O slideshow foi denunciado.
Utilizamos seu perfil e dados de atividades no LinkedIn para personalizar e exibir anúncios mais relevantes. Altere suas preferências de anúncios quando desejar.

Andreia Inamorato Dos Santos

229 visualizações

Publicada em

Blockchain in education

Publicada em: Educação
  • Seja o primeiro a comentar

  • Seja a primeira pessoa a gostar disto

Andreia Inamorato Dos Santos

  1. 1. ANDREIA INAMORATO DOS SANTOS European Commission: Scientific Project Officer, Joint Research Center
  2. 2. Joint Research Centre the European Commission's in-house science service Blockchain in Education A study on the digital accreditation of personal and academic learning Andreia Inamorato dos Santos @aisantos Groningen, The Netherlands 5th September 2017
  3. 3. 3 Joint Research Centre - JRC The JRC (Seville) is the in-house science service of the European Comission. Our main goal is to support policy making in Europe via research evidence. We have over 100 policy reports published in the field of education, to include reports on Open Education, area in which we locate our blockchain study.  It can be downloaded from: http://bit.ly/openeduframework   
  4. 4. 4 DigComp (DG EMPL) EntreComp (DG EMPL) DigCompConsumers (DG JUST) OpenEdu Policies (DG EAC) MOOCKnowledge (DG EAC) Blockchain for Education (DG JRC) OPTEV (DG JRC) MOOCs4 inclusion (DG EAC) Learning Analytics (DG JRC) Anticipatory studies Policy & society OrganisationsIndividuals DigCompEdu (DG EAC) DigPolEdu (DG EAC) CPDmodels (DG EAC) ICTinPISA (DG EAC) CompuThink (DG JRC) DigCompOrg4Schools (DG EAC) OpenEdu (HE) (DG EAC) DigCompOrg (DG EAC) Current JRC research on Digital Age Learning and 21st Century Skills
  5. 5. 5 Blockchain in Education study Who is involved: The study is being carried out by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), unit B4, of which the overall education project areas coordination is by Yves Punie. Main researchers for this study are Alex Grech and Anthony Camilleri (Strategyworks) and study design and management is by Andreia Inamorato (European Commission, JRC). Collaborators for use cases: interviewees, informants and reviewers based in Europe and abroad (e.g. Open University UK; MIT, Learning Machine, University of Nicosia, Malta education institutions, Ministry of Education of Estonia and The Netherlands - University of Groningen) Outcome: A report to be published in the Autumn 2017 ‘
  6. 6. 6 Outcome ‘Blockchain in Education: a study on the digital accreditation of personal and academic learning’ (JRC, 2017) Upcoming report: Autumn 2017
  7. 7. 7 Aims of the study The study sought to: Identify, analyse and disseminate the state-of-the-art of the use of blockchain technologies in education in the EU. Currently stakeholders within the education sector are often unaware of the social advantages and potential of blockchain technology. The report tries to address this gap Explore examples of practices via case studies in Europe and abroad ( and present possible future scenarios: e.g. blockchain for automatic recognition and transfer of credits, as a lifelong learning passport, for tracking intellectual property, etc) Propose a set of recommendations that may support EU efforts (Member States and the European Commission) to open up education in Member States by maximising the potential for blockchain technologies.
  8. 8. 8 Qualitative methodology Source: Overview of Methodology, Blockchain for Education, JRC 2017
  9. 9. 9 Report content overview  Identification and engaging with the key issues which are influencing policy-makers and other key stakeholders in considering the use of the Blockchain as a value-added proposition within an education landscape (social value proposition: 1. self- sovereignty and identity; 2: trust; 3. transparency and provenance; 4. immutability; 5. disintermediation and 6. collaboration)  Exploration of how education institutions and learners can use the technology as a transparent, trusted system for securing, sharing and verifying academic achievements in Europe ( e.g. ontology of certifications, smart contracts, digital signatures, grants issuing, etc)
  10. 10. 10 Report content overview  Discussion whether the technology is fit-for-purpose for the recording of academic achievements within the short-term, and the likely take-up by European universities and higher education institutions should it be deployed as an open standard  Discussion of how the Blockchain may help bridge the legitimate need for academic institutions to safeguard their brands and reputation when issuing academic credentials and the aspirations of individuals to maximise their learning portfolio OpenCred report (JRC, 2016) Validation of non-formal, MOOC-based learning Available at: http://bit.ly/opencredreport
  11. 11. 11 Report content overview  Identification of a set of clear opportunities and challenges for the take-up of the Blockchain in higher education institutions  Exploration of issues relating to interoperability of technology; and how the centralized nature of accreditation and the decentralized nature of the Blockchain could be reconciled  Set of recommendations that may support open education in Member States by maximising the potential for blockchain technologies
  12. 12. 12 Main conclusions This report concludes that blockchain applications for education are still in their infancy (1). It describes case studies of implementations from various European and non- European players, but each of these implementations is in a piloting phase. However, even from these early pilots, it is possible to suggest that blockchain has the potential to disrupt the market in student information systems (2), by loosening the control current players have over this market. ( in line with open education’s sharing and transparency principles)
  13. 13. 13 Main conclusions A further conclusion is that the benefits of blockchain in education are better achieved through open implementations of the technology (3), by utilising open source software, open standards for data, and implementing self-sovereign data management solutions. Finally the study recommends that: a) further development of the technology in the educational field should be considered as a shared competence of the market and of public authorities (4), to ensure an appropriate balance of private sector innovation coupled with safeguard of the public interest ( shared competence between the EU and MS)
  14. 14. 14 Upcoming reports: OpenEdu Policies
  15. 15. 15 24-26 April
  16. 16. 16 Thank you andreia-inamorato-dos.santos@ec.europa.eu yves.punie@ec.europa.eu https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/open-education