ENGLISH SUMMARY. The valorisation was conducted in the following order:

Manninen, J., Nevgi, A., Matikainen, J., Luukannel, S. & Porevuo, M. 2000. Osaajien koulutus 2000-luvulla. Leonardo da Vinci -ohjelman tuottamat pedagogiset ja teknologiset innovaatiot ammatillisessa koulutuksessa. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. ENGLISH SUMMARY This report summarises the results of a valorisation of the Finnish Leonardo projects. The aim of the valorisation was to analyse, point out and disseminate further the pedagogical and technological innovations in Finnish vocational education, created in the Leonardo projects. The valorisation was conducted in the following order: 1. analysis of the current state-of-the-art; meta-analysis of previous evaluations related to pedagogical and technological development projects, and the current level of expertise within the Finnish vocational education system; 2. definition of criteria for pedagogical and technological innovations; it was based on an analysis of the current situation (phase 1) and on some new pedagogical theories; 3. selection of 21 Leonardo projects; selection was based on the criteria; 4. evaluation of the outcomes and products; it was based on documents, interviews and an analysis of the products; 5. workshop with project representatives and experts; discussion based on preliminary results; 6. adjustment of analysis methods and results according to feedback; 7. presentation of the results in an invitational seminar; and 8. report writing. Current state-of-the-art Several evaluations suggest that in the Finnish vocational education system, the use of modern technology is very well supported by a good infrastructure. Schools and universities usually have a good number of computers available for students and teachers, good access to the Internet and satisfactory data networks. However, good technological infrastructure does not guarantee that teachers are able and willing to use modern technology in teaching. Use of technology is often limited to more active teachers and to the odd teaching experiments, which are rather isolated and therefore less effective for the educational system as a whole. Usually, the experiments also lack pedagogical insight, and therefore produce technologically advanced yet pedagogically less innovative outcomes. The level of pedagogical formal training for vocational teachers and trainers varies a great deal. In polytechnics and in vocational schools a formal degree in pedagogy is required, but in other levels (universities, vocational training centres, working life organisations) there are no such regulations, and thus the pedagogical skills of the teachers and trainers are more heterogenious. Criteria for innovations Based on the current state-of-the-art, a list of criteria was defined both for pedagogical innovations and technological innovations. Additional criteria were created to analyse the projects and outcomes in terms of dissemination, transferability and use of the end products. Pedagogical criteria are based on the analysis of pedagogical literature; modern learning theories and pedagogical models which could be used to develop further vocational training were analysed, and the key elements of good learning were collected as criteria. The list of theories

and models was also used in the evaluation of the end products, to analyse whether advanced pedagogical tools and models had been used in the projects. The models and theories were: the cognitive learning model (Engeström 1988), constructivism (eg. Duffy & Jonassen 1992), Self- Directed Learning, Open and Contextual Learning Environments (Kauppi 1995, Manninen 2000), Web-based Learning Environments and Computer Mediated Communication (eg. Paulsen 1995, Matikainen & Manninen 2000), Collaborative Learning (Johnson & Johnson 1987), Problem Based Learning (Hakkarainen & al. 1999), Transformative Learning (Mezirow 1991), Developmental work research and Activity Theory (eg. Engeström 1999), Project Based Learning (Miettinen & al. 1999), Learning at Work -approaches, and models based on Cognitive and Collective Development of Expertise (Bereiter & Scardamalia 1993, Lave & Wenger 1991). The criteria for pedagogical innovations are described below: Criteria Ordinary Innovative