NW 16 ICT in Education and Training Archives

GenZ – the new generation of university students and implications for academic practice

by Elif Taslibeyaz, Feng Su & Margaret Wood | NW 16 ICT in Education and Training, NW 22 Research in Higher Education

In order to enhance university students’ experiences, there is a real need to have a better understanding of the new generation of students, particularly in the higher education context, and to explore the implications for academic practice. Our research and experiences of working in higher education have shown that there are ways to support and enhance the diverse range of university students’ learning needs, such as flexible learning models, work-based and community-based learning approaches, prioritising relationships in learning and teaching, and engaging students as partners in the learning process.

In this article, we offer a critique of the concept of ‘Generation Z’ learners in higher education and assumptions about their learning needs. ‘Generation Z’, or GenZ, is a term used to refer to young people born between 1997 and 2012, which includes a significant proportion of the university student body today. ‘Generation Z’ was born into a very different world from many of their educators in terms of access to information and life experience. This has deeply affected the way they seek, access, learn, and live information (Thomas, 2011).

Beyond the stereotype of GenZ

While it is true that they were born into the digital world, making them adept at using digital tools and accessing information online (Taslibeyaz, 2019), it would be unfair to limit them solely to the digital realm. It seems timely to revisit the implications for academic practice of the learning needs of the diverse student population in higher education today including but not limited to ‘Generation Z’.

Some researchers have suggested that ‘Generation Z’ has a particular set of characteristics of which academics need to be mindful in order to respond to their needs accordingly (Seemiller & Grace, 2016). The idea of assigning particular notional shared characteristics to these learners appears to be based on assumptions of collective experience and homogeneity. Arguably, this idea is, at best, of limited value. In fact, without more nuance and reference to diverse student contexts and individual experiences, it may be considered too widely drawn and of limited value to the educator in the development of inclusive practice.

Understanding the new generation of university students

Due to the massification of higher education, the university student body is now more diverse than ever. In addition, students in some countries are more affected by the marketisation of higher education than others. As a result, they have different expectations from higher education depending on their context. In their study, Gupta et al. (2023) found that many university students in Denmark, England, and Spain would like to see education as a right rather than a service or a product. However, at the same time, students recognise the implications of consumerist discourse on their university experiences. So, for example, as more students pay for their higher education, it is perhaps not surprising for them to expect certain returns on the ‘investment’.

Massification is a term used to describe the rapid increase in university student enrolment in many countries that was witnessed towards the end of the twentieth century. It is rooted in the shift from an élite to a mass higher education (Scott, 1995). The effect of massification in higher education is not only about student numbers but also about student body composition, character and aspirations. Rather than labelling the new generation of university students against assumed characteristics of a particular age group, massification of higher education also brings to the fore the importance of a better understanding of the student community we work with. So, we consider how to adjust our academic practice to be inclusive to facilitate students’ learning and support their learning needs. Rather than relying on generalised notions, we draw on our collective experience to identify some of the principles which guide our practice across the different geographical and cultural contexts we have encountered.

Flexible learning models

It is important to offer students flexible ways to engage with learning. For example, universities often structure learning and teaching with a rigid and linear time frame. Berg & Seeber (2016, p.xviii) note how ‘corporatization has compromised academic life and sped up the clock. The administrative university is concerned above all with efficiency’, and the result is a ‘time-crunch’ and a sense of ‘powerlessness’ for those subjected to it. This kind of timescape (time and space for learning) and organisation may not serve the distinct and particular needs of each student. Among other legacies, one thing we have learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic is that students appreciate the flexibility of learning modes, such as blended learning, rather than traditional classroom-based learning. Flexibility to engage with learning may be particularly important in times of economic hardship and cost of living pressures. Financial pressures and the need for some students to work whilst studying was examined by Henry (2023), who noted examples of strategies adopted by some UK universities to enable this:

Compact teaching timetables, where lectures and seminars are scheduled over two or three days rather than dotted throughout the week, are being introduced by a number of institutions. The move makes it easier for the growing number of undergraduates who must take on part-time jobs to make ends meet. More than half of students now work alongside their studies, up from 45% in 2022 and 34% in 2021.

Relationships

We argue for the priority of relational pedagogic approaches within academic practice. Relationships matter for everyone, especially for those students who are traditionally marginalised in higher education (Su & Wood, 2023). As Bovill (2020:24) has argued, ‘Time spent building trust and relationships is time well spent, because relationships form the foundation of good teaching’. In their study in America, Felten & Lambert (2020:17) uncovered four interlocking relationship-rich principles that guide both effective programmes and generative cultures at colleges and universities:

Every student must experience genuine welcome and deep care
Every student must be inspired to learn
Every student must develop a web of significant relationships
Every student must explore questions of meaning and purpose.

Students are primary actors in all four of these principles, but it is also essential for higher education institutions to ensure the learning climate and conditions that nurture these ‘relationship-rich’ principles, which we suggest can influence student motivation and engagement with the learning process.

Engaging students

In addition, we suggest it is crucial that academic and higher education institutions explore different teaching and learning strategies that encourage students to see the relevance of specific learning to experiences in the real world. In addition, we propose that using innovative digital technology can be advantageous for students, for example, combining real and virtual environments to maximise students’ conceptual understanding (Wörner & Scheiter, 2022).

Whilst higher education serves wider purposes than solely the development of employability, students expect that a university course of study will be useful and relevant to their career prospects after graduation. Embedding work-based and community-based learning as part of the curriculum may not only develop employability but also civic-mindedness and community engagement. In addition, there are benefits of engaging students as partners in the learning process and as co-designers of the curriculum (Bovill, 2000). For example, when higher education institutions design and review the curriculum, we argue that students have an important part to play in the process.

Summary

Our research and collective experiences of working in higher education suggest to us that generalised notions considered to represent common experiences of a section of the student body may be of limited value. In the development of academic practice to support the diverse range of university students’ learning needs, we suggest that educators reflect on the principles which guide the development of inclusive practice to recognise the rich experience and diverse learning needs represented by the student body.

In addition, we suggest that digital environments such as virtual applications and blended learning solutions should be utilised for the advantages and flexibility they offer, whilst also being mindful of equity issues in terms of student access to technologies. Reflection on our collective experience suggests to us the importance of flexible modes of learning, the role of work and community-based learning approaches, the priority and importance of relationships in learning and teaching, and ways to engage students as partners in the learning process by tutor guiding. Colleagues might like to add or substitute their own to these four principles as they reflect on the learning needs of the new generation of university students in their contexts.

Key Messages

The expectations of ‘Generation Z’ of higher education are not limited to the digital world.
A better understanding of the diverse student body in a particular higher education context is needed to support the development of inclusive practice.
There are ways to support and enhance the diverse range of university students’ learning needs, such as
- flexible learning models
- work and community-based learning
- relationships in learning and teaching
- engaging students as partners in the learning process.

Blog Authors

Elif Taslibeyaz

Associate Professor in the Education Faculty at Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Türkiye

Elif Taslibeyaz is an Associate Professor in the Education Faculty at Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Turkey. Her research interests revolve around various areas, including technology integration in the educational context, and the development of learning in higher education settings.

