1 / 7

Artefacts, products and practice as credit

Artefacts, products and practice as credit. Dr Pauline Armsby Sibyl Coldham Helen Pokorny Dr Barry Stierer. A brief background to APEL.

rolf
Télécharger la présentation

Artefacts, products and practice as credit

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Artefacts, products and practice as credit Dr Pauline Armsby Sibyl Coldham Helen Pokorny Dr Barry Stierer

  2. A brief background to APEL • Historically, for reasons of reassuring academics concerned about the threat APEL poses to academic standards  it has been considered legitimate to make APEL harder than conventional assessment and to draw similarities with conventional assessment models.

  3. Models of APEL, Butterworth (1992) • The ambiguity around what APEL is and how it should be represented meant that dominant approaches to APEL have evolved around models of reflective practice as a means of legitimising the process. This shifts the focus onto the processes of gaining new/academic learning and away from the products of prior learning. It results in a heavy reliance on reflective narratives and transforming knowledge derived from experience.

  4. One must be careful not to create the erroneous impression whereby APEL is seen to be easier and quicker for the student to acquire than taking the course (Johnson, B. 2002, Models of APEL and Quality Assurance p. 27). • …at higher levels still the student will need to call on the works of various authors as a basis for critical reflection (Johnson, B. 2002, Models of APEL and Quality Assurance p. 44).

  5. In 2011 APEL remains a peripheral practice. If we are going to take advantage of the changed environment to position APEL as a relevant mainstream assessment practice for mature students APEL needs to be done differently. It needs to be efficient and accessible hence our interest in artefacts, products and practices as credit.

  6. Our position • APEL in HE should include assessment practices which involve ‘holistic, integrative interpretations...the valuing of context-bound knowledge; and the articulation of values and judgments of assessors’ (Armsby et al. 2006, p. 381). • Context bound knowledge as… • Artefacts – objects with elements of design • Products – tangible outcomes/technologies of practice • Practice - behaviours/ways of being

  7. References • Butterworth, C. (1992) ‘More than one bite at the APEL, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 16, No 3, pp 39-51. • Johnson, B. (2002) Models of APEL and Quality Assurance, SEEC. • Pokorny, H.(2011) ‘APEL research in English Higher Education’ in Harris, J., Breier, M. and Wihak, C. (eds) Researching the Recognition of Prior Learning, NIACE • Trowler, P. (1996), ‘ Angels in marble? Accrediting prior experiential learning in higher education,’ Studies in Higher Education, 21, No 1, pp 17-29. Pokorny 2011: HEA Seminar

More Related