Constructiveness Teaching does not pay much attention to how the subject matter is integrated in the existing knowledge structures of the student Activeness Cooperativeness Contextuality Problem based Learning environment does not support nor require the learner s own active role in the learning process Learning takes place mainly alone Learning takes place in an institution and/or is separated from the concrete situation of application of the knowledge Study objectives are based on study subjects in a traditional way, and cut into separate units in the curriculum Teaching and learning are clearly based on the learners active construction process and on the creation of higher level knowledge structures Learning environment is based on the learner s active role and commitment Learning is based on cooperative and collaborative principles and takes place in groups Learning takes place in a simulated or real-life situation, which equals the actual context where the knowledge will be applied Learning approach is problem based and investigative Criteria for technological innovations were based mainly on research on educational technology, and the emphasis was on the human technology interaction as well as on technology mediated human human interaction. The technological solutions were evaluated by analysing what kind of interaction is possible with the technology and via the technology. Also, use of multimedia applications and solutions, allowing individual learning paths, were considered innovative. The criteria are defined below: Criteria Ordinary Innovative Interactivity Tools developed in the project are mainly based on passive receiving of information (video, tv, www-pages) Tools are based on interactive technology (interactive video, interactive www-pages, learning programmes) 2

Communicativeness Individuality Multimedia Tools allow only one-way messaging The learning process using the tools will be similar for all the users The product is based on a single tool Tools allow many-to-many - type communication The tools make it possible to create and follow individual study paths The product is an innovative combination of alternative tools supporting each other In www-based products the level of solution (Manninen 2000) was analysed. Level 1 solutions simply use the Internet and the www as a distribution channel and linear text documents, Level 2 (also) makes interaction and communication possible, Level 3 has structured hypertext elements and environments which aim to direct the learning process, and Level 4 solutions provide a whole Learning Environment, for example, with different tools, discussion areas and course management tools. Other criteria were based on objectives of the Leonardo programme, and on the appraisal of the added value of working together internationally: Criteria ordinary good idea innovative Dissemination not done some dissemination activities have taken place Role of the EUcooperation Use of the product Transferability well, we did it together left on the shelves when the project ended Expensive technology which is difficult to access; many resources and special skills required by the teachers Working together had some added value; we also learned something still in use in the same place Moderately priced and accessable technology; pedagogical innovation which only requires some additional resources Actively disseminated and marketed to own and other organisations Cooperation was the primus motor for the innovation to come true has been distributed to other places as well Moderately priced and easy-to-use and accessable technology; pedagogical innovation which is easily adopted using normal resources Results The end products were clearly divided into three different groups. Technological solutions were products, where modern information and communication technology were used in relatively traditional teaching and learning contexts. Technological innovativess was therefore high, but pedagogically the products were rather ordinary. Pedagogical tools and models emphasise more the pedagogical innovations, creating rather good pedagogical solutions and new methods for teaching and learning. Technology is used either in a rather limited or in a ordinary way, and some end products were completed without any technology. 3