X

Feng Su

Associate Professor and Head of Education Studies at Liverpool Hope University, UK

Feng Su is an Associate Professor and Head of Education Studies at Liverpool Hope University, UK. His main research interests and writings are located within the following areas: education policy, the development of the learner in higher education settings, academic practice and professional learning.

X

Margaret Wood

Senior Lecturer in Education at York St John University, UK

Margaret Wood is a Senior Lecturer in Education at York St John University, UK. Her recent research and publications have explored: the centralizing tendencies of much current education policy and its relation to community and democracy at the local level; and the development of academic practice in higher education.

References and Further Reading

Berg, M. & Seeber, K. (2016) The Slow Professor: Challenging the Culture of Speed in the Academy. University of Toronto Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2016-19419-000

Bovill, C. (2020) Co-creating Learning and Teaching: Towards Relational Pedagogy in Higher Education. St Albans: Critical Publishing. https://www.criticalpublishing.com/co-creating-learning-and-teaching

Felten, P. & Lambert, L. M. (2020). Relationship-Rich Education: How Human Connections Drive Success in College. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/12146/relationship-rich-education

Gupta, A., Brooks, R. & J. Abrahams (2023) Higher education students as consumers: a cross-country comparative analysis of students’ views. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, DOI:10.1080/03057925.2023.2234283 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03057925.2023.2234283

Henry, J. (2023) ‘UK universities offer three-day-week to let students find part-time work’, The Observer. 26^th August 2023. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/aug/26/uk-universities-offer-three-day-week-to-let-students-find-part-time-work

Prensky, M. (2001) Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5): 1-6. DOI: 10.1108/10748120110424816

Scott, P. (1995). The meanings of mass higher education. Buckingham: SHRE and Open University Press. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED410817.

Seemiller, C. & Grace, M. (2016) Generation Z Goes to College. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Generation+Z+Goes+to+College-p-9781119143451

Su, F. & Wood, M. (2023). Relational pedagogy in higher education: what might it look like in practice and how do we develop it? International Journal for Academic Development, 28 (2): 230-233. DOI: 10.1080/1360144X.2023.2164859 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/366988042_Relational_pedagogy_in_higher_education_what_might_it_look_like_in_practice_and_how_do_we_develop_it

Taslibeyaz, E. (2019). Analysis of research trends related to generation z and their contributions to education. Dokuz Eylul University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 21(3), 715-729. https://www.academia.edu/40391757/ANALYSIS_OF_RESEARCH_TRENDS_ABOUT_GENERATION_Z_AND_THEIR_CONTRIBUTIONS_TO_EDUCATION

Thomas, M. (ed.) (2011). Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology, and the new literacies. Taylor & Francis. https://www.routledge.com/Deconstructing-Digital-Natives-Young-People-Technology-and-the-New-Literacies/Thomas/p/book/9780415889964

Wörner, S., Kuhn, J., & Scheiter, K. (2022). The best of two worlds: A systematic review on combining real and virtual experiments in science education. Review of Educational Research, 92(6), 911-952. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/00346543221079417

Fostering Creativity in the Classroom – developing a cross-curricular module in ITE

by Dr Peter Tiernan, Dr Fiona Gallacher & Dr Irene White | ESAI, NW 16 ICT in Education and Training

Outside of the core curricular content that makes up initial teacher education (ITE) programmes, there are increasing callsfor input on a variety of pedagogical, social, cultural, and competence-based issues that impact future teaching practice (MacPhail et al., 2022). Most higher education institutions possess expertise in a range of innovative areas, but the practicalities of timetables, student availability, and academic structures often mean students must choose one or two five-credit, level nine modules from a range of electives. This blog outlines an effort to combat this through an integrated module on the Professional Masters in Education PME (Post-Primary) at Dublin City University, Ireland, which combines Digital Competencies, English as an Additional Language, and Drama-based learning under the umbrella of ‘Fostering Creativity in the Classroom’.

Fostering creativity in the classroom – developing the module

We know that cross-curricular and integrated teaching can facilitate students in making creative connections and solving complex problems (Harris & de Bruin, 2017). Motivated by this, we began examining our content, values and teaching approaches and quickly realised a common thread of creativity ran through our work. Our module, ‘Fostering Creativity in the Classroom’ places explicit focus on the role of the teacher in fostering creativity and innovation in the post-primary classroom. Using a multidisciplinary approach, we allowed students to explore and experience a range of creative, collaborative and playful approaches to fostering creativity in teaching and learning. This was achieved through lectures, workshops, and a range of strategies from the Digital Learning(e.g. digital storytelling), Drama (e.g. soundscapes), and Linguistic Responsiveness (e.g. multilingualism) domains.

Underpinned by theories of creativity in education (e.g. Gilhooly & Gilhooly, 2021), our students, who are pre-service teachers, worked together to experiment with creative approaches, reflect on their experiences, and plan their practical implementation in the future. In order to draw the different strands together under the theme of creativity, we designed an innovative assignment. The assignments tasked students (in small groups) with creating a digital story on the theme of ‘fostering creativity and innovation in the post-primary classroom’. Their target audience was future PME students and practising teachers. Videos considered how digital media, drama and linguistically responsive strategies can enhance practice and encourage pupil creativity. Groups reflected on the strategies explored during the module and considered their application across curricular subjects. Videos were to be presented as a cohesive narrative or story and include a variety of audio-visual content.

Our reflections

Reflecting on the process, we were pleased it did not result in merely fitting our ‘pieces’ together, but in creating something unique that was enriched by our individual curricular areas. As academic staff, collaborating on the design and delivery provided us with opportunities to learn from each other’s curriculum design and facilitation approaches while demonstrating to students the connections that exist between subject areas. Our challenges were primarily around articulating our vision and structuring the delivery. While, as academic staff, our initial vision for the module was clear, our individual ‘flavours’ of that vision came through at first. It wasn’t until the second iteration of the module that we began to speak in one voice. The structure of the module delivery was another aspect that we found challenging initially and that we improved over time. In the first iteration of the module, we split the content into ‘blocks’, where each team member delivered their content in sequence after one another. We found that this meant students saw the module as three separate parts, and while that made sense in terms of the coherence of each aspect, it took away from the overall flow and interconnected nature of the work we were trying to achieve. Rectifying this was more than the simple act of moving lectures from one week to another. Instead, it necessitated the alteration of certain aspects of content so they more naturally connected to the other areas of study. We also spent more time ‘in’ each other’s lectures in order to display a unified voice.

Students’ impressions

Feedback from students on the experience of participating in this integrated module contained positives and potential areas for improvement. Students commented on the module’s ambitious and forward-thinking nature, saying it was ‘pretty ambitious’ and ‘very relevant in modern education’. They noted that they learned a lot from each strand and, perhaps most importantly, they learned more from how the strands linked together. Comments included: ‘Lovely to have different strands (E.g., Digital Media, Drama-based learning) each week. Helped the creativity’ and ‘It helps shift your focus from the ways in which you were taught at school and to focus on all of the possibilities that exist for enhancing your lessons and making them more meaningful’.

