Page 65 - Looking_after_school

2. The architecture: from the educational institution
to the learning environment

the above-mentioned quality indicators. In other words: in so far as the
goals of education are expressed in terms of outcomes, education, but
also the teacher, becomes accountable for whether or not these out-
comes are achieved. An additional consequence is that, in this archi-
tecture, the ‘qualification function’ (and the recognition and validation
of learning outcomes) is outsourced ideally to external entities (which
may or may not be approved by the government). Educational institu-
tions which have to guarantee these learning outcomes and have the
authority to acknowledge and validate these, serve as both judge and
interested party. This can become also additionally problematic when
learning outcomes can be achieved anywhere. The new architecture,
thus, needs the disconnection of formative evaluation (as feedback
and learning support) and summative evaluation (in view of qualifica-
tion which is, for instance, done by approved assessment centres). In
an educational institution, which is focused on achieving goals and
handing out degrees, this disconnect is not under consideration.

The exam, degree, and corrective sanctions have important roles to
fulfil in the modern configuration of education. They provide insti-
tutional signposts for the student to orient themself. A learning envi-
ronment, on the other hand, is built around the learning process and
around learning outcomes, so the learner above all needs to be moni-
tored and coached. In an open learning environment, and thus without
predefined paths and with a variable destination (in terms of perfor-
mance level and/or domain), it becomes necessary for the learner to
have information that they can use to position themself. There is, then,
a need for information about the required proficiency level in order to
gain access to a certain module or path, such as concrete information
about the learning outcomes, the estimated learning time, expected
added value, and returns; but also, there is the need of constant infor-
mation about the current status of the learner in the learning process
(thus information about the preliminary level of performance) and
about any needed adjustments (up or down a level according to pro-
ficiency). Continuing Foucault’s (1975) strand of thought, this could
be formulated as follows: while the norm asks for discipline and for
normalising sanctions, employability asks for monitoring and per-
sonalised feedback.

65