Between these there were learning environments, where both technological and pedagogical innovations were used to create technology-supported modern learning environments, usually using Internet and www technology. The main results can be summarised as follows. When pedagogical innovations were considered, it can be said that: the quality of the product is better, if it is clearly based on some pedagogical model and on a particular learning theory; even though some theoretical principles can be seen behind the products, only a few of them are based on a particular pedagogical theory on purpose; the good pedagogical models which are available, and could be used in vocational training, were hardly ever used in the projects; therefore, the products cannot be considered as innovations, because they do not use modern learning theories and pedagogical models; and the general strengths usually are contextuality and problem-based approaches, and many products have collaborative and constructive elements. However, these could be used in a more conscious and systematic manner. Use of technology can be summarised as follows: the main technology used in the projects is the www, CD-Rom, and simulations/3d virtual reality; the www and Internet solutions apply all levels, which means that Level 1 linear text solutions are also used (but not as the only means of teaching and learning); technologically most advanced are some solutions using 3D virtual reality, which have been used to simulate different production processes. Some high quality multimedia products have been created as well; not all technological solutions can be considered as innovations, because they are usually based on rather ordinary technology. On the other hand, in some cases a lower level of technology has been a conscious decision, which better enables dissemination in countries where the technological infrastructure is less advanced; the level of technological infrastructure and skills vary from one country to another, which in some cases makes it more difficult to cooperate and disseminate the outcomes. Therefore, from the Finnish point of view, the level of technological innovations is not as high as it could be; technology is not always selected using pedagogical arguments, but to guarantee wide dissemination or simply because the particular technology is available; and funding is often used to develop technology instead of pedagogical training of the teachers; however, a pedagogically sound use of that technology depends on the teacher s ability to use it. Other observations can be summarised as follows: establishment of personal contacts and networks is considered as an especially valuable side product; these encourage an exchange of ideas, creation of ideas, cooperation and integration of international dimension in all activities; in some projects there are examples on how good pedagogical and technological solutions move from one country to another; and cooperation is usually more effective, if the consortium have (1) existed prior to the project idea, or (2) built on purpose by contacting the relevant partners. 4

Cooperation with the working life is usually useful: projects which are based on the needs of the working life, and which are done in cooperation, usually produce good products and outcomes; representatives of the working life usually make the end products more contextual and more problem-based; and in some cases the business partner s commercial interests and need for secrecy make it more difficult to disseminate the products (eg. tailor-made products, commercial copyrights) In general it can be stated that: many good pedagogical and technological development projects would not see daylight without Leonardo funding; the added value provided by Leonardo funding is usually in the creation of networks and international contacts; Leonardo projects legitimise developmental work in the organisations and therefore support pedagogical development; however, administration and bureaucracy take too much time from the actual work. Conclusions and recommendations General recommendations related to the development of the vocational education system in Finland are the following: 1. In order to make full use of the possibilities provided by new learning environments and modern information and communication technology, these should be better taken into account in the pedagogical training of teachers. 