902448-28-6
Contact
Thomas Fischer
Institute for Innovation in Learning (ILI)
thomas.fischer@fim.uni-erlangen.de
Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
Editor
Guntram Geser, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft, Salzburg, Austria
Authors
Davide Calenda, Servizi Didattici e Scientifici per l’Università di Firenze, Prato, Italy
Clare Cullen, Arcola Research LLP, London, United Kingdom
Joe Cullen, Arcola Research LLP, London, United Kingdom
Thomas Fischer, Institute for Learning Innovation (ILI), Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg,
Erlangen, Germany
Guntram Geser, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft, Salzburg, Austria
Renate Hahner, Institute for Learning Innovation (ILI), Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nuremberg,
Erlangen, Germany
Martijn Hartog, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, The Netherlands
Damian Hayward, Arcola Research LLP, London, United Kingdom
Wolf Hilzensauer, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft, Salzburg, Austria
Else Rose Kuiper, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, The Netherlands
Veronique Maes, Arcola Research LLP, London, United Kingdom
Bert Mulder, The Hague University of Applied Sciences, The Hague, The Netherlands
Katharina Nasemann, Institute for Learning Innovation (ILI), Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-
Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany
Sandra Schön, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft, Salzburg, Austria
Diana Wieden-Bischof, Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft, Salzburg, Austria
A digital version of this Summary Report can be downloaded from http://www.links-up.eu/
This project has been funded with support from the European Com-
mission. This publication reflects the views only of the author(s),
and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which
may be made of the information contained therein.

TABLE OF CONTENT
Executive summary....................................................................................................7
1 Theoretical and methodological overview...............................................................9
1.1 Learning, inclusion and Web 2.0..............................................................................9
1.2 Methodological approach .....................................................................................11
1.3 Research questions ...............................................................................................11
1.4 Research methods and case study design.............................................................12
2 Selection criteria and selected cases......................................................................15
2.1 Data collection and analysis...................................................................................15
2.2 Overview of selected cases....................................................................................16
3 Analysis of intervention concepts of Web 2.0 learning and social inclusion.............23
3.1 General observations on the intervention concepts.............................................23
3.2 Tabular overview of the intervention concepts.....................................................24
3.3 Important aspects of the intervention concepts...................................................27
4 Web 2.0 technologies used....................................................................................29
4.1 General observations on technology implementation and use ............................29
4.2 Tabular overview of tools and objectives...............................................................30
4.3 Patterns of technology implementation and use...................................................33
5 Problems encountered and lessons learned...........................................................35
5.1 Observations on major issues faced by the projects.............................................35
5.2 Tabular overview of problems encountered and lessons learned.........................35
5.3 Discussion of the main problem areas and lessons learned..................................43
6 Recommendation for successful projects in Web 2.0 learning and social inclusion...51
6.1 Overcoming resistance of organisational cultures.................................................51
6.2 Meeting user needs and requirements in e-skilling & inclusion............................51
6.3 Promoting open Web 2.0 based educational practices in schools........................52
6.4 Using appropriate e-learning & inclusion methods...............................................52
6.5 Driving participation on community websites.......................................................53
6.6 Securing sustainability and impact........................................................................54
7 The case studies and the landscape of Learning 2.0 for inclusion............................55
7.1 Introduction............................................................................................................55
7.2 The policy context..................................................................................................56
7.3 The theoretical context..........................................................................................60
7.4 The practices context ............................................................................................63
8 A ‘theory of change’ interpretation of the results...................................................67
8.1 Introduction: Theory of change and impact assessment.......................................67
8.2 Evidence on impacts...............................................................................................68
8.3 Summary of impacts: general theory of change analysis......................................71
9 Literature and sources...........................................................................................73

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background and aims of Links-up
Links-up is a two-year research project that is co-financed by the Lifelong Learning pro-
gramme of the European Commission. The project started in November 2009 and is car-
ried out by an international project team: The project co-coordinator University of Erlan-
gen (DE), Arcola Research LLP (UK), European Distance and eLearning Network (UK),
Salzburg Research Forschungsgesellschaft (AT), Servizi Didattici e Scientifici per l’Uni-
versità di Firenze (IT) and University of the Hague (NL).
The overall aim of Links-up is to combine and enhance the know-how of existing pro-
jects in the field of inclusion with learning 2.0 in order to promote better future e-inclu-
sion projects and policies. More specifically, Links-up will
| collect and analyse information on projects that are using Web 2.0 tools and meth-
ods for learning and social inclusion,
| implement an “Innovation Laboratory” for “Learning 2.0 for inclusion” to support
knowledge-sharing between different existing initiatives,
| develop new approaches and tools building on the gathered expertise, and
| test identified success factors in five learning experiments examining whether and in
what ways they improve the efficiency and effectiveness of current learning 2.0 ap-
proaches for inclusion.
This research work reflects the increasing interest in the opportunities offered by “Web
2.0” for supporting innovative ways of learning, especially for those who are “hard to
reach” or “at risk” of social exclusion.
Links-up relates to, and aims to support, a number of current policy initiatives. On the
European level this includes the EU i2010 initiative (2005)1
, the Riga Declaration on e-in-
clusion policy goals (2006)2
; the Lisbon Declaration on e-inclusion (2007)3
; the European
Commission’s Communication “Ageing Well in the Information Society” (2007)4
and the
“e- inclusion: be part of it” initiative5
.
1
i2010 – A European Information Society for growth and employment. Available online at:
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/eeurope/i2010/index_en.htm [2010-09-15]
2
Riga Declaration (2006). Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/-
events/ict_riga_2006/doc/declaration_riga.pdf [2010-09-16]
3
Lisbon Declaration (2006). An Alliance for Social Cohesion through Digital Inclusion, Lis-
bon, 28-29 April 2006. Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/where/latin-
america/regional-cooperation/alis/documents/lisbon_declaration_en.pdf [2010-09-16]
4
EC Communication (2007) 332 final. Online available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexU-
riServ/site/en/com/2007/com2007_0332en01.pdf
5
e-Inclusion: Be Part of It! Online available at: http://ec.europa.eu/-
information_society/activities/einclusion/bepartofit/index_en.htm [2010-09-10]
7

Case study report on inclusive Learning 2.0
This report presents an in-depth case study analysis of 24 examples of innovative use of
Learning 2.0 and Web 2.0 for inclusive lifelong learning (project deliverable 2.1). A nar-
rative descriptions of the 24 case studies is free available for download from the project
website.6
The main objective of this collection and analysis of exemplary projects is to investigate
the potential of Learning 2.0 to support the social inclusion of groups at risk of exclusion
from society.
In particular, problems encountered and lessons learned by the projects are summar-
ised, and a number of practical recommendations provided on how to realise successful
projects in Web 2.0 learning and social inclusion.
The projects studied are also set within the current “landscape of Learning 2.0 for inclu-
sion”, i.e. the contexts of policy, theory and practices. Thus the extent to which the cases
support the major policies in the field, the conceptual thinking around social inclusion
and the needs of excluded groups is evaluated.
Moreover, the projects are reflected upon from the perspective of a “theory of change”
approach taking account of the evidence on impacts they provide.
6
http://www.linksup.eu or directly available http://tinyurl.com/linksup-cases
8

1 THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL OVERVIEW
1.1 Learning, inclusion and Web 2.07
‘Inclusion’ is a complex concept, not least, because it is intimately associated with its op-
posite – exclusion. As Glass (2000) observes, there is frequently a confusion in the liter-
ature between trying to measure social exclusion and trying to measure the effects of
policies aimed at eliminating it. The elimination of exclusion – inclusion – needs to ad-
dress complex multi-dimensional phenomena.
As the European Commission (2004) defined it, exclusion is ‘a process whereby certain
individuals are pushed to the edge of society and prevented from participating fully by
virtue of their poverty, or lack of basic competencies and lifelong learning opportunities,
or as a result of discrimination. This distances them from job, income and education op-
portunities as well as social and community networks and activities. They have little ac-
cess to power and decision-making bodies and thus often feeling powerless and unable
to take control over the decisions that affect their day to day lives.´
The growing ubiquity of ICTs in recent years, as a result of the burgeoning ‘Knowledge
Society’, has attracted the attention of initiatives and projects aimed at harnessing tech-
nologies to address exclusion and support inclusion. This has especially been the case
with regard to ´Web 2.0´, and ‘social networking’ technologies, with their potential to
support far greater social interaction than before.
As a range of studies have demonstrated (see Redecker et al., 2009); the Web offers a
lot of possibilities for self-expression and people are able to participate, e.g. to gain in-
formation, to communicate and to collaborate in many different ways. For example,
with the use of web 2.0 technologies, blind people are able to participate by using a
braille display, a device which transforms the information on the screen into embossed
printing. Also, migrants can use online tools to enhance their second language abilities
with informal learning activities.
Nevertheless, the ´digital divide´ between better-educated and higher-status groups and
involuntary off-liners or people with low digital literacy still exists and limits the possibil-
ities of participation. A recent report by the Oxford Internet Institute observed that:
“technological forms of exclusion are a reality for significant segments of the popula-
tion, and that, for some people, they reinforce and deepen existing disadvantages”
(Helsper, 2008).
There is strong evidence to suggest that significant numbers of people remain at the
margins of the ‘knowledge society’ – not least because the complexity and diversity of
their lives, and their roles in a ‘technologically rich’ society, remain poorly understood
(Facer & Selwyn, 2007). Digital inclusion itself is therefore a new field for inclusion initi-
atives, concerning e.g. the accessibility of web resources or digital literacy of people at
risk of exclusion.
Against this background, a number of initiatives have been established to support the
application of ICTs – particularly Web 2.0 – to inclusion. In tandem, a range of initiatives
aimed at awareness-raising and dissemination of good practices in the field have been
implemented, including, several awards schemes. For example, the European e-Inclu-
sion Award8
was established in 2008 in the following categories: ageing well, marginal-
7
The following text is a slightly revised version of parts of Schaffert, Cullen, Hilzensauer &
Wieden-Bischof, 2010, pp. 57–64.
8
European e-Inclusion Award – http://www.e-inclusionawards.eu/ [2010-05-18]
9