On the other hand, students also found areas challenging. For example, they found that the three strands meant there was a lot to take in. Comments included ‘There was a lot of information in each module[strand] and not enough time to get to grips with all of it’. Some also found it difficult to see how everything aligned under the umbrella of developing pupils’ creativity in the classroom. Comments included ‘personally felt that there was a bit of a disconnect between the three strands’ and that they ‘did not find the necessarily all aligned under the umbrella of creativity’.

Fin

Our efforts to combine three elective strands into one coherent module were not without their challenges. However, as lecturers, we found that the process not only allowed us to examine connections across curricular areas but facilitated the development of a more nuanced version of ‘creativity’ than we had delivered before. Students also recognised the value of our integrated approach, which is encouraging. However, their comments also provide scope for improvements in the future. For example, further work may be needed to increase the connection between strands so that students see the module as a cohesive approach to develop pupils’ creativity in the classroom.

Key Messages

The practicalities of ITE programmes often make the provision of additional pedagogical, social, cultural, and competence-based initiatives challenging
We document the development of a cross-curricular, integrated module “Fostering Creativity in the Classroom”
The module integrates Digital Learning, Drama-based Learning, and Linguistic Responsiveness
The process provided us, as academic staff, with the opportunity to enrich our individual curricular areas and practice by learning from each other’s design and facilitation approaches.
Students found the module to be ambitious and forward-thinking, and learned more from how the curricular areas fitted together to ‘foster creativity in the classroom’.

Dr Peter Tiernan

Associate Professor in Digital Learning and Research Convenor for the School of STEM Education, Innovation and Global Studies in the Institute of Education at Dublin City University.

Peter is an Associate Professor in Digital Learning and Research Convenor for the School of STEM Education, Innovation and Global Studies in the Institute of Education at Dublin City University. He lectures in the areas of digital learning, digital literacy and entrepreneurship education. His current research focuses on digital literacy at post-primary and further education level as well as entrepreneurship education for third level lecturers and pre-service teachers.

Peter was shortlisted for the DCU President’s Award for Excellence in Teaching and Learning in 2021.

Find Peter on Twitter.

X

Dr Fiona Gallacher

Assistant professor in the School of Applied Language and Intercultural Studies (SALIS) at Dublin City University

Fiona Gallagher is an assistant professor in the School of Applied Language and Intercultural Studies (SALIS) at Dublin City University. Before this, she worked as a teacher and CELTA teacher educator in Sudan, Italy, Spain, Ireland, the US, Australia and Portugal. Her research interests lie primarily in the fields of second language acquisition, TESOL and bi/multilingual education with particular reference to: L1 use in language learning and teaching; translanguaging and plurilingual pedagogies; and teaching and learning in the linguistically and culturally diverse primary and secondary school classroom.

She has published widely in her field, both as the author/co-author of various EFL textbooks and teacher guides and in high-ranking peer reviewed journals and edited volumes.

Dr Irene White

Assistant professor in English and Drama Education in the School of Human Development at the Institute of Education, Dublin City University.

Dr Irene White is an Assistant Professor in English and Drama Education in the School of Human Development at the Institute of Education, Dublin City University. She is the Programme Chair of the Professional Master of Education and teaches across a range of initial teacher education programmes. Irene taught English and Drama at the post-primary level for twelve years, during which time she was a mentor for initial teacher education students and a State Exams Commission examiner for the Leaving Certificate Applied Programme.

Irene’s research straddles the arts and education sectors, with a particular focus on creative mindsets, creative learning environments and creative activity for health and wellbeing. Her PhD examined creativity in participatory arts initiatives and articulated a Participatory Arts for Creativity in Education (PACE) model, an applied participatory arts model aimed at fostering creativity in education.

Irene is Chair of the Board of Directors for Upstate Theatre Project, a community-engaged participatory arts organisation funded by the Arts Council of Ireland. Her work in the field of participatory arts includes her role as artist and director with Upstate Theatre Project on The Crossover Project, a cross-border, cross-community participative drama programme, and her work with students from the Steinhardt School of Culture, Education and Human Development, New York University on the study abroad programme. Irene has also worked with Smashing Times Theatre and Film Company on the ‘Acting for the Future’ programme using drama and theatre performance to promote positive mental health and the ‘Acting for Change’ programme using drama to explore cultural diversity and identity and promote anti-racism, anti-sectarianism and equality.

References and Further Reading

Gilhooly, K. J., & Gilhooly, M. L. M. (2021). Aging and creativity. Academic Press.

Harris, A., & de Bruin, L. (2017). Steam education: Fostering creativity in and beyond secondary schools. Australian Art Education, 38(1), 54–75.

MacPhail, A., Seleznyov, S., O’Donnell, C., & Czerniawski, G. (2022). Supporting the Continuum of Teacher Education Through Policy and Practice: The Inter-Relationships Between Initial, Induction, and Continuing Professional Development. In Reconstructing the Work of Teacher Educators: Finding Spaces in Policy Through Agentic Approaches—Insights from a Research Collective (pp. 135–154). Nature.

Using ChatGPT in an educational technology course for maths teacher candidates

by Dr Bengi Birgili | Emerging Researchers' Group, NW 10 Teacher Education Research, NW 16 ICT in Education and Training

There has been a lot of discussion in educational research circles about the use of AI in education, in particular, ChatGPT. We asked doctoral research assistant, Bengi Birgili to tell us about how she is using (and teaching the use of) ChatGPT in the classroom. Dr Birgili introduced a fully flipped university context from the view of a researcher instructor. In this post, she explains how she and her students used ChatGPT in an instructional technology course offered in the Spring 2023 semester. This blog post includes not only her ideas and experiences but also those of 30 pre-service teachers studying in the mathematics education department in the faculty of education in Istanbul, Türkiye.

I have been teaching an educational sciences course at the intersection of Instructional Design and Instructional Technologies and Materials Design (EDS 206) at the Department of Mathematics Education (Grade 5-8), MEF University, Istanbul, Türkiye for 2 years. MEF University is known as the first fully flipped university in the world. You can find out more about the course at the end of this blog post.

This semester, additionally, we had a new visitor to this course. ChatGPT! Yes. Let’s share our experiences in this course.

Using ChatGPT in an educational technology course

I heard that ChatGPT, developed by Artificial Intelligence Developer Open AI, was released as a prototype on November 30th, 2022. I noticed that it attracted people’s attention in a short period of time with its detailed justifications and understandable answers in many fields of information. Many instructional technologists, educational scientists, and even linguists from Türkiye have started using it. It has become popular in our country as well as all over the world.

As a Ph.D. holder of educational sciences and a mathematics teacher; based on my limited experience, I can describe ChatGPT as a companion. Although the database has kept its information until the last updated date, it provides us with companionship in terms of sharing basic, responding fact-based prompts, and comprehensive information. Users must, of course, be aware of the issues that have been raised about the accuracy of the AI too (or see the impact of AI for more information).

Despite this caveat, when I look at it from the perspective of an educator, I believe that teacher candidates can benefit from ChatGPT, when used for the right purposes.

In the EDS 206 course, I demonstrated ChatGPT for a week. Then, I allowed the teacher candidates to experience it for themselves. Some of them asked ChatGPT to talk about common misconceptions made by middle school students in fractions in mathematics, and some of them asked for sample questions of their lesson plan preparation. While discovering ChatGPT, they also learned new instructional design models. They put into practice what they learned in our course while interacting with it. For the accuracy of the information, they had to compare what they learned in the course with the information provided by ChatGPT. At this level, they also started to use their high-level cognitive skills. In their article writing assignments, they were free to use ChatGPT, as long as they referenced appropriately.