2. All development projects should include both technical, pedagogical and content-related expertise. 3. The outcomes of the EU projects could be developed further in national dissemination projects. Recommendations in relation to pedagogy are the following: 1. Learning theories and different pedagogical models should be used in the new projects in a systematic manner. 2. One criteria for funding could be that pedagogical expertise is available within the project as well. 3. Project plans and budgets should take into consideration how the teachers learn to work with new pedagogical models and in new technology-supported learning environments. 4. National or EU funding could be directed to continuation projects, where technologicallyinnovative products are developed further pedagogically (eg. training of teachers to use the end product, development of pedagogical principles behind the product). 5. Teacher training should be developed so that teachers and training organisations have better qualifications to use and develop modern pedagogical models and new learning environments. It is recommended that when technology is used in education: 1. Www -products should be higher level solutions instead of services which use linear texts and information searches. 5

2. Technological decisions and solutions should also be pedagogically based. 3. Planning of projects should take into consideration the differences in technological infrastructure in different countries. 4. Usability should also be considered when technological decisions are made (eg. limitations caused by speed and expenses in international data connections). 5. Special dissemination funding should be available to develop further good and innovative pedagogical models and methods, to include some technological aspects as well. Relations to working life organisations: 1. Representatives of working life organisations should always be within the partnership, and their role and input should be clearer. 2. The projects should take into consideration and support the integration of end-products into the activities of the partner organisations (enterprises and training organisations). 3. It should be guaranteed that the objectives are needs-based. Recommendations related to project management and international cooperation: 1. Bureaucracy related to funding should be reduced and made more simple, in order to allow more resources for the actual development work. 2. Arrival of funding on time should be guaranteed, in order to make it possible for partners without buffer funds to participate and function properly; this is especially vital for private enterprises, and therefore related to the development of relations between the training system and the working life. 3. More attention should be paid to how and on what grounds project partners are selected. 4. The added value and objectives of international cooperation should be evaluated and justified already in the application stage. 6

References Ahteenmäki-Pelkonen, L. 1994. From self-directedness to interdependence? An analysis of Mezirow's conceptualization of self-directed learning. In: Tösse, S. & Wahlgren, B. & Manninen, J. & Klasson, M. (1994) (eds.) Social Change and Adult Education Research - Adult Education Research in Nordic Countries 1992/93. Trondheim: Norsk Voksenpedagogisk Institut. Ahteenmäki-Pelkonen, L. 1997. Kriittinen näkemys itseohjautuvuudesta. Systemaattinen analyysi Jack Mezirowin itseohjautuvuuskäsityksistä. Helsingin yliopiston kasvatustieteen laitoksen tutkimuksia 157. Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy. Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. 1993. Surpassing ourselves: an enquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Open Court. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. 1989. Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 1989, 18, pp. 32-42. Duffy, T. & Jonassen, D. 1992. Constructivism: new implications for instructional technology. In: T. Duffy & D. Jonassen (eds.) Constructionism and technology of instruction: a conversation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Engeström, Y. 1988. Perustietoa opetuksesta. Valtiovarainministeriö. Helsinki: Valtion painatuskeskus. Engeström, Y. 1995. Kehittävä työntutkimus. Perusteita, tuloksia ja haasteita. Helsinki: Hallinnon kehittämiskeskus. Engeström, Y. 1999. Situated learning at the treshold of the new millennium. In J. Bliss, R. Säljö & P. Light (Eds.), Learning sites: Social and technological resources for learning. Amsterdam: Pergamon Press. Finnconsult 1999. Member state report: Finland. Evaluation of the Leonardo da Vinci Programme in Finland 1995-1999. Hakkarainen, K., Lonka, K. & Lipponen, L. 1999. Tutkiva oppiminen. Älykkään toiminnan rajat ja niiden ylittäminen. Porvoo: WSOY. Hein, I. & Larna, R. 1992. Lähellä, kaukana, yksin, yhdessä. Näkökulmia monimuoto-opetukseen. Helsingin yliopisto: Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Hein, I. (toim.) 1998. Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka elinikäisen oppimisen apuna. Sitran teknologia-arviointihanke: Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Osaraportti 2. Sitra 192. Helsinki: Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto. Huovinen, L. (toim.) 1998. Peruskoulujen, lukioiden, ammatillisten oppilaitosten ja varhaiskasvatuksen nykytilanne ja tulevaisuudennäkymät. Sitran teknologia-arviointihanke: Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Osaraportti 3. Sitra 191. Helsinki: Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto. Immonen, J. 2000. Kirjeopetuksesta verkko-opiskeluun - etäopetuksen neljä sukupolvea. Teoksessa: Matikainen, J. & Manninen, J. (toim.) 2000. Aikuiskoulutus verkossa: Verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Helsingin yliopisto, Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, R.T. 1987. Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive and individualistic learning. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Jonassen, D.H. 1995. Supporting communities of learners with technology: a vision for integrating technology with learning in schools. Educational technology 35, (4), 60-63. Kauppi, A. 1993. Mistä nousee oppimisen mieli? Kontekstuaalisen oppimiskäsityksen perusteita. Teoksessa: Aikuisen oppimisen uudet muodot. Helsinki: Aikuiskasvatuksen tutkimusseura / Kansanvalistusseura. Kauppi, A. 1995. Monimutkaiset yritysympäristöt avoimina oppimisympäristöinä. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. 7

Kauppi, A. & Vainio, L. 1998. Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka ammattikorkeakoulujen opetuksessa. Teoksessa Jarmo Viteli (toim.) ja Seppo Collan, Antti Kauppi, Hannele Niemi ja Leena Vainio. Yliopistojen ja ammattikorkeakoulujen tilanne ja tulevaisuuden näkymät. Sitran teknologia-arviointihanke: Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Osaraportti 1. Sitra 189. Helsinki: Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto. 35-65. Keogh, H. (eds.) 1999. Made to measure - personalising training. Dublin: Made-to-Measure Project. Koro, J. 1993. Aikuinen oman oppimisensa ohjaajana : itseohjautuvuus, sen kehittyminen ja yhteys oppimistuloksiin kasvatustieteen avoimen korkeakouluopetuksen monimuotokokeilussa. Jyväskylä: Jyväskylän yliopisto. Launis, K. & Engeström, Y. 1999. Asiantuntijuus muuttuvassa työtoiminnassa. Teoksessa A. Eteläpelto & P. Tynjälä (toim.), Oppiminen ja asiantuntijuus. Työelämän ja koulutuksen näkökulmia. Porvoo: WSOY. Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lehtiö, P. (toim.) 1998. Tietoverkot ja digitaaliset oppimateriaalit. Sitran teknologia-arviointihanke: Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Osaraportti 5. Sitra 193. Helsinki: Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto. Lewis, R. 1992. What is open learning? IN: A. Tait (Ed.) Key issues in open learning. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Lipponen, L. 1997. Tietotekniikka yhteisöllisen oppimisen tukena. Teoksessa S. Tella (toim.) Media nykypäivän koulutuksessa. Osa 1. Ainedidaktiikan symposiumi Helsingissä perjantaina 14.2.1997. Helsingin yliopiston opettajankoulutuslaitos. Tutkimuksia 178, 99-106. Lonka, K. 1997. Explorations of Constructive Processes in Student Learning. Deparment of Psychology, University of Helsinki. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino. Luosujärvi, P., Reponen, M. & Vuohelainen, H. 1994. Monimuoto-opetusta korkeakouluihin. Helsinki: TKY, KY, HYY. Manninen, J. 1992. Tietokonevälitteinen viestintä etäopetuksessa. Teoksessa: Hein, I. & Larna, R. 1992. Lähellä, kaukana, yksin, yhdessä. Näkökulmia monimuoto-opetukseen. Helsingin yliopisto: Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Manninen, J. 1998. Itseohjautuminen avoimissa oppimisympäristöissä - kotiin, töihin vai koulutukseen? Teoksessa: Manninen, J. (toim.) Aikuiskoulutus modernin murroksessa. Näkökulmia työllistymistä edistävän koulutuksen ja ohjauksen merkityksiin ja vaikuttavuuteen. Helsingin yliopisto, kasvatustieteen laitos, tutkimuksia 158. Manninen, J. 2000. Kurssikoulutuksesta oppimisympäristöihin - aikuiskoulutuskäytäntöjen kehityslinjoja. Teoksessa: Matikainen, J. & Manninen, J. (toim.) 2000. Aikuiskoulutus verkossa: Verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Helsingin yliopisto, Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Manninen, J. & Nevgi, A. 2000. Opetus verkossa - vuorovaikutuksen uudet mahdollisuudet. Teoksessa: Matikainen, J. & Manninen, J. (toim.) 2000. Aikuiskoulutus verkossa: Verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Helsingin yliopisto, Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Manninen, J. & Pesonen, S. 1997. Uudet oppimisympäristöt. Aikuiskasvatus 4/97. Manninen, J. & Pesonen, S. 2000. Aikuisdidaktiset lähestymistavat - verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen suunnittelun taustaa. Teoksessa: Matikainen, J. & Manninen, J. (toim.) 2000. Aikuiskoulutus verkossa: Verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Helsingin yliopisto, Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Mannisenmäki, E. 2000. Oppija verkossa - yksin ja yhdessä. Teoksessa: Matikainen, J. & Manninen, J. (toim.) 2000. Aikuiskoulutus verkossa: Verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Helsingin yliopisto, Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Matikainen, J. & Manninen, J. (toim.) 2000. Aikuiskoulutus verkossa: Verkkopohjaisten oppimisympäristöjen 8

teoriaa ja käytäntöä. Helsingin yliopisto, Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Mezirow, J. (et al.) 1995. Uudistava oppiminen. Kriittinen reflektio aikuiskoulutuksessa. Helsinki: Lahden tutkimus- ja koulutuskeskus. Miettinen, R. 1993. Oppitunnista oppimistoimintaan. Helsinki: Gaudeamus. Miettinen, R., Lehenkari, J., Hasu, M. & Hyvönen, J. 1999. Osaaminen ja uuden luominen innovaatioverkoissa. Helsinki: Taloustieto oy. Miettinen, R., Isokangas, J. & Peisa, S. 1999. Yrityksen perustaminen ja toiminnan tutkiminen partneriyrityksen kanssa: 1990-luvun innovaatio kaupan alan koulutuksessa. Teoksessa: Sallila, P. & Tuomisto, J. (toim.) Työn muutos ja oppiminen. Aikuiskasvatuksen 38 Vuosikirja. Jyväskylä: Gummerus. Niemi, H. 1998. (Toim.) Opettaja modernin murroksessa. Helsinki: Atena. Niemi, H. 1998. Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opettajankoulutuksessa. Teoksessa Jarmo Viteli (toim.) Yliopistojen ja ammattikorkeakoulujen tilanne ja tulevaisuudennäkymät. Osaraportti 1. Sitra 189. Nyyssölä, K. 2000. Rajatonta oppimista ja kulttuurien kohtaamista - Leonardo da Vinci -ohjelman vaikuttavuus ammatillisen koulutuksen kansainvälistymiseen. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Ollikainen, A. & Pajala, S. 2000. Ammattitaitoa ja työllisyyttä Euroopasta? Leonardo da Vinci - henkilövaihtotoimintojen vaikuttavuus. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Oppimisen uudet ympäristöt 1999. Koulutusteknologian esiselvitys. Digitaalisen median raportti 4/99. Helsinki: Tekes. Oulujärvi, J. & Perä-Rouhu, E. 2000. Oppiminen työelämässä - työssäoppiminen opiskelussa. Koulutuksen ja työelämän yhteistyö Leonardo da Vinci -projekteissa. Helsinki: Opetushallitus. Pasanen, H. 1998. Refleksiivisen itseohjautuvuuskäsityksen hahmotusta. Teoksessa: Manninen, J. 1998 (toim.) Aikuiskoulutus modernin murroksessa. Näkökulmia työllistymistä edistävän koulutuksen ja ohjauksen merkityksiin ja vaikuttavuuteen. Helsingin yliopiston kasvatustieteen laitoksen tutkimuksia 158. Paulsen, M. 1995. An Overview of CMC and the Online Classroom in Distance Education. In: Berge, Z. & Collins, M. 1995 (eds.). Computer Mediated Communication and the Online Classroom. Vol. III: Distance Learning. Cresskill: Hampton Press. Peisa, S. 