proceedings of Student Mobility and ICT: Can E-LEARNING

views. As the IOs staff has to collaborate with partners from outside the organization on a daily basis, who
often have a different vocabulary and a different method to analyze problems and situations, this was also
of great importance. By subjecting participants to these differing views, while at the same time teaching
them the underlying principles, this can make a valuable contribution to the overall learning outcomes.
Second, participants will differ in their levels of participation and that participation will change over the
course of the program. This is an inherent characteristic of professional participants, as they will remain a
vibrant part of their working environments during the program. Consequently, it of crucial importance to
design a structure that allows for periods of absence, which neither have consequences on the overall group,
nor on the performance of the individual. Third, any CoP should cater for both public, as well as private
community spaces. The inclusion of public spaces will facilitate the overall exchange of knowledge and the
creation of a shared repertoire of communal resources and tools. The private spaces, which also stimulate
such processes, also allow for more relational communication between participants, but also between
educators and participants. This creates a type of ‘commonality’ (Hung & Der-Thanq, 2001), which can
help participants to identify with the purpose of the collaboration in the CoP (Gannon-Leary & Fontainha,
2007), and help to establish and strengthen personal ties and relations. Fourth, and very closely linked to
the aforementioned, Amin & Roberts (2006) point out the importance of including spaces for informal
discussions, where participants can create an ‘electronic personality’ (Woods & Ebersole, 2003) and
engage into ‘online socialization’ (Smith, 2001). This process can substantially contribute to the success of
a CoP, as it creates a sense of belonging and trust between the affected actors (Gannon-Leary & Fontainha,
2007), who should feel comfortable to actively contribute to the CoP. Fifth, participants should be
challenged by real-life and current problems. It is the task of the designers to effectively combine familiar
aspects of the daily routines with the challenges of new concepts, theories and mechanisms. This issue is
again highly correlated with the notion of ‘situated learning’ (Hung & Der-Thanq, 2001, Lave & Wenger,
1991). Moreover, Huang (2002) suggests this to be of special importance for adult learners, who want to
apply the new gained knowledge in their regular working environments, while at the same time linking it
up with their often vast amount of practical experience. Finally, CoPs should be based on a clear and predefined
timeline. Again, this is especially true for adult learners, as they have ongoing work obligations. For
them to effectively plan their already scarce time and consequently to get the most out of the learning
program, they need to know the specific timing of activities as much in advance as possible. If this notion is
not properly implemented this can actually create an effective barrier to an active participation in the CoP
(Gannon-Leary & Fontainha, 2007).
Structure and purpose of the e-learning phase
The e-Learning phase took place entirely online, with no scheduled real-time meetings. The
duration of the e-learning phase was 8 weeks in 2006 and 14 weeks in 2007. This substantial increase in
length was caused by two main reasons. Firstly, in contrast to 2006, the 2007 programme began with an
introductory stage, where participants could get accustomed to the structure, content and online learning
environment. This is very much in line with the findings of researchers such as Kelly, et al. (2007), who
have also indentified a certain degree of lacking experience in using ICT among adult learners.
Additionally, Gannon-Leary & Fontainha (2007) stipulate that many professionals are “strategic users of
ICTs”, being well capable of using standard text- and data-processing packages, but encountering
noticeable difficulties in working with more advanced, mainly online tools. Consequently, it was decided to
begin with an introductory stage, where participants could simply get accustomed to the phases structure,
content and online learning environment. The second reason was based on the inclusion of a 4 week
vacation period to accommodate for annual leaves and vacations. Given the interdisciplinary background of
the participants, the purpose of the e-learning phase was really to introduce and possibly refresh the more
basic and standard knowledge of the learning program’s central topics. In a way, it created a “level playing
field” for the second phase, where the participants really got challenged to put all aspects into perspective
and implement them in real-life scenarios.
Pre e-learning phase
Before the actual start of the program, participants received all necessary materials they needed for
the e-learning phase. This included a structured timeline, a detailed explanation of the program’s
objectives, a comprehensive overview of required activities, as well as all necessary content materials. The
content materials included recorded lectures, context notes, manuals, instructions and readings, and were
distributed via various channels, such as DVDs, CD-ROMs, websites and a dedicated VLE, which was
Conference proceedings of Student Mobility and ICT: Can E-LEARNING overcome barriers of Life-Long learning?” 27