To sum up, by following the correct instructions, we teacher educators, can admit ChatGPT as a mentor somewhere in a teacher education program. Nevertheless, it should be used as a means, not an end.

Students’ experiences using ChatGPT

After the ChatGPT experience, I asked my students: “Can you share with me in a paragraph your first experience with ChatGPT in the EDS 206 course, and explain whether it is useful and how your learning experiences in the faculty can get benefit from it?” I made a thematic analysis of their general ideas and initial thoughts. According to the findings of the thematic analysis, I inferenced the following categories.

Junior-year teacher candidates, studying in the faculty of education and a flipped university, were introduced to ChatGPT for the first time in this course. They were aware that ChatGPT is an up-to-date, innovative, and popular AI-based tool and they gained the specific awareness.

“I think #ChatGPT is a nice artificial intelligence application for people who are researchers and curious. As a teacher candidate, I was introduced to ChatGPT for the first time in EDS206 class and I saw the benefits of the application. During the lesson, my group mates and I experienced that ChatGPT can translate between languages, solve mathematical equations, and offer various suggestions on the subject….”

“I was introduced to the ChatGPT application in the EDS 206 course. In the lesson, we sought an answer to the question of how to use the ChatGPT application in education. We asked the ChatGPT application to develop a training model.”

All of them found ChatGPT useful for their learning. They see it as a privileged step of being an innovative teacher. When they asked questions regarding maths education, lesson planning, teaching methods etc, ChatGPT provided them with creative and useful examples. For instance:

“…We got surprising results. We discussed these results in class. I think the answers will be useful and effective. I think the most useful feature of the ChatGPT application is that it gives creative and useful examples for desired situations….”

“…While we were experiencing ChatGPT, when we asked “What is the most appropriate teaching model that can be applied on the subject of fractions in mathematics?”, it brought out various models. Although the question we asked was very specific, it brought out more than one model and, most importantly, it explained the focus points of these models with them….”

“…. I wanted to develop a material on “Factors and Multiples” within the scope of the EDS206 course. I wanted to add examples from daily life to my material. I asked ChatGPT to provide me with examples, and source books/sites on this subject. I was redirected to many pages. When we want to make a study by analyzing many sources in education and synthesizing these sources; I can say that ChatGPT is very useful to work step by step.…” (Female, senior year teacher candidate)

Almost all of the teacher candidates emphasized that ChatGPT encouraged them to use higher-order thinking skills. For example, they stated that they used cognitive skills such as analysis, synthesis, interpretation, and discussion together in the flipped class.

“….When we want to make a study by analyzing many sources in education and synthesizing these sources, I can say that ChatGPT is very useful to work step by step. On the other hand, I can say that it provides ease of learning and analyzing many pieces of literature for students. I can say that individuals who will produce a new study will have the chance to design a roadmap for basic errors, to access the materials to be used here, and to design a synthesized version of many sources if they wish. For this reason, I can say that it also provides a lot of convenience in the production of new works.”

“…. When we further advanced our question and asked it to choose one of these models and create a lesson plan that suited us, its answer really impressed me. Determining the necessary materials, which sections we will divide the lesson into, how many minutes these sections will take, and what we will do in them were explained in detail…”

On the other hand, only a few of them asserted the possible negative aspects of ChatGPT. Since it depends on machine learning and Artificial Intelligence, the accuracy and validity of the information given by ChatGPT must be tested and controlled from other scientific sources.

“…. Thanks to the information data in ChatGPT, it is a very useful application that allows us to save time by extracting logical answers in the context of cause and effect. If I take a negative aspect, it should not be forgotten that this is an artificial intelligence, if important information research is being conducted, ChatGPT’s responses should definitely be verified with other sources.” (Female, senior year teacher candidate)

Final thoughts

Last but not least, according to my short-term and unique experience regarding ChatGPT, I feel that the contribution of ChatGPT to teacher education is emerging. However, ethical issues should always keep the minds occupied. While discussing the benefits, the critical points and probable negative aspects should be paid attention by the instructors and teacher candidates. We think that ChatGPT will continue to be like a companion that provides motivation during individual learning or unguided instruction, and saves time – as long as it comes from the primary right academic source.

Key Messages

Teacher candidates can benefit from ChatGPT, when used for the right purposes
Teaching students reported that they found ChatGPT useful for learning, and saw it as evidence of being an innovative teacher
ChatGPT encouraged teacher candidates to use higher order thinking skills such as analysis, synthesis, interpretation, and discussion
Students should be aware of the limitations of tools such as AI and the importance of verifying the information provided with other sources
The use of AI tools in teacher education is still emerging, and critical points should be considered by instructors and teacher candidates

References and Further Reading

About the educational science course

The educational sciences course sits at the intersection of Instructional Design and Instructional Technologies and Materials Design (EDS 206) at the Department of Mathematics Education (Grade 5-8), MEF University, Istanbul, Türkiye.

Upon successful completion of this course, students [aka teacher candidates] are expected to be able to:

explore various ways of thinking about the use of technology in education
demonstrate how to use a variety of multimedia tools to enrich learning opportunities
identify appropriate teaching methods and electronic media to support objective-based lessons
design learning experiences that engage learners in individual and collaborative learning activities
create electronic multimedia to support specific learning objectives
use technology to represent topics or concepts in a static or interactive format.

I have been offering the course with an active learning environment both in COVID-19 pandemic times and now in a hybrid format. Teacher candidates apply what they have learned about weekly instructional technological tools, participate in pre-class/individual space and in-class/group space experiences, share their experiences and thoughts during flipped class activities, sometimes evaluate themselves, collaborate, and reflect while learning instructional design theories and practicum with material design.

At the beginning of the semester, the teacher candidates are assigned middle school mathematics content from the national mathematics education curriculum. They learn to design digital materials in order to improve their digital competencies. For example, Bubbl.us, Kahoot, Desmos, Geogebra. They prepare teaching materials for 6th grade students using the digital tools they learn about in the EDS206 related to the mathematics topic they were assigned. However, they design not only independent teaching and learning materials, but also instructional design models and so learn to integrate their digital materials into their ID models.

For more information about EDS 206 please do not hesitate to contact me.

On AI and accuracy

The field of Artificial Intelligence is changing rapidly, and it can be difficult to keep up with the current situation. Here are some articles that we found when this blog post was published.

ChatGPT: Everything you need to know about OpenAI’s GPT-4 tool

ChatGPT and facts (January 2023)

The impact of AI on content accuracy (October 2023)

ChatGPT accuracy getting worse (June 2023)

Dr Bengi Birgili

Research Assistant in the Mathematics Education Department at MEF University, Istanbul.

Dr Bengi Birgili is a research assistant in the Mathematics Education Department at MEF University, Istanbul. She experienced in research at the University of Vienna. In 2022, she received her PhD from the Department of Educational Sciences Curriculum and Instruction Program at Middle East Technical University (METU), Ankara. Her research interests focus on curriculum development and evaluation, instructional design, in-class assessment. She received the Emerging Researchers Bursary Winners award at ECER 2017 for her paper titled “A Metacognitive Perspective to Open-Ended Questions vs. Multiple-Choice.”