1996. Laajojen ja kompleksisten opetuskokonaisuuksien kehittämisestä kauppaopetuksessa. Teoksessa: Lambert, P. & Engeström, Y. (toim.). Kehittävä työntutkimus ammatillisissa oppilaitoksissa. Helsinki: Helsingin yliopiston kasvatustieteen laitoksen julkaisuja 150. Remes, V. & Yrjölä, P. 1998. Ammatillisen lisäkoulutuksen pedagoginen arviointi. Helsinki: Opetushallitus, no. 10/1998. Reusser, K. 1995. From cognitive modeling to the design of pedagogical tools. In: S. Vosniadou et al. (eds.). International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ruokamo, H. & Pohjolainen, S. 1999. Etäopetus multimediaverkoissa (ETÄKAMU) - tavoitetutkimushanke. Teoksessa: Etäopetus multimediaverkoissa. Kansallisen multimediaohjelman ETÄKAMU-hanke. Digitaalisen median raportti 1/99. Helsinki: Tekes. Sahlberg, P. & Leppilampi, A. 1994. Yksinään vai yhteisvoimin? - yhdessäoppimisen mahdollisuuksia etsimässä. Helsingin yliopisto. Vantaan täydennyskoulutuslaitos. Helsinki: Yliopistopaino. Sinko, M. & Lehtinen, E. (toim.). 1998. Bitit ja pedagogiikka: Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Jyväskylä: Atena Kustannus. Sirviö, P., Hakola E-M. & Koskinen, L. 1999. Opetuksen uudet toteutukset Taideteollisessa korkeakoulussa. Helsinki: Taideteollinen korkeakoulu. 9

Tella, S. & Tirri, K. 1999. Educational Innovations in Finnish and European Contexts. An analysis of the Aims and Outcomes of The European Observatory of the European Commission. (1994-1998). Department of Teacher Education. University of Helsinki. Research Report 200. Viteli, J. (toim.) 1998. Esimerkkejä ja kokemuksia korkeakoulumaailmasta. Sitran teknologia arviointihanke: Tietoja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Osaraportti 2. Sitra 190. Helsinki: Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto. Viteli, J. (toim.), Collan, S., Kauppi, A., Niemi, H. & Vainio, L. 1998. Yliopistojen ja ammattikorkeakoulujen tilanne ja tulevaisuuden näkymät. Sitran teknologia-arviointihanke: Tieto- ja viestintätekniikka opetuksessa ja oppimisessa. Osaraportti 1. Sitra 189. Helsinki: Suomen itsenäisyyden juhlarahasto. Appendix 1. Projects selected for valorisation: Projects coordinated by Finns: 1 FIN/95/2/1704/PI/II.1.1.c/FPC European Collaborative Learning Environment (ECOLE) 2 FIN/95/2/1091/PI/II.1.1.a/CON Integrated Open and Distance Learning Programme for the SMEs in the European Graphics Industry (IDOL) 3 FIN/95/A/10/PI/III.1.a/FPC Multiformat Open and Distance Learning Technical and Business English Programme (MTBE) 4 FIN/95/A/22/PI/I.1.1.a/FPI Common European Studies in Multiple Use of Forests and Forest Environment (Multiple Use of Forests) 5 FIN/96/1/03041/PI/I.1.1.a/CON Virtual Factory for Education (Virtual Factory) 6 FIN/97/1/27020/PI/I.1.1.a/FPI Network Based Project Learning in Engineering Education (NetPro) 7 FIN/95/A/1/PI/I.1.1.a/FPI Teaching Chemistry by Vegetable Oil Theme (Biodiesel) 8 FIN/95/2/1218/PI/II.1.1.a/FPC The Development of Quality Guide and Multimedia Training Program for Hotel Industry (Quality Guide) 9 FIN/95/2/2921/PI/II.1.1.c/FPC Special Training for Environmentally-sound Production (STEP) 10 FIN/96/2/0435/PI/II.1.1.c/FPC Development of Fieldbus Training (DEFITRA) 11 FIN/96/2/0600/PI/II.1.1.a/CON Developing Multi-skilled Technician and Lifelong Learning (Multi-skill) 12 FIN/98/1/67013/PI/III.1.a/CONT A Teacher/Institutional Diagnostic and Development Programme for the Introduction of Content and Language Integrated Learning (VocTalk) 13 FIN/95/A/40/PI/I.1.1.b/CON (Hamlet Archive and) Multimedia Learning Environment for Theatre (HAMLET) 14 FIN/98/1/67030/PI/I.1.1.a/FPI Media and Ethics (Medet) Partner projects: P1 IRL/96//4260/PI/I.1.1.e/ Personalisation of Training Courses P2 S/95/2/1280/PI/II.1.1.a/FPI Computer Aided Training System for Bookbinding, Finishing & Mailing Areas (PostPressSIM) P3 IRL/97/2/00696/PI/II.1.1.a/FPC Training of Facilitators in Learning by Open Learning Systems (Trails) P4 D/97/1/12008/PI/III.3.a/FPC The Delta Concept (DELTA) P5 UK/97/1/37036/PI/III.3.a/FPC European Regional Education Network (EREN) P6 S/96//240/PI/II.1.1.a/ Benchlearning - advanced organisational learning P7 D/96/1/01063/PI/III.3.a/FPC Multimedia Learning and Information Systems in CVT: A European Train-the-Trainer Concept (MM-Euro) 10