scholarly journals Flexible learning options for the degree MMedVet (Chir) : to the editor

2003 ◽  
Vol 74 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Bland-van den Berg ◽  
P. Stadler ◽  
P.H. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Learning Options

Social inclusion education policy in South Australia: What can we learn?

2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Bills ◽  
Nigel Howard
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Young People ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Young Person ◽  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Early School Leaving ◽  
Early School ◽  
School Learning ◽  
Learning Options

In this article, we interrogate the policy assumptions underlying a significant South Australian public education re-engagement initiative called Flexible Learning Options, formulated within South Australia’s social inclusion policy agenda, beginning in 2006. To this end, we applied Baachi’s ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ policy analysis framework to a historical range of departmental Flexible Learning Options policy documents and evaluations to uncover how Flexible Learning Options (1) understands the problem of early school leaving, (2) defines the notion of being an ‘at risk’ young person and (3) interprets and enacts the intervention process for young people identified as ‘at risk’ of early school leaving. Our policy analysis indicates re-engagement in learning – as measured by improved retention – to be the key Flexible Learning Options policy driver, with schools ‘silently’ positioned as a significant part of the retention in learning problem. The Flexible Learning Options engagement in learning intervention directed at ‘high-risk’ students’ works to remove them from schools into places where personalised support and an alternative curriculum are made available. ‘Lower risk’ students are given a combination of in-school and off-school learning options. Our What’s the Problem Represented to be? analysis also reveals that (1) the notion of ‘risk’ is embodied within the young person and is presented as the predominant cause of early school leaving; (2) how the educational marketplace could work to promote Flexible Learning Options enrolment growth has not been considered; (3) schools are sidelined as first choice engagement options for ‘high-risk’ young people, (4) secondary school redesign and family intervention as alternative reengagement strategies have largely been ignored and (5) through withdrawal from conventional schooling, the access of many Flexible Learning Options to students to an expansive curriculum delivered by teachers within well-resourced school learning architectures has been constrained.

Policy Analysis on Education in Emergencies (EiE) and Flexible Learning Options (FLOs) for Senior High School (SHS) in the Philippines

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi Fontanos ◽  
Junette Fatima Gonzales ◽  
Kathrina Lorraine Lucasan ◽  
Dina Ocampo
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Policy Analysis ◽  
Basic Education ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Senior High School ◽  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
School Year ◽  
Novel Coronavirus ◽  
Learning Options

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has affected the basic education sector in the Philippines. In the public school system, the pandemic has not only disrupted schooling by shifting the beginning of the school year (SY) 2020-20201 at a later time, it has also necessitated a shift to alternative learning delivery strategies including the use of more flexible face-to-face, distance and blended learning. This paper focuses on the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak on the K to 12 senior high school (SHS) program and the need to offer flexible learning options (FLOs) to upper secondary learners. It examines the policies the Department of Education (DepEd) has initiated in continuing learning during the pandemic and providing education through FLOs using the INEE’s domain standards on EiE. From this policy analysis, the paper identified some gaps that need to be addressed through the following recommendations 1) intensify FLO guidelines to meet the different needs and contexts of learners especially the marginalized; 2) develop an EiE policy; 3) improve teachinglearning by strengthening communication channels, formative assessment, and multimedia learning materials; 4) provide offline and online options for SHS tracks; 5) explore the use of videos, mobile training centers and flexible times of study.

Outcomes from Flexible Learning Options for disenfranchised youth: what counts?

2016 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 117-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kitty te Riele ◽  
Kimberley Wilson ◽  
Valda Wallace ◽  
Sue McGinty ◽  
Brian Lewthwaite
Keyword(s):  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Learning Options

scholarly journals Distance travelled: outcomes and evidence in flexible learning options

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 443-460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Thomas ◽  
Sue McGinty ◽  
Kitty te Riele ◽  
Kimberley Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Learning Options

scholarly journals Educational Re-engagement as Social Inclusion: the role of flexible learning options in alternative provision in Australia

FORUM ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 345 ◽  
Author(s):  
GEORGE MYCONOS ◽  
JOSEPH THOMAS ◽  
KIMBERLEY WILSON ◽  
KITTY TE RIELE ◽  
LUKE SWAIN
Keyword(s):  
Social Inclusion ◽  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Learning Options

INDIVIDUALISATION IN FLEXIBLE LEARNING, FROM A POST-POST-FOUNDATIONALIST PERSPECTIVE

2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-114
Author(s):  
J L Van der Walt
Keyword(s):  
Distance Learning ◽  
Blended Learning ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Flexible Learning ◽  
Per Se

Most practitioners in the field of flexible learning seem to be sufficiently aware of the importance of catering to the needs of their students. However, it appears that many are rather more conscious of the needs of the students as a group than as individuals per se. Others seem to be rather more concerned about the technology involved. After touching on the foundationalist and non-, post- or anti-foundationalist approaches to the problem of individualisation in flexible learning, the article discusses a number of guidelines for individualisation from a post-post-foundationalist perspective. This is followed by a section in which these guidelines are presented in practical terms. This outline of guidelines reveals that attempting to individualise from this perspective is no simple and straightforward matter, but that there might be practitioners in the field of flexible learning (open distance learning and blended learning) who already are following this approach as a best practice. A post-post-foundationalist approach to individualisation in flexible learning offers practitioners in the field a whole new vocabulary.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document