ised young people, geographic inclusion, cultural diversity, digital literacy, e-accessibility,
and inclusive public services. Altogether 469 European institutions had applied for the
e-Inclusion Award in 2008.
To build an overview of the results and lessons learned in the projects, the European
Commission initiated a study (Osimo, De Luca & Codagnone, 2010) on projects and initi-
atives in the whole field of inclusion by private and non-profit European organisations.
The majority of case studies are in the field of e-accessibility (ibid, p. 10). Another study,
published in 2008, gives an overview on the different fields of action and examples of e-
inclusion in Austria (The Federal Chancellery, 2008). Furthermore eLearning Papers No.
19, a publication of elearningeuropa.info, has published a number of articles on inclu-
sion and digital technologies (eLearning Papers, 2010).
Learning with ICT is to be seen as a key driver for inclusion. It is increasingly argued that
Web 2.0 can empower resistant learners and groups at risk of exclusion by offering them
new opportunities for self-realisation through collaborative learning, and by changing
the nature of education itself. This owes much to a notion that has come to the fore in
recent thinking on learning – the idea that education is now focusing on ‘new millenni-
um learners’ (NML), and that the future of learning is inextricably bound up with these
learners.
NML – those born after 1982 – are the first generation to grow up surrounded by digital
media, and most of their activities dealing with peer-to-peer communication and know-
ledge management are mediated by these technologies (Pedró, 2006). For example, it is
easier to take part in open learning initiatives, profit from open educational resources
and new tools that allow easy communication and collaboration for learners. There
seem to be fewer boundaries to take part in these opportunities compared with formal
education settings, where social milieu, family background, healthiness, socio-economic
possibilities and the accessibility of educational institutions as well as the geographic
location e.g. urban areas, are still the most important factors for (non) participation.
Yet, as noted above, the evidence base for these conclusions is fragmented and con-
tested. There is also counter evidence that Web 2.0 can reinforce exclusion and reduce
learning outcomes. For example, it seems that people with better education and socio-
economic backgrounds profit more from the new learning and participation opportunit-
ies than others. This effect – those who have more will get more – is called Matthew’s
effect based on a popular citation from the bible. Therefore, a sceptic view on projects
within this field is needed. Critical questions comprise: Is learning 2.0 really supporting
inclusive life-long learning? Can isolated experiments be mainstreamed and is learning
2.0 fundamentally changing the educational landscape?
Until now, there have only been a few studies that bring together experiences in this
field. For example, the aim of the project ´E-learning 4 E-inclusion´ is “to build a com-
munity for those with valuable expertise regarding the use of eLearning for digital inclu-
sion” (Casacuberta, 2007, 1). Another contribution which focuses on inclusion projects
dealing with learning and Web 2.0 is called ´e-learning 2.0´ (Downes, 2005) or in short
´learning 2.0´.
As a part of a wider project about learning 2.0 initiatives and their effects on innovation
(see Redecker et al., 2009) a study based on case studies of eight projects on learning
2.0 for inclusion was implemented by Cullen, Cullen, Hayward and Maes (2009). Within
this study, the described initiatives focus on learners ‘at risk’ of exclusion from the
knowledge-based society. For example, the alternative online-school “Notschool” fo-
cused on young people for whom 'school does not fit'. Another example “MOSEP”,
10

which developed training materials for trainers using the e-portfolio method, addressed
the growing problem of adolescents dropping-out of the formal education system
around Europe (Hilzensauer & Buchberger, 2009). The study delivered an overview
about approaches and experiences within eight case studies concerning the innovative-
ness, the barriers and success factors of the initiatives.
Building on the results of the above mentioned study by Cullen et al. (2009), the Links-
up project has been developed. Links-up will collect and enhance the know-how of se-
lected European projects in the field of inclusion through learning and Web 2.0. The
project aims at delivering recommendations for better projects and policies in the spe-
cial field of inclusion through learning 2.0. This report is one important step in achieving
this.
1.2 Methodological approach
From a methodological point of view, Links-up's recommendations will be derived
through a four-step-process:
Step 1: The project consortium will describe and analyse case studies of existing projects
in the field of inclusion through learning 2.0 using a detailed tool-kit for case studies.
Step 2: In five ´innovation laboratories´ Links-up partners will observe new Web 2.0 us-
ages within existing projects using ‘action research’. Action Research (Pedler, 1997) fo-
cuses on gathering and analysing data to assess the nature and scope of changes
brought about by an innovative intervention – in these cases the use of Web 2.0 to sup-
plement existing learning practices. Observations made by the project manager and by
participants will be collected, selected and reflected on. The data collection and analysis
will be linked to specific hypotheses posed by the initial Links-up research analysis. For
example, the action research will test the hypothesis that ‘motivational resistance to
participation in Web 2.0 learning environments can be reduced through peer support –
especially with older learners’. On the basis of the action research results, a list of re-
commendations will be developed as a guideline to make better projects and policies in
the future. Nevertheless, the first part of our investigations will be an analysis of case
studies.
1.3 Research questions
The overall research questions of Links-up are based on the assumption that, the usage
of Web 2.0 supports inclusive lifelong learning. Links-up will therfore explore three main
issues:
| Is Learning 2.0 really supporting inclusive life-long learning?
| Can isolated experiments be mainstreamed?
| Is Learning 2.0 fundamentally changing the educational landscape?
Other research questions providing additional input to the study are:
| What kinds of Learning 2.0 applications are currently being developed and imple-
mented to support lifelong learning and social inclusion?
| What are their characteristics, in terms of technical configurations; learning scenari-
os; pedagogic methods; institutional arrangements?
11

| What kinds of new digital skills are emerging as a result of the use of Learning 2.0 ap-
plications?
| What other, non-digital key competences for lifelong learning, are being supported
by Learning 2.0 applications?
| In what ways are Learning 2.0 applications equipping users with skills that will in-
crease their labour market opportunities?
| What examples of good practice can be identified and how can these be used to sup-
port future policy and practices in the field?
1.4 Research methods and case study design
The research design of this study is a slightly modified approach of the approach de-
veloped for Cullen et al (2009). The methodological approach adopted follows accepted
models and practices used in case studies (Yin, 2002), but incorporates additional ele-
ments chosen to suit the particular focus of this study – particularly the research ques-
tions outlined above – and the environment in which Learning 2.0 initiatives operate. Six
of these additional methodological elements applied were:
| Behavioural additionality analysis (Georghiou & Clarysse, 2006) – a method used to
measure both individual and aggregate changes in learning and social interaction be-
haviours, using self-reported measurements;
| Theory of change analysis (Chen, 1990) – an approach used to identify both the ex-
plicit and implicit paradigm of change that lies at the heart of an innovation – in oth-
er words the transformative model that is embedded within it;
| Cultural logic analysis (Habermas, 1981) – a ‘discursive’ approach used to supple-
ment the ‘theory of change’ analysis and aimed at de-constructing the conceptual
and theoretical paradigms underlying the initiatives, their ‘vision’ of Lifelong Learn-
ing, Learning 2.0 and e-Inclusion and their intended outcomes;
| Pedagogic audit – a tool for assessing learning outcomes (see as an example the Aus-
tralian Flexible Learning Community, 2004);
| Digital skills audit – a method focusing on capturing the extent to which Learning 2.0
applications are developing and supporting e-skills over and beyond the basic ICT
skills typically aimed at in conventional digital literacy programmes;
| Social capacity audit – an instrument designed to assess the effects of participation
in Learning 2.0 initiatives aimed at promoting social inclusion on promoting individu-
al capacity and social participation (see Freire, 1970 and Horton & Freire, 1990).
The case study methodology design is based on five inter-connected stages: (a) logistics,
(b) positioning and profiling, (c) data collection, (d) analysis, (e) synthesis. Table 1 sum-
marises the objectives of each phase together with the methods and tools used to im-
plement it.
12

Phase Objectives Methods and Tools
Logistics Establish protocols for implementing case studies Case study procedures
Identify key informants and data sources. Contact
key ‘gatekeepers’. Arrange site visit
Logistics audit
Positioning
and Profiling
Desk research to collect preliminary data on the
case
Case profile template
Situate the case in its cultural and organisational
lifeworld
Environmental Audit
Data
Collection
Collect preliminary data on key research questions
with main informant
Key informant Interview schedule
Collect data generated through utilisation of plat-
form and tools
Guideline for automated data col-
lection
Collect data on user experiences Self administered user question-
naire
Collect in depth data on user experiences User interview schedule
Collect group data on user experiences Focus Group Guidelines
Observe how the initiative operates on the ground Observation Guideline
Analyse content produced by the initiative Content analysis Guideline
Analysis Assess key outcomes and impacts for individual
users
Behavioural additionality analysis
template
Compare intended outcomes with actual outcomes Theory of change analysis tem-
plate
Evaluate the ‘vision’ of the initiative Cultural logic analysis
Assess learning outcomes Pedagogic audit
Assess innovative e-skills outcomes Digital skills audit
Synthesis Integrate the results of the data collection and ana-
lysis to answer key research questions
Case Summary template
Table 1: Case Study Design (see Chen, 1990)
13

