[ Current Issue ] [ Back Issues ]

JAPP: Editorial

Volume 2, Number 2, Spring 2005

Mary Stuart
University of Sussex

There are two main themes in this edition of the journal: curriculum change, and new collaborations and academic capacity to enable widening access.

The emphasis in much of the field is most often on learners: different learners, attracting new learners, helping new learners to succeed and so on. Certainly in England, government policies have focused on learners, and the new emphasis on what is called personalised learning takes the concern for learners to another level. Less frequently, however, do we examine provision and providers. The articles in this edition do just that.

Two articles focus specifically on staff development, and they provide an interesting comparison between different countries’ distance-learning environments. Cowan, George, Cannell and Hewitt discuss a new model of staff development tested at the Open University in Scotland, while Bhalalusesa sets out the challenges of developing distance learning in Tanzania. She forcefully points out that without proper training for lecturers working with students in the Open University of Tanzania the government’s hopes for its people cannot be realised. This article shows how staff development, something which is usually seen to be a local issue within an institution, can affect the implementation of policy.

Parker et al focus on staff in HEIs and their attitudes and practice in relation to widening participation. Their study examines a range of institutions and reveals very different attitudes and approaches. Again, the theme of staff development is highlighted here.

Asecond theme in the journal is changing provision and offering provision to different learners. Hall describes a project under the ‘gifted and talented’ scheme funded by the UK government to raise attainment and aspirations of young people contemplating entry to university. The study, which examines students taking HE modules while still studying for their HE entrance qualifications, draws out a number of issues which emerge from the policy. It highlights how engagement with other sectors is blurring the lines between pre-HE and HE.

In the Debates and Discussion section we have three pieces which address another new development in the field of widening access in the UK, the emergence of lifelong learning networks. As is usual with this section, these papers have a ‘live feel’. They were presented at a seminar held in London in January 2005, and their style and flavour retains the sense of the occasion. While providing courses for students studying at pre-HE level seems challenging, as the Hall study shows, the development of lifelong learning networks (LLNs) will probably prove even more challenging.

The LLN concept, developed by Sir Howard Newby, Chief Executive of the Higher Education Funding Council for England, builds on ideas from the USA where progression routes between community colleges and different types of HE providers are clearly mapped out. Newby outlines the vision based on localities and tackling a particular problem which faces English HE, the status and development of vocational higher education. Readers from outside the UK may find this strange, as vocational higher education is well developed in many parts of the world, but in England it remains a particular problem. Newby suggests that lifelong learning networks could provide a way forward.

Following on from this piece, Watson sets out the real challenges that ‘yet another initiative’ may offer. He goes on to argue that the key to success with the networks has to be a sustained and integrated approach to funding and development. Finally Blackie sets out the process of developing a network, processes that offer practitioners ideas and a vision for possible ways forward to enable success.