In 2020, a co-authored research became one of the 4 accepted studies among Early-Career Scholars awarded by the International Testing Commission (ITC) Young Scholar Committee in the UK [Postponed to 2021 Colloquium due to COVID-19].

In Jan 2020, she completed the Elements of AI certification offered by the University of Helsinki.

Researchgate:https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bengi-Birgili-2

Twitter: @bengibirgili

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bengibirgili/

ORCID:https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2990-6717

Medium: https://bengibirgili.medium.com

You’ve been hired! Exploring the future of learning design using speculative methods

by Dr Eamon Costello | ESAI, NW 13 Philosophy of Education, NW 16 ICT in Education and Training

The latest annual survey from the Association for Learning Technology (ALT) highlights the changes in the profession of those who work in the spaces where technology, teaching, and learning intersect. The brokers who work in these vital in-between places of education have been referred to as “third space professionals”.

A range of titles is reported in the ALT annual survey by respondents, with the most common being “learning technologist”. For real, paid work, people apply for more prosaic-sounding jobs than that of a “third space professional”. There may be gaps, if not tensions, between academic parlance and how we speak in the real world.

If this resonates with you, and you are a pragmatic person who seeks tangible, real-world solutions, rather than abstract academic notions, then stop reading now. If, however, you would like to work at a more-than-real posthuman University – in an entanglement of technology, plants, animals, emotions, gods, and demons, where you would write learning designs directly onto other people’s hearts – then read on.

Key Messages

Learning designer/technologist roles continue to increase greatly both in number and their scope.
The roles of learning designers/academic developers/learning technologists/heads of teaching and learning centres are vitally important but complex.
Speculative methods are being increasingly used in both teaching and educational research.
Speculative methods (specifically speculative fiction) can be used to think about the impact of learning design roles and imagine strange but bright university futures for and of them.

Conceptualising learning design roles

A recent exercise conducted with learning designers in Ireland aimed to creatively analyse, conceptualise and represent the role of learning designer. It proceeded from the contention that a digital learning consultant, or an academic developer, or a head of digital education, are more than their titles. And they are more than their skills. Indeed, they are more than human. We do not live as job titles, as bunches of disembodied skills and competencies, nor even as perfectly differentiated individual human beings. Rather, we live deeply entangled in the language that describes us, in the tools we use [1], in each other, and in the non-human beings of this world [2].

To make sense of this provocation, and to learn how learning designers actually feel and live this entanglement, we adopted a more-than-real speculative approach. Speculative methods are not premised on measurement or “what works” but rather on “not-yetness”. They attempt to create or leave space for dreaming about what is yet to come. They are approaches “aimed at envisioning or crafting futures or conditions which may not yet currently exist, to provoke new ways of thinking and to bring particular ideas or issues into focus” (Ross, 2007).

In our study, we analysed a collection of job postings for learning technology roles advertised in Ireland during the pandemic. Based on these, we interviewed several fictional learning designers. These people had just been hired into a strange university that exists in the near future. Below is an excerpt from one such fictional interview, adapted from the preprint version of our article, the full version of which you can read in the journal Learning Media and Technology.

Christine:

What was your last question? My learning design super-power? Ha ha, I like it! Well, we took this Info Lit class one time on posthumanism and speciesism. Also, that year we were editing Wikipedia, to fill in gaps on famous women, so I did Frances Power Cobbe. She campaigned for animal rights and the rights of women to vote and attend university. I went down a bit of a rabbit hole then, and read all about the Brown Dog affair, but I had to stop after a while because it was just so horrible that someone could be cutting up a dog who was clearly in distress. When I read about the medical students taking down the statue that commemorated the dog, I just felt my body shaking and I took both hands off my iPad and let it drop to the ground.

Anyway, long story short, I pick the ability to speak to animals as my superpower. I look after all the animals here in the Animal Aid Division of the Learning Design Deck. Me, and my friend Pema.

It all started with Isha. As a blind student, she had to fight for literally everything during her time in the University and for her dog Sandy too. But one time we were doing all this big data stuff, trying to catch people cheating in exam halls. An algorithm checked the similarity of students who sat close together and triangulated with sweat levels the system could see on their skin. We were looking at all these mood maps and I noticed that people sitting near Sandy in the exams seemed calmer. So that’s how the project of allowing dogs in exam halls started, because they had such a positive effect on people. And then we were loaning dogs out to students to take walks with. That evolved into our Library Dogs initiative. Later, I went back and looked at the data and realised that there was some uplifting effect for students in exams sitting near windows. Turns out, just seeing some plant life is good for you, a little bit of green. So, we started working connecting students with trees. The researchers were all excited and talking about oxytocin levels and so on, but it just seems like basic sense to me. It’s like something I heard once about how you need connection but you don’t need another person necessarily, just one tendril of love to something, and that could be looking in a dog’s eyes or touching a tree [3].

And the whole thing grew from there really, and we are rewilding parts of the University now. I look after all the animals, primarily the dogs, but also the ones that are part of other projects: cats, monkeys, snails, kites, buzzards, crows. And the sand martins who do this like hunting ballet over the lake in the evening when I’m walking home – sweeping through invisible clouds of insects. There was some dispute I think, a student protest, as the University wanted to build something where the lake is – maybe a carpark.

How does that one go? University (noun): A set of warring fiefdoms united around a common cause of parking. That’s the biggest threat to the plant and animal projects – new university buildings and developments. But my favourite part of the Uni is a patch of old scrub out back of the library. It must be earmarked for a building because it’s not landscaped or mowed or anything. It’s just thistles and poppies and stones but sometimes I go in and lie down there. I try to feel the world under me to see if I’m still here or maybe if it’s still there.

Conclusion

This blog post attempts to give a flavour of how speculative methods, in this case, design fiction, can be used to represent and explore evolving educational roles. The next step of the research involved analysing the above persona, along with two others, by presenting them to real-life learning designers to seek their feedback on the fictions’ validity, and resonance or otherwise, with their own lived experience.

We drew on literature related to ethics of care in education and the philosopher and theorist Simone Weil to help frame this analysis. You can read about what happened next in the full version of the associated article. Our work tried to show people with complex embodied existences that spread beyond the formal boundaries of their work in educational settings. We attempted to counter the neoliberal construction of identities of workers that are comprised of disembodied skills. Instead, we tried to problematise this question of who and what people do in particular roles, not according to their skills alone, but as people who have bodies that experience joy and suffering.

We attempted to show learning designers as existing in a tangled web of objects, people, and experience. In this way, we hopefully shone some light on the complex roles these people play in the messy territories of contemporary, and near future, education.

Acknowledgements

A wonderful team of learning design and learning design-adjacent superheroes contributed to the published article (Costello et al, 2022): Steve Welsh, Fiona Concannon, Tom Farrelly, Clare Thompson and Lily/Prajakta Grime (who is doubly acknowledged as the creator of the beautiful images).

