Activity 6.4 - CMALT and LSN certification schemes - my observations

Sources

CMALT (n.d.) ‘CMALT Prospectus ’, [online] Available from: http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/cmalt-prospectusv4.pdf (Accessed 30 November 2008).

The Learning and Skills Network (2007) ‘A Professional Development Framework for E-learning’, [online] Available from: https://oufe.open.ac.uk/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.learningtechnologies.ac.uk/files/0627161Framework.pdf (Accessed 2 December 2008).

Lessner, Ellen (2007) ‘CMALT experience - an individual perspective ’, [online] Available from: http://www.alt.ac.uk/docs/Ellen_Lessner_CMALT_experience_200711203.pdf (Accessed 2 December 2008).

Lisewski, Bernard and Joyce, Paul (n.d.) ‘Examining the five-stage e-moderating model: Designed and emergent practice in the learning technology profession’, [online] Available from: http://learn.open.ac.uk/mod/resourcepage/view.php?id=90970&direct=1 (Accessed 24 November 2008).

Oliver, Martin (2002) ‘What do Learning Technologists do?’, Innovations in Education and Teaching International , 30(4), pp. 245-252.

Write a short 300 word account of what you have learned about the development and certification of elearning practitioners in this unit.

Much of the interest in accrediting learning technologists comes from a recognition of

• the isolation common to many learning technologists (including myself) (Oliver)(Lessner)
• the problems with credibility (i.e. academics not recognizing the expertise / competencies that a LT role can hold and instead reducing the position to a service provider or enabler; their practices are poorly understood (Oliver) (LSN) ; involves more than simply selecting from an off the shelf arsenal of products / services (Lisewski)
• the unique nature of the position (autonomy, without authority, yet still being promoted as a strategic change agent) .. (Oliver)

It appears that learning technologists have moved to address these (and other) issues first through the formation an association (ALT), and secondly through the set up of accreditation (CMALT or LSN). Such efforts also raise the profile of research in learning technology and the pursuit of professionalism by Learning Technologists.

While not directly stated, it's clear that this work ultimately improves credibility and respectability for the LT position. (CMALT prospectus) (LSN) .

My own review of competencies yielded some important insights.

The LSN competencies were subdivided by role - general practitioner, policy maker, expert adviser, developer, leader. This proved to be much more interesting because it pointed out to me just how many "hats" one can wear as an Learning Technologist .. and the need to switch those hats - i.e. from learner to adviser to leader.. Which lead me to suggest yet another challenging competency - the need to know when to switch those hats .... thus I'm deducing the need to be a fairly seasoned communicator in order to recognize that.

Based upon my interpretation and review of the competencies from CMALT, all six of my pdp objectives tied into atleast one of the CMALT Core competencies.. and in three pdp objectives a CMALT Specialist competency was identified. Noticeable was a focus on operational issues in 4 of the 6 objectives. This has me wondering if I am unknowingly "complying" with management's view of me as an learning technologist as "service provider"(?).