Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, online supervision has increased markedly, including within the Dutch probation services. In the present research, we systematically collected and analysed both clients and probation officers’ experiences of working online in the prior year. Although the clients were generally positive about remote supervision, some expressed that they missed the personal contact. According to most of the probation officers, remote working is flexible (efficient, saves time, travel costs), appropriate for certain phases of the probation process (especially at a later stage when a working alliance has been established) and particularly suitable for probationers with mild problems and low risk profiles. The general experience was that conversations are both more pragmatic and business-like, which, in turn, can produce both strengths and limitations. Once a foundation has been established, it appears to be possible to continue working remotely with clients, albeit the probation officers stressed that this depended on the type of client, type of offence and risk level.
Learning objects are bits of learning content. They may be reused 'as is' (simple reuse) or first be adapted to a learner's particular needs (flexible reuse). Reuse matters because it lowers the development costs of learning objects, flexible reuse matters because it allows one to address learners' needs in an affordable way. Flexible reuse is particularly important in the knowledge economy, where learners not only have very spefic demands but often also need to pay for their own further education. The technical problems to simple and flexible are rapidly being resolved in various learning technology standardisation bodies. This may suggest that a learning object economy, in which learning objects are freely exchanged, updated and adapted, is about to emerge. Such a belief, however, ignores the significant psychological, social and organizational barriers to reuse that still abound. An inventory of these problems is made and possible ways to overcome them are discussed.
This paper discusses two studies - the one in a business context, the other in a university context - carried out with expert educational designers. The studies aimed to determine the priorities experts claim to employ when designing competence-based learning environments. Designers in both contexts agree almost completely on principles they feel are important. Both groups emphasized that one should start a design enterprise from the needs of the learners, instead of the content structure of the learning domain. However, unlike business designers, university designers find it extremely important to consider alternative solutions during the whole design process. University designers also say that they focus more on project plan and desired characteristics of the instructional blueprint whereas business designers report being more client-oriented, stressing the importance of "buying in" the client early in the process.