2 SELECTION CRITERIA AND SELECTED CASES
24 cases were selected for a detailed analysis. The detailed narrative description of each
case is free available for download from the project website9
. The selection of cases re-
flected the following priorities:
| Different Learning Settings – include formal and non-formal learning settings; differ-
ent target groups, in particular ‘at risk’ and ‘hard to reach’ groups; training situations
(i.e. workplace, at home; distance or face-to-face), training needs (i.e. general, voca-
tional, leisure; re-skilling, up-skilling) and interactions (i.e. learner-teacher, learner-
learner, teacher-teacher), organised learning (i.e. in schools, universities, training
centres);
| Different Social Computing Applications – include a variety of uses of social comput-
ing applications in learning contexts, involving wikis, blogs, podcasts, social book-
marking, editing and networking tools, virtual realities/immersive technologies, as
well as networking, sharing, reviewing, commenting, collaborative knowledge cre-
ation, editing or publishing;
| Maturity and Potential of the Initiative – include initiatives that provide examples of
sustainable development;
| Geographical Distribution – include a range of different geographical locations and
cultural environments.
The procedure adopted for case study selection was as follows:
| A first list of potential projects within the field of inclusion and learning 2.0 was com-
piled by our partner Arcola Research LLP, through intensive research for cases and
projects from a diverse range of European publications and repositories.
| The partners additionally looked for interesting projects within their language area.
This was a very productive step as the partners found a lot of projects from outside
the UK: Typically they are described and documented in their native language
without an English translation (which is normally only needed in European collabora-
tion's or in UK).
| Afterwards, the partners selected possible projects (with the help of the criteria de-
scribed above) and contacted project managers of potential case studies.
| Depending on the interest and agreement of the projects the final list of case studies
was discussed and decided by the project partners.
2.1 Data collection and analysis
As noted above, the study approach incorporates a multi-methodological design in-
volving the use of different data collection methods (quantitative and qualitative) and a
diverse range of actors that consider each of the examples from different perspectives.
As a result, data collection varies from case to case in terms of the type of data collec-
ted, the range of actors represented, the balance between ‘primary’ and ‘secondary’
data. However, the case study procedure involved synthesising and interpreting the res-
ults using a common template in order to promote standardisation and support cross-
case comparisons. This approach was successfully used (Cullen et. al., 2009), and we
slightly modified templates and procedures due to the partners' needs.
9
15

2.2 Overview of selected cases10
Scope of Inclusion Ageing well
(e.g. generation
50+)
Marginalised
people
(e.g. educational
– school drop
out, gifted
people, illness,
economic, labour
market, social
exclusion risks...)
Geographic
inclusion
(e.g. regional fo-
cus, non-urban
or rural area)
Cultural diversity
(e.g. migrants,
ethnic minorit-
ies)
Digital literacy
(e.g. all popula-
tion groups)
ALPEUNED
Assistive Technology
Wiki
Avatar@School
BREAKOUT
Conecta Joven
Cyberhus
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
HiStory
ICONET
Mixopolis
MOSEP
Mundo de Estrellas
Nettilukio
Notschool
Pinokio
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
Seniorkom.at
TRIO
Web in the Hood
XenoCLIPse
Table 2: Classification of the cases according to the different categories of e-Inclusion
Table 2 gives an overview of the cases and shows the variety with respect to their ´scope
of inclusion´. The classification of inclusion scenarios is based on the categories of the e-
inclusion awards11
. Table 2 shows that in this sample most of the projects focus on the
inclusion of marginalised people. Other important dimensions are cultural diversity and
digital literacy, whereas ageing well and geographic inclusion are (intentionally) less
present.
10
A detailled description of each case can be downloaded from the project website:
11
http://www.e-inclusionawards.eu/
16

Target groups Young kids Teenagers12
Students13
(young)14
Adults Seniors
ALPEUNED
Assistive Technology
Wiki
Avatar@School
BREAKOUT
Conecta Joven
Cyberhus
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
HiStory
ICONET
Mixopolis
MOSEP
Mundo de Estrellas
Nettilukio
Notschool
Pinokio
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
Seniorkom.at
TRIO
Web in the Hood
XenoCLIPse
Table 3: Target groups addressed
Table 3 shows that all age groups are well represented, although most cases include the
category teenagers. Obviously, Web 2.0 strategies focus more on the Net-Generation as
well as on the adolescence. Most projects have more than one target group, which of-
fers a variety of implementation scenarios as well as transferability of results.
12
Persons between the ages of 13 and 19.
13
This category includes young people who attend a regular school or university curricu-
lum.
14
FreqOut! As well as Roots & Routs targets young people aged 13-25 years old.
17

Learning activities formal15
non-formal16
informal17
ALPEUNED
Assistive Technology Wiki
Avatar@School
BREAKOUT
Conecta Joven
Cyberhus
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
HiStory
ICONET
Mixopolis
MOSEP
Mundo de Estrellas
Nettilukio
Notschool
Pinokio
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
Seniorkom.at
TRIO
Web in the Hood
XenoCLIPse
Table 4: Category of the Learning Activities
Most of the learning scenarios focus on informal learning outcomes, often in combina-
tion with either formal or non-formal aspects. Although informal learning activities are
hard to categorise, the cases focus on the indirect acquisition of skills by ´doing´
something with the internet (in different settings) or by using Web 2.0 technology. The
documentation and reflection upon these activities allow for informal learning out-
comes.
15
Formal learning is learning that takes place within a teacher-student relationship and
educational setting (e.g. school).
16
Nonformal learning is organized learning outside the formal learning system. For exam-
ple: learning by coming together with people with similar interests and exchanging
viewpoints, e.g. in a youth organisation.
17
Informal learning occurs in everyday life, e.g. situations at work, conversations, playing,
etc.
18

Inclusion objective Educational
Re-insertion
Supporting
Disability
Digital
Literacy
Overcoming Low
ICT Use
Addressing So-
cial Isolation
ALPEUNED
Avatar@School
BREAKOUT
Conecta Joven
Cyberhus
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
HiStory
ICONET
Mixopolis
MOSEP
Mundo de Estrellas
Nettilukio
Notschool
Pinokio
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
Seniorkom.at
TRIO
Web in the Hood
XenoCLIPse
Table 5: Inclusion objective
With regards to the inclusion objectives, the cases are quite heterogeneous. Most of the
projects provide strategies against social isolation, accompanied with other measures.
Often the inclusion objective is combined with an educational focus, where up-skilling
and competence development are key. Also some cases with a focus on inclusion of
people with disabilities are included in the sample.
19

Tables 6 and 7 below present the fields of intervention combined with the different cat-
egories of learning activities and age groups:
Young kids Teenagers Students (young) Adults Seniors
Ageing well (e.g. gener-
ation 50+)
Seniorkom.at
HiStory
Seniorkom.at
Marginalised people
(e.g. educational –
school drop out, gifted,
illness, economic, la-
bour market, social ex-
clusion risks...)
Avatar@School
BREAKOUT
Cyberhus
Mundo de Estrellas
rePlay
Web in the Hood
Pinokio
Avatar@School
BREAKOUT
Cyberhus
FreqOut!
ICONET
MOSEP
Nettilukio
Mundo de Estrellas
Notschool
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Schome Park
ALPEUNED
TRIO
ICONET
Assistive Techno-
logy Wiki
Conecta Joven
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
Roots & Routes
TRIO
Conecta Joven
TRIO
Geographic inclusion
(e.g. rural area)
Nettilukio
Cultural diversity
(e.g. migrants, ethnic
minorities)
Pinokio
Savvy Chavvy
Web in the Hood
FreqOut!
ICONET
Mixopolis
Nettilukio
Pinokio
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
XenoCLIPse
Mixopolis
XenoCLIPse
Conecta Joven
FreqOut!
Roots & Routes
XenoCLIPse
Conecta Joven
Digital literacy
(e.g. all population
groups)
Web in the Hood
FreqOut!
Web in the Hood
XenoCLIPse
Conecta Joven
FreqOut!
Seniorkom.at
Web in the Hood
Conecta Joven
HiStory
Seniorkom.at
Web in the Hood
Table 6: Addressed age groups and fields of inventions of the case studies
20

formal non-formal informal
Ageing well
(e.g. generation 50+)
HiStory
Seniorkom.at
HiStory
Seniorkom.at
Marginalised people
(e.g. educational – school drop
out, gifted, illness, economic, la-
bour market, social exclusion
risks...)
Avatar@School
Cyberhus
ICONET
MOSEP
PINOKIO
Nettilukio
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Schome Park
TRIO
Avatar@School
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
ICONET
Mundo de Estrellas
Nettilukio
Notschool
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Schome Park
ALPEUNED
BREAKOUT
Conecta Joven
Cyberhus
EduCoRe
FreqOut!
ICONET
MOSEP
Mundo de Estrellas
rePlay
Roots & Routes
Schome Park
Geographic inclusion
(e.g. rural area)
Nettilukio Nettilukio
Cultural diversity
(e.g. migrants, ethnic minorities)
ICONET
Mixopolis
Nettilukio
Pinokio
Roots & Routes
Schome Park
XenoCLIPse
ICONET
FreqOut!
Mixopolis
Nettilukio
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
Conecta Joven
ICONET
FreqOut!
Mixopolis
Pinokio
Roots & Routes
Savvy Chavvy
Schome Park
XenoCLIPse
Digital literacy
(e.g. all population groups)
XenoCLIPse
FreqOut!
HiStory
Seniorkom.at
Web in the Hood
Conecta Joven
FreqOut!
HiStory
SeniorKom.at
Web in the Hood
XenoCLIPse
Table 7: Addressed learning and field of interventions of the case studies
21