Dr Eamon Costello

Associate Professor of Digital Learning

Dr Costello has worked in industry and university settings for over 25 years. He is deeply curious about how we learn in different environments. He is also concerned with how we actively shape our world so that we can have better and more humane places in which to think, work, live, and learn. He has taught and researched a wide range of topics in the places where people and technology mingle. He is an advocate of using the right tool for the job or sometimes none at all, for not everything can be fixed or should be built.

Twitter: https://twitter.com/eam0 RG: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Eamon-Costello Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/eamoncostello?originalSubdomain=ie Website: https://www.dcu.ie/stemeducationinnovationglobalstudies/people/eamon-costello

References and Further Reading

[1] Fawns, T. (2022). An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy—Technology Dichotomy. Postdigital Science and Education, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00302-7

[2] Gourlay, L., Littlejohn, A., Oliver, M., & Potter, J. (2021). Lockdown literacies and semiotic assemblages: academic boundary work in the Covid-19 crisis. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(4), 377-389. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1900242

[3] Brach, T. (2012). Radical Acceptance: Awakening the Love that Heals Fear and Shame. London: Random House.

Costello, E., Welsh, S., Girme, P., Concannon, F., Farrelly, T., & Thompson, C. (2022). Who cares about learning design? Near future superheroes and villains of an educational ethics of care. Learning, Media and Technology, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2074452

Experiences on digital literacy and collegial learning in a Swedish preschool

by Dr Karin Forsling | NW 16 ICT in Education and Training, NW 6 Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures

At a time when developing digital literacy is high on the agenda, an interdisciplinary starting-point may provide opportunities for daily activities at preschool. This approach may involve the preschool teachers’ own digital literacy, their ability to lead activities, integration of digital tools and resources, as well as their approach to using digital tools critically and responsibly. In addition, it involves extended teaching skills. Timperley (2019) argued that collegial learning is extremely valuable for successful practice in preschool. Research shows that personal and professional development go hand in hand and that development is closely related to how knowledge is put into practice at the preschool, for instance in relation to scaffolding – to build on what a child already knows to provide a strong support base (cf. Hernwall, 2016; Letnes, 2017).

A study on the effect of digital tools on learning situations in preschool

The aim of the study presented here was to investigate how preschool teachers understood, changed, and improved learning situations when digital tools were used under the supervision of a film educator, a preschool colleague, and a researcher. Two preschools, situated in a small Swedish town, participated. One of the teachers, Mia, was engaged as a co-researcher. In total four teachers, two from each preschool, and 25 children aged four to five participated. Design-based experiment (DBE) method was used to collect data. The data collection was built as a spiral, starting with a teacher-led photo activity with the children. I, as a researcher, filmed the activities and the film sequences were then used as discussion material in the later reflection session together with the participating teachers. The insights were forwarded and discussed by the staff at a pedagogical meeting, to be the base for the teachers’ next photo activity, and so on. The experimental aspect lay in the researchers, the co-researchers, and the teachers’ receptivity to the unexpected and their didactic flexibility.

The film educator initially introduced a predetermined photo activity model to the participating teachers:

Photo assignment
Show-and-tell (each child chose one of their photos to talk about)
New assignment

Development of didactic flexibility and digital literacy

In the analysis, it turned out, that he teachers assumed active roles as designers of digital learning situations. This form of agency was intimately linked to flexibility and collegial learning. The teachers expressed that they had undergone professional development during the study. This involved handling tablets, and understanding their usefulness as pedagogical tools.

The teachers pointed out that the new insights surprised them. The important question: What did you think here? was put more often to both children and adults. When the teachers discussed preschool goals, they emphasized teaching and guiding and creating wonder. ”It is important to guide, control, and challenge”, one of the teachers said. ”We have been exploring,” said another. Being conscious and confident in the learning situation were qualities often mentioned in the interviews.

New insights related to transparency and structure, gave confidence as well as freedom to explore and develop. They talked a lot about taking an interest in children’s thoughts and reflections.

We caught the children’s interest: what will happen? The tasks were important. Important to show each other. What did you think here? That children understand that they have understood something in a different way from their friend. It was also a good training waiting for their turn.

— Ulla

The cultural and educational environment at the preschools improved. The teachers testified to being inspired and having new ideas and said that they wanted to continue using tablets in the preschool:

Based on the tasks we have given, I feel more comfortable in conveying to them what they should do. New ideas and how develop them further. And how to use this [tablet] as a tool.

— Helena

We are in the process of developing our own reflection sessions based on the children’s pictures and thoughts. We have really implemented it.

— Mia

Role of the reflection sessions

Collegial processes of learning took place during the reflection sessions. In turn, this affected confidence, approaches, and concrete work in the team and in the groups of children. Self-reflection and reflection on the actions of colleagues in the video sequences created a greater sense of agreement in the team. The teachers talked about benefitting from each other’s competences and the importance of being present as teachers.

We complement each other, pool our knowledge, get to know each other’s approaches and view of children. We know how our colleagues think in different situations and then it’s easy to support and push each other. Thanks to the reflections, learning is good.

— Kajsa

The teachers at one of the preschools started to video record each other and themselves to study and reflect on their actions in different learning situations. They described reflection sessions as the basis for development in a safe and sound environment. One of the teachers talked about how reflection opportunities had been an asset in team development and how they had been challenged and forced to express their thoughts and actions in words.

We clearly see what the children do from their perspective, how we can build on that the next time. How we should think. It is also the way this creates consensus and a sense of safety in the team.

— Mia

Collegial Learning and digital literacy– some reflections

Success factors for providing digital literacy to children in preschool are the teachers’ competence and ability to lead activities, integrate digital tools and resources in teaching, and give children clear and attainable challenges. This further requires that preschool teachers and other staff are familiar with the use of digital tools. This study shows how five committed teachers with no particular digital habits or interest in digital tools used tablets in preschool as a teaching tool to reach curricular goals relating to communication. The use of digital tools affected the interaction between individuals and between individuals and artefacts. The teachers learned from each other and were inspired by modelling, good examples, reflecting together and on their own.

A meeting-place for collegial learning emerged in the intersection between activities, reflection sessions, and staff discussions. There were opportunities for the participants to evaluate and continuously reflect, which also Thomas (2011) emphasizes as important factors in developing digital literacy. The teachers’ reflections on their teaching practice are prominent in the study. They remarked on their discovery of their professionalism. Furthermore, the study shows the importance of internal as well as external agents in development work.

Initially, it involves individuals who want to and can make a difference. The teachers described how the persons with more knowledge, the film teacher, the co-researcher and the researcher, could support their learning. Modelling by the film educator added structure and practical exercises and the reflection sessions in connection with exercises provided conditions for collegial learning, which resulted in understanding and explorative development of possible digital practices in the preschools.

My role as a researcher was to document sequences of learning in practice, not for the sake of displaying learning per se, but sequences demonstrating the process of learning. Discovering and reflecting on learning was the task of the teachers. The experimental community was central and I acted as a sounding board without reducing the teachers’ agency.

As a design-based researcher, my purpose was to draw attention to preconceived notions in order to let the participants in the conversation become aware of how their way of thinking and working in the team could change (cf. Åsén Nordström, 2017). It is possible, though, that the co-researcher Mia—was the most important factor in relation to the aim that preschool teachers should get tools to understand, change, and improve learning environments and situations where digital tools are used.

