Integrated lifelong learning
The project Lifelong learning at the School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE) aims to expand and further develop the range of courses to reach the target of 20 per cent of the total education volume.
The development project is carried out at ABE, within the framework of the change programme "Future Education at KTH".
Background
KTH's goal is for 20 per cent of the education volume to consist of lifelong learning activities. Integrating lifelong learning is one of the principles of the change programme "Future Education at KTH", and aims to promote individual skills development and career transition for students and professionals at different stages of life. Through lifelong learning, education stays attractive and relevant even in a rapidly changing and uncertain world, where the demand for skills can change swiftly.
Aim and objectives
- To make lifelong learning an integral part of the ABE school's education.
- To develop operational support, communication and marketing for the ABE School's developopment of lifelong learning.
Milestones and preliminary time table
1 March 2023 - February 2025:
- Mapping and evaluation of lifelong learning within the existing course offerings and activities of the ABE School.
- Analysis of demand (market survey) among students and employers.
- Overview of operational support, communication and marketing for the school's development of lifelong learning.
- Proposals for course offerings.
- Proposal for working methods for operational support, communication and marketing.
Challenges
Lifelong learning requires extensive reforms as it faces several challenges:
-
Unclear division of responsibilities;
-
Lack of access to support tools;
-
Low student completion;
-
Unclear measurement tools and budget/funding models creating uncertainty in departments;
-
Admission requirements and eligibility criteria are unclear;
-
Funding for research centres not linked to LL, as requested by target groups.
Orders from central KTH to deliver several courses often come at short notice. As a result, basic courses (level K1) are being converted or becoming follow-up courses. These are not adapted to the target group or organised in such a way that they lend themselves to high participation and, by extension, good student completion (short modules).
In addition:
-
The LL courses are also not necessarily in demand by the general public or the business community;
-
KTH employees do not have written job descriptions or mandates to work with or towards LL courses;
-
Small and uneven range of courses with low or no requirement for a quid pro quo on completion rates;
-
There are arbitrary minimum student requirements for the start of the course.
Suggestions for improvement
-
Clear roles are distributed in the organisation regarding the LL courses;
-
Ready-made course templates at school level;
-
Allocated and earmarked funds centrally for LL/initiative (not the Head of School's influence);
-
A control system and evaluation of the relevance and structure of the course.
Results and lessons learnt
From the analysis and subsequent discussions, we have learnt the importance of a structured approach to developing LL courses underpinned by clear, standardised models and templates. Key insights include identifying the misalignment of LL strategies with societal and business needs, the negative impact of an over-reliance on consultants in educational environments, and the necessity for economic sustainability in LL course offerings.
We also recognised the need for a clearer development framework in research fields and the critical role of centralised LL management to enhance oversight and effectiveness. These findings highlight the strategic areas for improvement to align educational offerings more closely with both learner needs and organisational goals, ensuring the long-term viability and relevance of the LL programmes.
Next step
-
Conduct thorough course analyses and evaluations to ensure high quality and efficiency (including a financial follow-up to ensure efficient use of resources).
-
Assess the societal value our courses generate.
-
Clearly define the division of responsibilities, policy and implementation model (includes having proper facilities and codes to ensure that interventions are carried out correctly and structured).