3 ANALYSIS OF INTERVENTION CONCEPTS OF WEB 2.0 LEARNING AND
SOCIAL INCLUSION
The diverse project descriptions presented in the Links-up project contain theories and
models of change. The expectation is that introducing some innovative components into
a social environment – in our cases Web 2.0 tools and methods – will promote different
behaviour of individuals, social groups or organisations, achieving beneficial impact and
change. These changes include re-engagement in learning and greater achievement of
learners, which may lead to improved employment prospects.
Projects using Web 2.0 supported learning for social inclusion can be viewed according
to a macro-model and a micro-model of change. In the example above, the micro-model
is about the learner’s re-engagement and achievement (how can this be realised more
effectively) linked with a socio-economic macro-model that requires people with certain
qualifications and aspirations (how to provide the economy, business and other sectors
with knowledgeable and dedicated workers).
Similar models already exist for issues of social anomy (e.g. deprived communities) and
social exclusion (e.g. of ethnic minorities and migrant communities). In these situations,
the intended impact of using Web 2.0 tools and methods is to strengthen communities
and promote social inclusion. However, processes of social learning also play a key role
(e.g. activities that vitalise a social community, help develop mutual understanding
among social groups, etc.).
The models inform interventions aimed at tackling problems in learning and social inclu-
sion and realising favourable impacts and changes in attitudes, knowledge and beha-
viours. In the sections below, we analyse the intervention concepts of the projects stud-
ied. The intervention concept of each project comprises the problem addressed, the tar-
get group(s), the intervention using Web 2.0 tools and methods, and the intended im-
pact of the intervention.
The sections below are structured as follows:
1. provides general observations on the intervention concepts of the projects studied;
2. presents a tabular overview of the intervention concepts;
3. discusses and illustrates important aspects of the concepts.
3.1 General observations on the intervention concepts
Problems addressed: The main problems requiring intervention are understood to be
lack of competences and participation in social life, i.e. social inclusion which requires
active engagement by the individuals and social groups themselves. In particular, en-
gagement in education, vocational training and lifelong learning in many social groups is
seen as a core issue. Equally, acquisition of e-skills as a basis for employability and parti-
cipation in the information and knowledge society is also presented as highly important.
Furthermore, better counselling in critical situations as well as for vocational orientation
and job finding is seen as a vital need. There is also a trend for developing innovative ap-
proaches that challenge established ways of providing public services. Such approaches
should allow for re-evaluating education and new scenarios of schooling, as well as new
methods in crime prevention and offender rehabilitation services.
23

Target groups: Groups that stand out as intervention targets are ´hard to reach´ learners
in deprived communities, including ethnic minorities and larger groups of migrants.
Young people are a prime target for interventions because they are seen to be át risk´
(including át risk´ of offending), often present the necessary skills for a career in creat-
ive industries, and may strengthen their community by becoming role models of
achievement and a voice for their interests. Other intervention targets are children, stu-
dents and adults with disabilities or medical conditions.
Intervention approaches: A ´blended´ approach is the most common form of interven-
tion. The main reason for this is that in many interventions, target groups face barriers
to learning which need to be overcome, such as poor e-skills, lack of motivation and
trust. A ´blended´ approach also allows for developing social relationships and exchange
of experiences among participants (community building) that can be supported, facilit-
ated and enhanced by using Web 2.0 tools. Ónline only´ approaches are used in con-
texts where there is an established portal or community website and users can be ex-
pected to have sufficient e-skills already.
Intended impacts: Re-engagement in learning, vocational training and lifelong learning,
as well as improving employability and social inclusion are the strongest themes presen-
ted by the sample of case studies, as with a majority of similar projects across Europe.
3.2 Tabular overview of the intervention concepts
The table below provides an overview of the intervention concept of each project stud-
ied. The concept comprises the identified problem, the target group(s), the intervention
using Web 2.0 tools and methods, and the intended impact of the intervention. Details
about the particular Web 2.0 tools used are provided and analysed separately in the
next chapter.
Problems & target group addressed Web 2.0 supported intervention and inten-
ded impact
ALPEUNED Equal learning opportunities and social
inclusion of distance learning students
with disabilities
Promote peer communication and coun-
selling in forums on the distance learning
portal to address problems of disabled stu-
dents and increase social inclusion
Assistive
Technology
Wiki
Improvement of ICT and e-learning op-
portunities for disabled adults and chil-
dren through cooperation in a dedic-
ated membership organisation
Allow for active online participation of more
members on the organisation’s website to
create momentum and receive new ideas
and support
24

ded impact
Avatar
@School
Aggressive social exclusion (e.g. bully-
ing) requires competence in conflict
mediation of students and teachers
Provide a virtual environment as a safe place
for role-playing in conflict situations and
learning about how to behave and mediate
in such situations
BREAKOUT Need of new approaches in youth
crime prevention and offender rehabil-
itation services
Allow for Web 2.0 based communication in
“action learning” of students at risk, teach-
ers, probation services and youth offending
teams to prevent offending behaviour
Conecta Joven Vocational training and lifelong learn-
ing opportunities for marginalised so-
cial groups of adults to allow for em-
ployability and social inclusion
Provide hands-on ICT training combined with
online learning and exchange of experiences
to keep learners engaged and socially con-
nected
Cyberhus Meaningful leisure activities and coun-
selling for kids and teens “at risk”
Provide a save on-line environment where
kids and teens can connect, learn together
and get support by skilled counsellors in crit-
ical situations
EduCoRe Support employability and participa-
tion in society of people that suffer
from physical disabilities after an acci-
dent or illness
Blended training and counselling approach
for people in the physical rehabilitation pro-
cess (hospital, rehabilitation centre, home)
to allow for skills acquisition and social con-
nectedness
FreqOUT! Promote creative activity, social inclu-
sion, and employability of young
people from deprived communities
Blended approach to engage, train and con-
nect talented young people and provide a
platform for creative uses of technology, and
to encourage opportunities for careers in the
creative sector
HiStory E-inclusion/participation of seniors
that is also beneficial for the wider so-
cial community and society
Engage seniors to participate in the digital
sphere by telling their stories of personally
experienced historical events and develop-
ments online (active e-citizenship)
ICONET Recognition of informal vocational
skills of students gained in extra-cur-
ricular experiences to leverage em-
ployability
Develop validation procedures in a train-the-
trainer environment and promote adoption
of the procedures potentially raising employ-
ment prospects of students
Mixopolis Need of better vocational orientation
and job searching for young people
with migration background
Attract, inform and connect young people
from the target community through an on-
line career orientation portal
MOSEP Prevent early school leaving and help
students to recognise their educational
achievements. Support students with
preparation for vocational careers
Motivate and train teachers and vocational
counsellors to use e-portfolios and online
collaboration methods to better inform stu-
dents about their education and vocational
career choices
25

ded impact
Mundo
de Estrellas
Increase well-being and learning of ill
school-age children in hospitals
Provide the children with an online environ-
ment for learning, recreation and social com-
munity
Nettilukio Students and adults who cannot parti-
cipate in the regular school system
(e.g. parents with small children, shift-
worker, disabled persons, students liv-
ing abroad) but want to gain an upper
secondary school diploma
Provide a flexible learning environment for
self-directed coursework and communication
with tutors and peers to prepare for the na-
tional exam
Notschool Re-engage learners and remove barri-
ers to learning for young people who
have become disaffected in traditional
school environments or excluded from
school due to behaviour or other cir-
cumstances
Enable personalised and self-directed learn-
ing with community support (tutors, peers
and other community members) to allow for
resilience and educational achievement of
students
Pinokio Addresses the need to promote inter-
cultural dialogue against social exclu-
sion of migrants involving pre-school
and primary school children, teachers
and parents
Combine story telling (fables) with new me-
dia to co-create narratives that enable dis-
cussion and better understanding social ex-
clusion
rePlay Intervention programs for social (re-)
integration aimed at marginalised and
young people and those “at risk” of of-
fending.
Provide an environment for game-based so-
cial learning and integration in centres for
young offenders and schools in deprived
communities
Roots
&
Routes
Promote creative activity, social inclu-
sion, and employability of talented
young people from deprived com-
munities
Blended approach of face-to-face learning
and hands-on development of skills in creat-
ive production with online community and
presentation of creative products, which may
encourage careers in the creative sector
Savvy Chavvy Strengthen ethnic minorities by en-
couraging young people to take pride
in their culture
Provide a safe, self-managed environment
for young people from the Gypsy and Travel-
ler community to connect, share experi-
ences, and tell stories about their culture
Schome Park Explore new educational possibilities
for co-learning and peer mentoring of
young people with difficulties in main-
stream schooling
Provide a virtual world for open learning
practices that challenge traditional teacher-
student roles and assessment of learning,
providing a platform to re-evaluate educa-
tion and develop new scenarios of schooling
Seniorkom.at E-inclusion of seniors by providing op-
portunities for recreational, learning
and community activities
Engage seniors on a dedicated portal by al-
lowing for meaningful and largely self-organ-
ised activities with own contributions
26

ded impact
TRIO Retention of adults in vocational train-
ing and lifelong learning
Provide a regional portal with e-learning
courses and communication features that
help counter learner drop-out and improve
retention
Web in the
Hood
Strengthening deprived communities
through e-skilling and community-fo-
cused activities of adults
Blended approach of physical meeting places
for socialising and online activities for com-
munity members aimed to encourage people
to care for each other and form stronger
community ties.
XenoCLIPse Strengthen ethnic minorities and mi-
grant communities by encouraging
young people to produce their own
media images of their culture
Support media production and presentation
of young people from the target communit-
ies potentially opening up careers in media
organisations
Table 8: Overview of the intervention concepts
3.3 Important aspects of the intervention concepts
Problems addressed
At the most general level, the core problem is social inclusion that requires active parti-
cipation of the target groups addressed. More specifically, lack of engagement in educa-
tion, vocational training and lifelong learning of people in all age groups is seen as a
prime target for intervention.
The majority of the case studies addressed this area. Clearly, an inclusive knowledge so-
ciety cannot be realised if many people do not acquire the necessary e-skills and voca-
tional experiences needed for employability and participation in social and economic
life.
Additionally, there is a vital need for better counselling services to help people in crisis
situations, as well as services offering valuable careers advice. These issues are ad-
dressed by some of the projects (e.g. Cyberhus, ICONET, Mixopolis and MOSEP).
There are also several projects that respond to the demand for innovative approaches
that challenge established ways of providing public services. This includes Schome Park,
which aims to develop a new educational format, and Breakout, which tested new
methods in crime prevention and offender rehabilitation services.
Target groups addressed
The major intervention targets are a range of social groups that are understood as “hard
to reach” and comprise unemployed low-skilled adults, young people “at risk” that
should be re-engaged in learning, and ethnic minorities and migrant communities lack-
ing social inclusion and participation.
There is a strong focus on social groups in deprived (urban) communities. Young people
are seen as a priority group because of their potential to play a role in strengthening
27