Key Messages

Success factors for providing digital literacy in preschool (“The experimental community”):

teachers’ motivation and intrepidity
familiarity with the use of digital tools
progressive challenges
continuously opportunities for collegial reflection
cooperation with other preschools

References and Further Reading

Hernwall, P. (2016). ‘We have to be professional’—Swedish preschool teachers’ conceptualisation of digital media. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 11(1), 5–23. https://www.idunn.no/doi/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2016-01-01

Larsson, P. (2018). Kollegialt lärande och konsten att navigera bland begrepp [Collegial learning and the art of navigating through concepts]. In N. Rönnström & O. Johansson (Eds.), Att leda skolor med stöd i forskning—exempel, analyser och utmaningar. Natur och kultur.

Letnes, M. A. (2017). Legende Læring med Digitale Medier [Playful Learning with Digital Media], Akademisk Forlag. https://www.akademisk.dk/legende-laering-med-digitale-medier

Lpfö18, Läroplan för förskolan. [Curriculum for the preschool]. Skolverket.

Thomas, A. (2011). Towards a transformative digital literacies pedagogy. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 6(1–2), 89–102. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Towards-a-Transformative-Digital-Literacies-Thomas/6cf9b2ea264ab068783ed84bc666d82732814bab

Timperley, H. (2019). Det professionella lärandets inneboende kraft [The inner force of professional learning]. Studentlitteratur. https://www.studentlitteratur.se/kompetensutveckling/skola-f-6/ledarskap-och-skolutveckling/det-professionella-larandets-inneboende-kraft

Åsén Nordström, E. (2017). Kollegialt lärande genom pedagogisk handledning (Collegial learning through pedagogical supervision). Liber.

The full article:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-021-01289-9

Gently down the stream(ing): Can digital literacy help turn the tide on the climate crisis?

by Dr Peter Tiernan, Dr Fiona Gallacher & Dr Irene White | ESAI, NW 16 ICT in Education and Training, NW 30 Environmental and Sustainability Education Research, ESER, NW 6 Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures

The ubiquitous availability of digital content and web services has transformed the way we live, work, and learn (List et al., 2020). Technology provides us with tools to manage and accomplish work, content to entertain us, and applications to document, store and share our lives online. It is within this context that digital literacy features prominently in policy documentation and educational literature, recognising digital literacy as an essential skill for 21st-century living (Pérez-Escoda et al., 2019). However, as we stand on the precipice of climate disaster, is it time for digital literacy to focus its attention on the impact our increasing digital activity has on the environment?

Environmental impact of users’ digital lives

In education circles, conversations around the impact of educational technology on our environment have begun in earnest (Facer & Selwyn, 2021), however, this is less evident regarding the use of digital content and tools in our day-to-day lives. The usage of streaming services, for example, has soared in recent years and while providers such as Netflix have improved efficiencies in these services, their carbon footprint is still significant (Stephens et al., 2021).

Our music consumption habits have also shifted away from physical media, but overall greenhouse gas emissions from storing and distributing music online have doubled since 2000 (Brennan, 2019). Social media activity continues to increase at a remarkable pace, and a significant carbon cost (Perrin, 2015), and popular apps like TikTok and Reddit have a disproportionately large carbon footprint. Our regular scrolling of ‘news feeds’ contributes carbon emissions equivalent to a short light vehicle journey, per person, per day (Derudder, 2021).

This online activity, coupled with our desire to store data in the cloud, means data centres account for 1% of the global energy demand (Obringer et al., 2021). The continued desire for the latest phone is also costing more than our wallets, with the environmental impact of the device lifecycle being well documented (MacGilchrist et al., 2021). Current figures suggest that over half of consumers in many EU countries renew their devices every 18 – 24 months.

In our work environment, too, our digital impact must be acknowledged. While conferencing platforms such as Zoom come with great environmental benefits when compared with face-to-face meetings and conferences, further efficiencies can be achieved by challenging ‘camera on’ policies. A seemingly innocuous task like sending 65 text emails can cost as much carbon as a short car journey, and when factors such as attachments are considered, the cost is even higher (Duncan, 2022). This snapshot reveals just some of the impacts of our digital lives, some of which our students are unaware of.

Current focus of digital literacy and digital literacy frameworks

An acknowledgment of the need to develop our students’ digital literacy has existed since Gilster (1997) first coined the term and defined it as “the ability to understand and use information in multiple formats from a wide range of [digital] sources”.

Definitions of digital literacy have remained remarkably consistent in the decades that followed, focusing on the ability to source, evaluate and use digital information. In recent years, there has been an increased emphasis on content creation and communicating using digital channels. However, academic definitions of digital literacy lack any real focus on the environmental cost of our digital activities. In fact, there is little evidence of this aspect of digital literacy being discussed in academic literature.

There are many digital literacy frameworks available to help academics and other users understand digital literacy and its competencies. Only the UNESCO and DigiComp frameworks refer to the environmental impact of technologies and their use, and this is nestled under the ’digital safety’ strand. The range of digital literacy frameworks (e.g. DigiComp, UNESCO, JISC) and volume of journal publications suggests that academics and policymakers are committed to the development of digital literacy, however, it appears that the impact of our digital lives on the environment has been largely left out of the debate.

Shifting our focus

Calls for action to avert a climate catastrophe are becoming more strident. The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report (2022) paints a very troubling picture regarding the widespread and severe impacts of climate change. We must act now. We must adapt our practices and become more sustainable in everything we do.

I believe we can refocus our attention on digital literacy to guide our students to being more critical users of technology and understanding its impact on our world. Using familiar language and strategies, we might encourage students to identify their current digital activities and analyse their carbon footprint, before evaluating areas where improvements can be made. Students could be encouraged to construct new meaning from their investigations by capturing trends associated with work, study and social practices, and communicating these findings with a wider audience.

This shift in focus is essentially a repurposing of what we already ask our students to do with regard to digital content, but targeted at addressing the authentic and urgent issue of climate change. While frameworks such as DigiComp and UNESCO should be commended for including environmental impact, further development of this area should be encouraged.

Digital literacy frameworks should provide a detailed scaffold which encourages a multidimensional understanding of digital tools, their impact on the environment, and consideration of actions that can be taken to affect change. Developing this aspect of digital literacy would increase students’ awareness of the ‘cost’ of technology and promote a more critical use of the tools and services they use in their day-to-day lives.

Conclusion

The coming years present major challenges for society to tackle the climate emergency. It is crucial that we shift our mindset and begin to understand the impact our actions have on the environment, and make the necessary changes to recalibrate our relationship with nature.

Changes are required in all aspects of our lives, from energy and waste, to the provision and rewilding of natural spaces. While a refocussing of digital literacy and digital competencies in this way is not the panacea to the situation, it can act as a move in the right direction, one more component of our lives where we begin to understand and address our toll on the environment.

