Formation {à} distance et outils num{é}riques pour l'enseignement sup{é}rieur et la recherche en Asie-Pacifique (Cambodge, Laos, Vietnam). Partie 02 : recommandations et feuille de route
Venue: arXiv cs.CY 2017
Year: 2017

This second part of a 2 volume-expertise is mainly based on the results of the inventory described in the first part. It is also based on a "worrying" statement in the terms of reference of this expert report 1, which states that "Asia enjoys a favourable technological context [in terms of equipment according to UN statistics]. Nevertheless, digital technology is still hardly present in the practices of the member institutions of the Agency and the francophone university community; So distance education is not well developed: there are currently no French-language distance training courses offered by an establishment in Asia; The region has only 14 enrolled in ODL over the period 2010 - 2014; Only three institutions have responded to the AUF's "Mooc" calls for projects over the last two years, etc.". The terms of reference also indicate a state of deficiency "in the Francophone digital campuses whose officials explain that the computer equipment are less and less used for individual practices". The proliferation of mobile digital technologies that would normally constitute an important asset for the development of teaching practices and innovative research around the Francophone digital campuses has not lived up to expectations. The paper refers to another no less important detail that would explain the paradox between the proliferation of technological tools and the reduction in usage when it indicates that, in parallel, and contrary to the francophone campuses, In English a positive dynamics of integration of T ICE and distance". The document provides concrete examples, such as the ASEAN Cyber University (ACU) program run by South Korea and its e-learning centers in Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam and Myanmar, The Vietnamese language and the fablab set up in the region since 2014 without the Francophonie being involved. A first hypothesis emerges from this premonitory observation that it is not technology that justifies the gradual demobilization (or even demotivation) of local actors to establish forms of Francophone partnerships for training and research. Nor is it a question of political will to improve technological infrastructure in digital training and research. Almost all the interviews carried out within the framework of this mission demonstrated the convergence of views and ambitious attitudes expressed by three categories of actors encountered:- political actors met in the ministries of education of the three countries who are aware of the importance of digital education and the added value generated by technologies for education. Each of the three countries has a regulatory framework and national technological innovation projects for education and digital education;- public and private academic institutions which, through their rectors, presidents and technical and pedagogical leaders, demonstrate their profound convictions for digital education (for reasons of quality, competitiveness and economic interest). However, given the rather centralized governance model at state level, the majority of academic institutions in the three countries are often awaiting the promulgation of legal texts (decrees, charters, conventions, directives , Etc.) that enable them to act and adopt innovative solutions in teaching and research;- Teacher-researchers relatively little consulted in this expertise, but sufficiently engaged as actors on the ground to be able to predict their points of view with regard to the use of digital in their pedagogical and research activities. Teachers and researchers with relatively modest incomes would inevitably have a decisive role in any academic reform on the digital level if concrete mobilizing arguments could compensate for their shortfalls by joining digital training or development projects or programs.