their communities. They may become role models, encouraging others to respect ethnic
minorities and migrant communities, and serve as a voice for their culture and interests.
A particular focus of projects in this field is to recruit and train talented young people for
a career in the creative industries (e.g. FreqOUT!, Roots & Routes, XenoCLIPse).
Other particular intervention targets are children, students and adults with disabilities
or medical conditions (e.g. ALPEUNED, Assistive Technology Wiki, EduCoRe, Mundo de
Estrellas).
Intervention approaches
Most projects employ a “blended” approach, which is adapted for different target
groups and interventions:
At the base level there are interventions that primarily aim to overcome barriers to so-
cial inclusion and learning, and additionally support development of basic e-skills and
promote activities on the Web (e.g. Conecta Joven and Web in Hood).
A special case is Notschool, an initiative which has developed a whole system for re-en-
gaging school drop-outs in learning, allowing for: self-directed learning without fear of
failure or pressure to achieve; connecting with a supportive community (peers, tutors
and other community members) and securing formal accreditation and certification of
educational achievement.
Interventions that focus on young peoples’ talents and skills enable the acquisition of
skills in creative production (workshops, summer schools, etc.), online social networking
and presentation of products, potentially opening up a path towards a career in the cre-
ative industries (e.g. FreqOUT!, Roots & Routes, XenoCLIPse).
Furthermore, there are interventions which prepare teachers and vocational counsellors
to use innovative tools for better assisting students in education and vocational orienta-
tion and preparation, e.g. e-portfolios (MOSEP) or a method for validating informal vo-
cational skills of students gained in extra-curricular experiences (ICONET).
Also of note are examples of interventions that focus on teachers, students and parents
to develop awareness and skills (e.g. story telling, conflict mediation) for overcoming so-
cial exclusion (e.g. Avatar@School and Pinokio).
Approaches that mainly or only use online activities can be found in the context of es-
tablished online portals, for example, a distance learning university (ALPEUNED), an In-
ternet-based upper secondary school (Nettilukio), a regional portal for vocational train-
ing (TRIO), a career orientation portal for students (Mixopolis) or a platform for seniors
(Seniorkom.at).
Furthermore there are open or restricted community websites that implement Web 2.0
tools to allow more members to share ideas and collaborate on topics of interest (e.g.
Assistive Technology Wiki, Cyberhus, Savvy Chavvy).
In such cases the target groups are expected to already have sufficient e-skills for ac-
cessing information, participating in activities, and communicating with peers or a coun-
sellor.
28

4 WEB 2.0 TECHNOLOGIES USED
This section analyses what technologies, in particular, Web 2.0 tools have been used by
the projects. The observations concern what platforms and specific tools are used and
what similarities there are in terms of purpose, target groups and whether they use the
same or different sets of Web 2.0 tools.
The sections below are structured as follows,
1. provides general observations on how the projects are implemented and the range
of Web 2.0 tools used;
2. presents a tabular overview of what project objectives were supported by which
Web 2.0 tools;
3. discusses some patterns identified in the implementation and use of the tools.
4.1 General observations on technology implementation and use
Often several tools have been used – most often communication and collaboration tools
such as weblogs, wikis, forums, chat and podcasts.
Media sharing platforms such as YouTube, flickr, slideshare are also an important ele-
ment in many projects.
Such tools and popular platforms are seldom combined with “classical” e-learning
portals and course programs.
The Moodle platform has been used by several of the projects; others used Drupal or a
home-grown system (e.g. the social software inspired and highly user-friendly system of
“Web in the Hood”).
Social networking platforms were used by projects aimed at bringing together creative
people from marginalised communities, e.g. Facebook by FreqOUT! and Ning by Savvy
Chavvy.
Projects also explored how to use virtual worlds, e.g. Second Life by Schome Park and
OpenSim by Avatar@School.
29

4.2 Tabular overview of tools and objectives
Web 2.0 tools used Objective for which the technology has
been used (and by whom)
ALPEUNED Interactive forums on a distance learn-
ing portal
Support student peer counselling related to
issues of disabled students (Spanish National
University for Distance Learning - UNED)
Assistive
Technology
Wiki
Wiki and media sharing on a Moodle
platform; wiki related features in-
cluded Wetpaint, a „Wiki Weekly Di-
gest“ e-mailed to members, a „Com-
munity Spot-light“ introducing a mem-
ber
Engage members of AbilityNet that focuses
on improving ICT for people with disabilities
(registered national charity, UK)
Avatar
@School
OpenSim virtual world with avatars for
role playing of students
Trial a virtual learning approach for conflict
mediation in situations such as bullying and
other social aggression (EU Socrates project)
BREAKOUT Weblog, forum and podcasts function-
ality on a EU project website
Allow for communication among teachers,
probation services, youth offending teams
and others who work with young people at
risk (EU Socrates project)
Conecta Joven Weblog, forum, co-authoring and me-
dia sharing on a regional portal dedic-
ated to adult workplace and lifelong
learning
Offer 23 community support centres collab-
orative and blended learning opportunities
aimed to overcome “digital divide” (large-
scale regional project in Catalonia, Spain)
Cyberhus Several tools such as weblogs discus-
sion forum, Q&A, instant messaging
clients and others, implemented on
Drupal
Provide a save online club environment for
kids and teens including counselling by vo-
lunteers (non profit organisation)
EduCoRe Weblogs, forum, wiki, implemented on
Moodle
Trial e-inclusion of people that suffer from
physical disabilities after an accident or ill-
ness; e.g. Weblog as learning diary, online
collaboration and e-counselling (EU Gruntvig
LLL project)
FreqOUT! Uses a wide range of tools such as
weblogs, social networking (Facebook
group), YouTube and other content
production, sharing and presentation
tools
Support creativity projects with marginalised
young people (13-25 yrs) in deprived com-
munities (Vital Regeneration, UK, funded by
public grants and private sponsorships)
HiStory Weblogs for writing, aggregating and
commenting on personal stories
Trial e-inclusion of senior people who tell
their stories of personally experienced his-
torical events and developments, promote
inter-cultural/generational exchange (EU
Lifelong Learning project)
30

ICONET Web 2.0 features in a train-the-trainer
tool, forums to share ideas and access
material for counselling of students
Trial vocational counselling tools aimed at
documenting relevant vocational skills of
secondary general school students that are
not covered in school leaving certificates (EU
Leonardo project)
Mixopolis Wiki, forums, weblogs, chat, poll, so-
cial bookmarking and other tools and
functionality
Portal for accompanying young people with
migration background (but also others) in vo-
cational orientation and job finding (part of
the German national “Schulen ans Netz” ini-
tiative)
MOSEP E-Portfolio software (Mahara), Wiki,
video podcasts
Train teachers and vocational counsellors on
e-portfolio work with students who prepare
the next phase of their education or a voca-
tional career (EU Leonardo project)
Mundo
de Estrellas
Personal Learning Environment, inter-
active forums, online games and other
features
Support learning and well-being of school-
age children in 32 public health service hos-
pitals in Andalusia (Spain) since 2000
Nettilukio Learning management system with vir-
tual classroom technology, wikis, for-
ums, weblogs, Skype; recently a virtual
conference room for remote participa-
tion in a classroom at Otava Folk High
School has been added
Allow students and adults who cannot parti-
cipate in the regular school system to gain an
upper secondary school diploma (start fund-
ing by ESF, national funding for regular oper-
ation)
Notschool A range of tools such as weblogs,
“MySpace” functions (notes, book-
marking, etc.), podcasting; implemen-
ted on First Class plat-form; parti-
cipants also received an iMac com-
puter and a printer (also access to di-
gital media equipment) and internet
access at home
Work with young people who have become
disaffected in traditional school environ-
ments or excluded by behaviour or circum-
stances from school (UK DfES funded-pro-
ject)
Pinokio Weblogs, ebooks, podcasts, slide-share
and other tools for producing and
sharing stories
Promote intercultural dialogue against social
exclusion of immigrants involving pre-school
and primary school children, teachers and
parents (EU Comenius project)
rePlay 3D game environment for learning
situations aimed to prevent anti-social
behaviour
Develop and trial a game platform for social
(re-)integration of marginalised young
people, meant to be used by secondary
schools in deprived areas and centres for
young offenders (EU FP7-ICT project)
31

Roots
&
Routes
Weblogs, social networking and multi-
media sharing tools; the web tools
were used in combination with voca-
tional internships, summer schools and
other face-to-face learning opportunit-
ies
Engage marginalised young people between
15 to 25 in creative activities, bring them in
contact with professionals from the arts and
creative sector, and pave a route towards
further learning and career development (EU
Leonardo project)
Savvy Chavvy Social networking (Ning based com-
munity), weblogs, discussion forums,
podcasting and video sharing (via You-
Tube/Blip.tv); leaders from the online
community were trained to adminis-
trate and moderate the site
Provide young people from the Gypsy com-
munity with a safe place to share stories,
podcasts and blogs about their culture (fun-
ded and promoted by On Road Media, UK,
based on School for Social Entrepreneurs
and Unltd awards)
Schome Park Second Life virtual world, wiki, web-
logs, forums, media-sharing (YouTube,
blip.tv, Flickr)
Explore new educational possibilities of co-
learning and peer mentoring in an inclusive
community; participants were young people
aged 13-17 with difficulties in mainstream
schooling (Open University project, UK – fun-
ded by the National Association for Gifted
and Talented Youth, the Innovation Unit,
Becta)
Seniorkom.at Portal with a broad range of function-
ality from weblogs to web radio, and
ensuring easy access to features and
content
Engage senior people in recreational, learn-
ing and community activities such as contrib-
uting content (articles, photos, videos), keep-
ing a diary, participate in forums and chats,
games, etc. and offering news and advice on
special themes (funded and promoted by
several Austrian senior organisations and
media, software and communications pro-
viders)
TRIO Forums and wiki on a Moodle based
platform offering e-learning courses
Lower school drop-out rates and increase
learner retention through a vocational train-
ing portal by allowing communication among
learners and tutors (portal funded and man-
aged by the Administration of the Region of
Tuscany)
Web in the
Hood
Web toolbox with which people can
create their own website in ‘4 clicks’
and then develop their profile, use a
logbook, add content, etc.; there is
also a module for starting an activity
and inviting people to join
Provide e-skills training for adults and help
them create their own web pages aimed at
promoting social inclusion in the neighbour-
hood; “animators” connect the people be-
hind the websites (funded by the Commissie
dag indeling [NL], Oranje Fonds, EQUAL-ESF)
32

XenoCLIPse Online course and hands-on training in
video clip creation; the videos were
made accessible online and a special
Web 2.0 element was a geo-referenced
directory for people interested in
reaching clip producers (e.g. journal-
ists, media companies)
Empower and make visible interests of eth-
nic minority and migrant communities and
promote media careers of students from
these communities (EU eLearning project)
Table 9: Overview of tools and objectives
4.3 Patterns of technology implementation and use
Use of Web 2.0 tools and features on existing institutional platforms
The majority of the projects use Web 2.0 tools in the context of EU projects (e.g. EU Le-
onardo, Socrates and other) and have set up a dedicated project website. Yet there are
also a number of initiatives that use Web 2.0 tools and features on existing institutional
platforms, e.g. ALPEUNED, Assistive Technology Wiki, Cyberhus, Mundo de Estrellas,
Nettilukio, Seniorkom.at, TRIO.
The fact that a platform is already implemented can be an advantage or a hindrance to
the full use of a Web 2.0 approach. Open platforms with Web 2.0 tool modules (e.g.
Drupal, Moodle and others) ease the setup, customization and interoperability of tools.
Other platforms may considerably limit what tools a project can use (and in which ways)
and, even, impede a Web 2.0 approach.
An illustrative case is Cyberhus, which in 2009 changed to a flexible platform (Drupal)
and, as their project manger reported, “saw an explosion in use of our forums and ques-
tion and answers columns”.
Another example may be TRIO: Managed by the Administration of the Region of Tuscany
this platform has offered traditional e-learning courses since 1998. TRIO has over
120,000 registered users and provides thousands of hours training each month. TRIO re-
cently moved from a proprietary system to Moodle and implemented forums and wikis.
Do similar projects use the same set of Web 2.0 tools?
We tried to identify if projects that are similar in terms of purpose and target groups use
the same set of Web 2.0 tools. The answer for our sample of projects is “no”. It is more
the case that a core set of tools is used by very different projects, although most of the
projects want to engage and support people in community building.
The core set of tools comprises weblogs, wikis, forums/chat and is used by projects with
purposes and target groups as diverse as e-inclusion of people that suffer from physical
disabilities (EduCoRe), support of young people with a migration background in voca-
tional advice and finding a job (Mixopolis) and online engagement of seniors (Seni-
orkom.at).
33

Use of one core tool
A couple of projects illustrate that simple tools, as well as more advanced environments,
may be used as the core tool:
For example, HiStory used Weblogs to engage seniors in history telling; ALPEUNED im-
plemented a dedicated forum on their distance learning portal to support student peer
counselling related to issues of disabled students.
Among the advanced environments are an OpenSim virtual world with avatars for role
playing of students used by Avatar@School, and a 3D game environment developed and
trialled by rePlay for purposes such as re-education programmes in centres for young of-
fenders.
“Low tech with high touch”
Among the outstanding examples are uses of “low tech” (yet still state-of-the-art) tools
such as weblogs, social bookmarking and slideshare. For example, Notschool’s success
at re-engaging teens in education or Pinokio’s success at engaging kids and parents to
work on themes related to the social exclusion of immigrants.
34

5 PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED AND LESSONS LEARNED
The projects studied encountered a number of problems and learned some interesting
lessons that are of interest to other Web 2.0 based e-learning and e-inclusion initiatives.
The sections below present and discuss these problems and lessons learned. They are
structured as follows:
1. provides general observations on major issues faced by the projects;
2. presents a tabular overview of the main problems and lessons learned;
3. summarises and illustrates the main problem areas and lessons learned.
5.1 Observations on major issues faced by the projects
Organisational cultures: The most fundamental issues have to do with organisational
cultures. Projects may face resistance by such cultures to use Web 2.0 communication
and collaboration tools. Often a change in mindsets and practices would be necessary in
order for Web 2.0 approaches to be successful and beneficial.
User needs & requirements: Identifying and meeting the needs & requirements of the
target groups is one of the key success factors. Some cases that used Web 2.0 tools for
e- inclusion were seemingly unable to properly identify and address them until later
phases of the project.
Level of participation: Some projects did not reach the expected level of participation of
target groups. Sometimes, project managers had higher expectations about the active
participation of the users of a portal or community website. In some cases high motiva-
tion and self-organisation of participants can drive an online community, others need
moderation by skilled community managers.
Measuring learning gains and securing formal certification: Projects that use Web 2.0
approaches usually imply that students have more freedom than in a traditional learn-
ing environment. However, there are considerable issues with regards to assessment
and formal recognition of learning outcomes.
Project-to-project work with difficult to reach communities: A number of cases demon-
strate critical issues with regards to sustainability and impact of initiatives that work
with hard to reach social groups under the pressure of sourcing and maintaining funding
Working with socially excluded groups: Successful work with social groups such as ethnic
minorities and migrants requires buy-in and self-organisation of leading members of the
excluded groups.
Availability of ICT: Last but not least, there are issues relating to out-dated ICT in some
places (e.g. schools), lack of access to ICT by people in deprived areas, and the need for
more adaptable and easy-to-use tools.
5.2 Tabular overview of problems encountered and lessons learned
The tabular overview below notes the specific context and focus of each project (e.g. EU
project focused on particular objectives, regional e-skills initiative, etc.), and summar-
ises the Web 2.0 elements, the main problems encountered and most important lessons
learned by each project.
35

Context / focus Web 2.0 elements / main problems en-
countered / most important lessons learned
ALPEUNED Initiative of the Spanish National Uni-
versity for Distance Learning (UNED)
aimed at supporting peer counselling
of students with disabilities
Web 2.0 elements: The university implemen-
ted interactive forums on the distance learn-
ing portal to allow for peer communication
and counselling.
Problems: Student motivation and engage-
ment was felt to be low. Only 482 disabled
students out of a total of 4026 enrolled were
interested and visited forums.
Lessons learned: There was much „chatting“
(e.g. about the university administration)
which was not moderated and channelled
towards productive ends.
Assistive
Technology
Wiki
Membership organisation (registered
national charity, UK) that aims to im-
prove ICT for people with disabilities
and supports e-learning opportunities
for disabled adults and children
Web 2.0 elements: The organisation imple-
mented a wiki and media sharing to allow for
active online participation of more members.
Problems: The level of participation was
much lower than expected, most content
was generated by only a few members.
Lessons learned: Web 2.0 applications do not
necessarily drive participation. Diverse in-
terests of different potential users must be
taken into account and their needs and re-
quirements addressed thoroughly.
Avatar
@School
EU Socrates project focused on conflict
mediation in situations such as bullying
and other forms of social exclusion
Web 2.0 elements: An OpenSim virtual world
with avatars was used as a safe place for pu-
pils to role-play in conflict situations and
learn about how to communicate in and me-
diate such situations.
Problems: Some technical problems in
schools that lacked up-to-date computers or
had restrictions due to internet firewalls or
filters.
Lessons learned: An application such as
Avatar@School should be used as part of a
wider social integration strategy.
36

BREAKOUT EU Socrates project focused on crime
prevention and offender rehabilitation
Web 2.0 element: The project used applica-
tions such as weblogs, forums and podcasts
to promote communication among students
at risk, teachers, probation services and
youth offending teams.
Problems: Resistance of organisational cul-
tures to adopt the project approach („action
learning“) – lack of sufficient participation on
the collaboration platform.
Lessons learned: Established practices of
hierarchic organisations are difficult to over-
come. Yet, Web 2.0 applications can provide
an environment for students at risk that is
external to their normal patterns and
vehicles of social interaction and they may
engage in a self-help support culture.
Conecta Joven Large regional project in Catalonia
aimed at e-inclusion of marginalised
social groups involving 23 community
support centres focused on adult
workplace and lifelong learning
Web 2.0 elements: The project provides
hands-on ICT training and blended learning
opportunities with Web 2.0 features.
Problems: Difficulty of attracting funding to
secure sustainability and potential extension
of the activities to other localities.
Lessons learned: The key success factor of
the project is voluntary participation of
young trainers and motivators and continuity
of their work on the local level.
Cyberhus Non profit organisation that provides a
safe online club environment for kids
and teens including counselling by vo-
lunteers
Web 2.0 elements: The online environment
offers a wide range of tools such as weblogs,
discussion forum, instant messaging and oth-
ers.
Problems: Good online counselling (e.g. on
how to face problems in school) required
better and different interaction tools.
Lessons learned: Implementation of a flex-
ible platform and tool set allowed enriching
the interaction with the youngsters.
37

EduCoRe EU Gruntvig project focused on people
that suffer from physical disabilities
after an accident or illness that
threaten their employability and parti-
cipation in society
Web 2.0 elements: A set of Web 2.0 tools
(e.g. blog, wiki, forum) allowed a blended
training and counselling approach for people
in the physical rehabilitation process (hospit-
al, rehabilitation centre, home).
Problems: Initial training content and setting
was not appropriate for patients with physic-
al disabilities; some scepticism amongst
medical staff.
Lessons learned: User needs & requirements
must be analysed thoroughly and organisa-
tional contexts fully taken into account.
FreqOUT! Initiative managed by the independent
charity Vital Regeneration that works
with deprived communities in bor-
oughs in London (funded by public
grants and private sponsorships)
Web 2.0 elements: Use of several tools for
communication, social networking and con-
tent sharing and presentation.
Problems: Project-by-project based work
with hard to reach social groups under the
pressure of funding programmes. For ex-
ample, longer intervention is often needed
to reach, train and engage creative people
from deprived communities.
Lessons learned: Strong barriers to learning
require differentiated methods of involve-
ment; importance of demonstrating impact
to sponsors and mainstreaming of successful
projects.
HiStory EU Lifelong Learning project focused
on e-inclusion of senior people who
tell their stories of personally experi-
enced historical events and develop-
ments
Web 2.0 elements: Primarily weblogs for
writing, aggregating and commenting on
personal stories.
Problems: Some reluctance of seniors to
commit to personal contributions with ICT;
difficult to customise tools (e.g. multilingual-
ity).
Lessons learned: Good guidance and support
is necessary, e.g. workshops with seniors to
explain the project approach, step-by-step
guide on how to use tools.
38

ICONET EU Leonardo project aimed to develop
and promote tools for evaluation of in-
formal vocational skills of students
gained in extra-curricular experiences
Web 2.0 elements: Web 2.0 features in a
train-the-trainer tool, forums to share ideas
and experiences.
Problems: Scepticism about adoption of the
interview and validation tools in routine
practice.
Lessons learned: Adoption of the tools and
recognition of validated informal skills by po-
tential employers will require changes in
mindsets and practices.
Mixopolis Portal of the German national Schulen
ans Netz initiative that wants to ac-
company young people with migration
background (but also others) in voca-
tional advice and finding a job.
Web 2.0 elements: Portal with several com-
munication and networking tools (e.g. wiki,
forum, poll, social bookmarking).
Problems: Attracting and retaining users
from the target groups.
Lessons learned: Need to systematically in-
volve third parties and multipliers such as
schools, migrant organisations, youth centres
and others.
MOSEP EU Leonardo project focused on teach-
ers and vocational counsellors working
with students who prepare the next
phase of their education or a vocation-
al career
Web 2.0 elements: E-Portfolio software (Ma-
hara), Wiki and video podcasts for train-the-
trainer approach.
Problems: Different educational cultures and
requirements of participating institutions, tu-
tors and learners necessitated developing a
broad picture of possible e-portfolio uses,
processes and outcomes.
Lessons learned: E-portfolio adoption re-
quires promoting a collaborative teacher role
and a change in institutional mindsets and
practices.
Mundo
de Estrellas
32 public health service hospitals in
Andalusia that since 2000 provide ICT
to school-age children to allow for
learning, social community and well-
being
Web 2.0 elements: Personal Learning Envir-
onment with access to forums, online games
and tools for sharing of experiences.
Problems: Mainly technical issues and in-
creasing expectations of users of online fea-
tures, i.e. upgrade infrastructure to provide
new applications, services and a wider range
of content.
Lessons learned: A well-balanced platform
offering (i.e. learning, community and recre-
ation), integration within hospital environ-
ment, and engagement of families and carers
must be achieved.
39

Nettilukio The Internet Upper Secondary School
(Finland) that allows people with diffi-
culties to attend a regular school cur-
riculum to gain a school diploma (start
funding by ESF, national funding for
regular operation)
Web 2.0 elements: Virtual classroom and
conferencing, wikis, forums, weblogs (incl.
personal learning portfolio and diary).
Problems: Some initial problems with the vir-
tual classroom and conferencing technology
(loading time, communication features, etc.).
Lessons learned: Importance of finding a
good balance between self-directed learning
and communication with tutors, peers and
the wider school community in order to stay
in contact and encourage the learners.
Notschool UK DfES funded-project aimed to re-
engage young people who have be-
come disaffected in traditional school
environments or excluded from school
due to behaviour or other circum-
stances; involves some 500 young
people each year
Web 2.0 elements: Several tools for virtual
presence, enhancing basic skills and allowing
for social community (tutors, peers and oth-
er community members).
Problems: Intermediaries between home
and school must be dedicated to following
innovative and unconventional methods. Ini-
tial difficulties in assessing measurable learn-
ing gains and securing formal certification.
Lessons learned: Disengaged students per-
form better when taken out of a standards-
driven school environment, as there is no
fear of failure or pressure to achieve. A con-
structivist approach with personalised, self-
directed and community-supported learning
empowers learners and removes many of
the barriers to learning.
Pinokio EU Comenius project involving pre-
school and primary school children,
teachers and parents to promote inter-
cultural dialogue against social exclu-
sion of immigrants
Web 2.0 elements: Weblogs, ebooks, slide-
share and other tools for producing and
sharing stories.
Problems: Promoting co-creation in a school
environment where traditionally the teacher
is expected to mediate content and assess
learning achievements.
Lessons learned: Combining traditional story
telling (fables) with new media provides fer-
tile ground for pedagogical innovation, e.g.
co-creation of narratives allows for discuss-
ing and better understanding of processes
such as social exclusion.
40

rePlay EU FP7-ICT project that develops and
trials a game platform for social (re-)
integration of marginalised young
people, meant to be used by schools in
deprived areas and re-education pro-
grammes in centres for young offend-
ers
Web 2.0 elements: Social interaction mainly
within the game and face-to-face with ther-
apist, teacher or social worker, however, on-
line applications such as a discussion forum
may be integrated.
Problems: Some initial problems were tech-
nical robustness and design for boys and
girls; possible difficulty to achieve market
take-up.
Lessons learned: Need for high flexibility of
the learning environment, e.g. different user
profiles and con-tent related to specific pre-
ventive and intervention programs.
Roots
&
Routes
EU Leonardo project aimed to engage
marginalised young people between
15 to 25 in creative activities, bring
them in contact with professionals
from the arts and creative sector, and
pave a route towards further learning
and career development
Web 2.0 elements: Weblogs, social network-
ing and multi-media sharing tools supple-
ment and build upon vocational internships,
summer schools and other face-to-face
learning opportunities.
Problems: Engaging the target groups and
establishing close connections with vocation-
al training centres and the professional world
of cultural and creative production.
Lessons learned: Success requires high visib-
ility (branding), ambassadors and multipliers
in the communities, and role models for the
talented young people.
Savvy Chavvy Initiative of On Road Media (UK) that
provides young people from the Gypsy
community with a safe place to share
stories, podcasts and blogs about their
culture (funded by School for Social
Entrepreneurs and UnLtd awards)
Web 2.0 elements: Social networking (Ning),
discussion forums and media sharing tools
(e.g. YouTube); leaders from the social com-
munity administrate and moderate the site.
Problems: Initial lack of interest and buy-in
by the target community that had faced ra-
cism and exclusion on other social network-
ing platforms.
Lessons learned: Importance of gaining cred-
ibility and trust, finding community ‘champi-
ons’, ownership and moderation of the regis-
tration-based social networking environment
by the community.
41

Schome Park Open University UK project that ex-
plored new educational possibilities of
co-learning and peer mentoring in an
inclusive community; participants were
young people aged 13-17 with diffi-
culties in mainstream schooling (fun-
ded by NAGTY, The Innovation Unit,
Becta)
Web 2.0 elements: Second Life virtual world
with several communication and media-shar-
ing features.
Problems: Lack of fast internet access and e-
skills by some members of the target group;
educational staff asked for more direction
(e.g. clearer alignment to curriculum) and
technical support; difficult to monitor and
assess learning progress and outcomes.
Lessons learned: Open learning models chal-
lenge traditional school settings, in particu-
lar, teacher-student roles and assessment of
learning outcomes. Teachers are likely to fear
loosing control and need pedagogical as well
technical training to develop collaborative e-
learning skills.
Seniorkom.at National portal for engaging senior
people in a broad range of recreation-
al, learning and community activities
(funded and promoted by several Aus-
trian senior organisations and media,
software and communications pro-
viders)
Web 2.0 elements: Portal with a broad range
of functionality from weblogs to web radio,
also taking care of easy and barrier-free ac-
cess to features and content
Problems: Providing, marketing and main-
taining many opportunities for e-participa-
tion. Keeping the high-level of support by
promoters and sponsors.
Lessons learned: Strong motivation from,
and self-organisation by, the user community
is key („a web-site of seniors for seniors“).
TRIO Regional vocational training portal fun-
ded and managed by the Administra-
tion of the Region of Tuscany
Web 2.0 elements: Moodle based platform
offering e-learning courses with additional
features such as forums and wikis.
Problems: Constant concerns are learner
drop-out and retention rates in vocational
training and lifelong learning.
Lessons learned: Communication and collab-
oration features have been implemented, yet
they are more frequently used among tutors.
The learners must be motivated and skilled
in using the tools as part of the curriculum.
42

Web in the
Hood
E-skills training and community build-
ing initiative for adults in deprived
communities in the Netherlands fun-
ded by the Commissie dag indeling, Or-
anje Fonds, EQUAL-ESF
Web 2.0 elements: A web toolbox that al-
lows easy creation and enrichment of user
websites and communication (e.g. a module
for starting an activity and inviting people to
join).
Problems: Social community workers are not
necessarily interested in ICT for their clients;
also the approach to address all (not only
marginalised people) and encourage people
to care for each other was much harder to
implement than the initiators thought.
Lessons learned: The core of the initiative is
the „blended“ approach with physical meet-
ing places for socialising and exchanging
ideas as well as the online community. The
idea that the participants could eventually
organise and manage Web in the Hood
themselves has not yet been realised. A pro-
fessional “animator” is still very important to
drive participation.
XenoCLIPse EU eLearning project aimed to em-
power and make visible interests of
minority and migrants communities
and promote media work/careers of
students from these communities
Web 2.0 elements: Video clips created by the
participants are presented online and a Web
2.0 based directory is offered for people in-
terested in reaching the producers (e.g.
journalists, media companies).
Problems: Facilitating access to digital pro-
duction tools and development of media
skills and products is only the first step.
Lessons learned: Involvement of mainstream
media organizations and associations is ne-
cessary so that community empowerment
has societal impact.
Table 10: Overview of problems encountered and lessons learned
5.3 Discussion of the main problem areas and lessons learned
Below we summarise main problem areas of, and lessons learned by, the projects. Selec-
ted examples illustrate critical issues. Many lessons learned about success factors may
be transferable to other projects contexts.
Resistant organisational cultures
The majority of case studies present projects that involved individual or a group of or-
ganisations from the educational sector, i.e. schools, universities, vocational and adult &
lifelong learning centres. Other projects involved rather different organisational cul-
tures, for example, social workers (Web in the Hood), offending and drugs services
(Breakout), hospitals and physical rehabilitation centres (EduCoRe).
43

Some of the projects had to face reactions by the organisational cultures that ranged
from active resistance (e.g. against using collaboration tools) to a moderate, and prob-
ably realistic, degree of scepticism by the professional staff (e.g. about usefulness of the
results in routine practice).
The strongest resistance was felt in the Breakout project, which involved organisations
that are focused on crime prevention and offender rehabilitation. For example, there
were tensions between and within professional groups because of „territorial boundar-
ies“, hierarchy and competition among units. This contributed to a lack of sufficient
commitment and participation in the project’s „action learning” approach.
The need to instigate change in organisational thinking and practice was also experi-
enced by the Notschool initiative, where intermediaries between the young people and
the project team had to commit to following innovative and unconventional methods.
A less obvious example is Web in the Hood, which challenged current social work prac-
tices (at least in the Netherlands). It could be expected that social work organisations
would be very positive about an initiative aimed at increasing e-skills and Web activity
of members of deprived communities. However, the experience of this project demon-
strates that this is not always the case, or at least not always a priority. Most import-
antly, Web in the Hood took a different approach to the dominant paradigm. While pro-
fessional social workers mainly focus on marginalised people, the Web in the Hood ad-
dressed everybody and aimed to foster a sense of community spirit and encourage
people to care for each other (Kuiper, 2007).
Projects that involved educational organisations, e.g. schools, distance learning uni-
versities and vocational training platforms also identified issues of organisational cul-
ture.
Those issues relate to the open educational approaches for which Web 2.0 environ-
ments and tools were used. Open learning models challenge traditional school settings,
in particular, teacher-student roles and assessment of learning outcomes.
A good example is Schome Park, which used a Second Life virtual world to explore new
educational possibilities of co-learning and peer mentoring in an inclusive community.
Some staff members and students found it difficult to re-imagine teacher-student roles
and how education is delivered. Teachers asked for more coordination and pedagogical
and technical support.
The need to promote a collaborative and co-creative teacher role not only to teachers
but also to students, parents and other stakeholders was also expressed in projects
which experienced “no resistance”. For example, in the Pinokio project, which involved
primary schools that establish a rather traditional image of the teacher.
It should be clear that in the school environment, projects often face problems that are
associated with timetabling and additional burdens of staff. School staff working under
pressure with time constraints are very likely to see new projects as a nuisance rather
than a potential benefit.
Key lessons learned: Projects involving organisations such as offending and drugs ser-
vices may have to cope with considerable resistance by organisational culture and ten-
sions because of professional rivalry, competition for resources, disciplinary differences
and disputes.
44

Introducing an online collaboration platform will very likely have no impact on their or-
ganisational culture and practices; only little use of such platforms can be expected.
In order to promote unconventional approaches and methods, ingrained paradigms of
professional communities must be identified and addressed, whether from medical
staff, social workers or teachers.
Open educational approaches that use Web 2.0 environments and tools will challenge
traditional school settings and teacher-student roles, encouraging much-needed
change. Teachers are likely to fear loosing control and need pedagogical as well as tech-
nical training to develop collaborative e-learning skills.
Measuring learning gains and securing formal certification
Some of the projects had to deal with issues of measuring learning gains (e.g. to demon-
strate impact) and of securing formal certification of outcomes. These issues are closely
related to the objectives of educational institutions and their core role of providing cer-
tified qualifications.
ICONET developed and promoted procedures and tools that enable validation of relev-
ant vocational skills gained by students during extra-curricular experiences. The project
focused on teachers in secondary general schools and careers counsellors. There re-
mained some scepticism about the impact on routine practices, i.e. wider adoption and
use of the interview and validation tools. Recognition of learners’ informal skills by po-
tential employers also seemed relatively uncertain, e.g. if the formal school leaving cer-
tificate was not convincing.
Schome Park found it difficult to identify progress in learning in the Second Life virtual
world, because the explorative and communicative methods allowed students much
more freedom than a traditional learning environment. Teachers asked for more direc-
tion (e.g. clearer alignment to curriculum) and worried about how to assess learning
outcomes.
Notschool also experienced initial difficulties in assessing measurable learning gains and
secure formal accreditation. Yet these difficulties could be overcome by developing a
scheme of point scoring qualifications that enable initiatives to award certificates recog-
nised by a national awarding body.
Key lessons learned: Projects that use Web 2.0 approaches must address the issue of
how to assess learning progress and outcomes. As such, projects are often considered to
be pilots, with the expectation that some of the experiences are transferable into
routine practice. Yet such practices will not flourish if alignment with curriculum goals is
missing, or cannot be adequately assessed.
Measuring learning gains is also important in contexts other than formal educational in-
stitutions such as social inclusion programmes for deprived communities or social work
with talented young people from migrant and ethnic minority groups. While formal cer-
tification may not be an issue in such cases, demonstrating some form of impact usually
is (e.g. re-engagement in learning, presentation of creative products, etc.).
Active participation of target groups
Some projects found it difficult to reach the expected level of participation by their tar-
get groups.
45

In the ALPEUNED project, the Spanish National University for Distance Learning (UNED)
implemented forums for disabled students to allow for peer communication and coun-
selling. Yet there was a lack of student motivation, only 482 disabled students out of a
total of 4026 enrolled visited a forum. There was much „chatting“ which was not moder-
ated and channelled towards productive ends. As the communication also included is-
sues concerning the university administration the “chatting” may also have been unwel-
come and a potential threat of community lobbying.
AbilityNet implemented Assistive Technology Wiki to allow for active online participa-
tion of more members, but the level of participation was rather low; most content was
generated by only a few members.
TRIO, the regional vocational training portal of the Region of Tuscany implemented com-
munication and collaboration features to counter learner drop-out and increase reten-
tion. Yet the features were more frequently used among tutors than students.
Mixopolis, a portal of the German national Schulen ans Netz initiative that wants to ac-
company young people with migration background (but also others) in vocational ori-
entation and job finding also found it difficult to attract and retain the target group in an
online community.
Seniorkom.at seems to fare much better by not only providing seniors with a broad
range of Web 2.0 functionality but motivating and empowering them to self-organise.
HiStory faced some reluctance by seniors to commit to personal contributions with ICT,
which could be overcome by offering workshops to explain the project approach and
how to use tools.
Sometimes project managers have too high expectations of active participation by the
users of a portal or community website. According to the widely accepted 90-9-1 rule
for user participation in online communities, 90% of users do not contribute at all, 9%
from time to time, and 1% a lot and account for most contributions. Important is to re-
tain and motivate the 9%, and probably more, of occasional contributors (Nielson,
2006). This may to the “stickiness” of a website.
Some further issues in community participation that relate to the special situation of
working with groups such as ethnic minorities are addressed in a separate section be-
low.
Key lessons learned: Web 2.0 applications per se do not necessarily drive participation
and communication among members of the target community.
Existing diverse interests of different potential users must be identified and taken into
account and the particular needs and requirements of the users addressed thoroughly.
According to the project objectives, third parties and multipliers such as schools, cultur-
al organisations, community and youth centres must be involved systematically.
Strong motivation and empowerment of users may help to achieve self-organisation,
“stickiness” and growth of an online social community. In most cases, however, support
by dedicated “community managers” will be needed.
Web 2.0 applications invite “chatting”. This can be a starting point of peer communica-
tion and community building, but often there is need of moderation and channelling the
communication towards productive ends. Unwelcome and threatening contributions
must be dealt with seriously.
46

Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society

Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society

Similar to Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society (20)

More from eSociety Institute of The Hague University of Applied Sciences

More from eSociety Institute of The Hague University of Applied Sciences (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Learning 2.0 for an Inclusive Knowledge Society