The post is an abridged version of an article in the upcoming (October 2022) issue of the Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy

Key Messages

Society’s use of digital and online content is increasing

Digital literacy is recognised as a set of competencies for this digital world

Our day-to-day use of technology has an environmental impact

Digital literacy definitions and frameworks largely ignore the environmental impact

We should begin including environmental impact in our digital literacy definitions, frameworks, and discussions

References and Further Reading

A framework of pre-service teachers’ conceptions about digital literacy: Comparing the United States and Sweden https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360131519303380

Dimensions of digital literacy based on five models of development (Pérez-Escoda et al., 2019) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11356405.2019.1603274

Digital technology and the futures of education – towards ‘non-stupid’ optimism (Facer & Selwyn, 2021) https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377071″>https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377071

Carbon impact of video streaming (Stephens et al., 2021), https://prod-drupal-files.storage.googleapis.com/documents/resource/public/Carbon-impact-of-video-streaming.pdf

MUSIC CONSUMPTION HAS UNINTENDED ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS (Brennan, 2019) https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/archiveofnews/2019/april/headline_643297_en.html

Social Media Usage: 2005-2015
65% of adults now use social networking sites – a nearly tenfold jump in the past decade (Perrin, 2015) https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2015/10/08/social-networking-usage-2005-2015/

What is the environmental footprint for social media applications? 2021 Edition (Derudder, 2021) https://greenspector.com/en/social-media-2021/

The overlooked environmental footprint of increasing Internet use (Olbringer et al., 2021) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344920307072?via%3Dihub

Shifting scales of research on learning, media and technology, (Mcgilchrist, et al, 2021) https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17439884.2021.1994418

Text Messaging & Emails Generate Carbon Emissions (Carbon Footprint), (Duncan, 2021) https://8billiontrees.com/carbon-offsets-credits/reduce-carbon-footprint/texts-emails/

A Global Framework of Reference on Digital Literacy Skills for Indicator 4.4.2 http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/ip51-global-framework-reference-digital-literacy-skills-2018-en.pdf

Digicomp https://joint-research-centre.ec.europa.eu/digcomp_en

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report https://www.ipcc.ch

Featured Image Photo by Marvin Meyer on Unsplash

Harnessing Digital Technology as a Pedagogical Tool in Early Childhood Education

by Paula Walshe | Emerging Researchers' Group, NW 16 ICT in Education and Training, NW 3 Curriculum Innovation

Children today are born into a world where digital technology is omnipresent and permeates all areas of their lives (O’Neill, 2018). Yet one area which appears hesitant to embrace technology and harness the possibilities it can provide is the early childhood education sector (ECEC).

Here in Ireland, the Department of Education and Skills (DES) has developed a digital strategy for primary and post-primary schools. This is fortified by a national support service which provides training and resources to support teachers in successfully incorporating technology in their educational practice. However, the DES has stopped short of recommendations for technology to enhance learning for children in ECEC and has instead recommended further research in this area (DES, 2020).

Internationally, the European Commission has stated that 26 out of 38 countries included in their 2019 report are incorporating technology within their ECEC educational guidelines. Ireland is not included in that list of 26 (European Commission, 2019).

From passive to active use of technology

jelleke-vanooteghem-chuzevDl4qM-unsplash

Photo by Jelleke Vanooteghem on Unsplash

Current research has found that young children are already proficient in digital technology use by the age of 3 years old (Marsh et al, 2015). In addition, further research findings from the Growing up in Ireland longitudinal study report that technology is the most favoured form of play for 9-year-old children, more popular than reading a book or even playing with their friends (ESRI, 2021).

When considering technology, devices such as smartphones and tablets initially come to mind, but what if the foundations were laid at the ECEC stage for thinking about technology as much more than streaming animations, social media, and games? An opportunity exists here for the introduction of technology as a developmentally appropriate pedagogical tool for ECEC children, many of whom are already technologically proficient, to open up the possibilities of technology for more than the aforementioned passive activities. This knowledge could inform and expand children’s engagement with technology right through their educational lives.

Examples of active uses of technology

Photo by Eduardo Barrios on Unsplash

From an accessibility perspective, it is important to acknowledge that ECEC settings may have varying degrees of access to technology. For example, access may be limited by resources, practitioner training, or funding, however, there are ways to incorporate technology which are both affordable and accessible and do not require a large investment.

Some simple methods for active uses of technology with ECEC children might include:

Examining bugs under a digital microscope.
Simple robotic sets.
Reflecting with children using photographs, video, and audio clips of them and their play.
Engaging with another setting as online “pen pals” via email or even video conferencing.
Invite parents who have an interesting job or story to tell into the setting via video conference.
Microphones for children to interview each other and listen back together.
Use an online tool such as Google Drawings to collaborate on artwork with family or with another setting.
Silent videos for children to narrate and act out.
Email and pictures from home – favourite food, my room, my favourite toy.
Search for recipes and order ingredients online, then cook together.

The future of technology in ECEC

Photo by Giu Vicente on Unsplash

But why stop there! Imagine the possibilities of the future and how they could have been so useful for children during the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, so many children missed out on their final year in ECEC and the associated social and emotional preparation for their transition to primary education that would have been provided.

What if augmented or virtual reality technology had been mainstream and accessible during that time. Children could have engaged in a virtual walkthrough of their new primary school environment and had a meet and greet with their primary school teacher and even classmates. This may sound like a somewhat futuristic idea for ECEC, but who would have imagined 30 years ago the technologies which exist today? Such technologies may be expensive now, but like all new technology, surely they will become more affordable over time.

Moving forward, a 2021 report on the uses of technology in ECEC, both pre- and post-pandemic, has highlighted the need for policies and procedures to be developed to provide appropriate guidance for increased utilisation of technology within ECEC pedagogical practice (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2021). This is reflective of the current lack of direction on technology within the ECEC curriculum in Ireland’s Aistear curriculum and Síolta quality frameworks. Although notably, the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA) are currently engaged in a project to update the Aistear curriculum framework which will hopefully address this gap in an Irish context. The OECD (2021) has also recommended the provision of practitioner training and the development of age-appropriate tools to further support the effective incorporation of technology in ECEC pedagogical practice. Of course, there are practical concerns that must be considered, such as ensuring that a balance is struck between engaging with technology for pedagogical use and avoiding an excess of screen time, as suggested by Finnish pedagogues (OECD, 2021). Additionally, we must ensure that the ECEC curriculum does not become dependent on technology so that those who do not have equitable access to technological tools are not disadvantaged. However, such issues further underpin the importance of developing and providing relevant training for ECEC professionals, appropriately embedding technology within the curriculum and quality frameworks, and considering the possibilities of technology in broader terms beyond merely smartphones, tablets, search engines, and streaming apps.

References and Further Reading

Department of Education and Skills. (2019). Digital Learning Framework for Primary Schools. Dublin: Stationery Office. https://www.dlplanning.ie

DES. (2017). Síolta the National Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education. Dublin: Early Years Education and Policy Unit. https://siolta.ie/manuals.php

DES. (2020). Digital Learning 2020: Reporting on practice in Early Learning and Care, Primary and Post-Primary Contexts. Dublin: Stationery Office. https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/c0053-digital-learning-2020-reporting-on-practice-in-early-learning-and-care-primary-and-post-primary-contexts/

ESRI. (2021). Growing Up in Ireland, National Longitudinal Study of Children: The lives of 9 year olds of cohort ‘08. Dublin: ESRI. https://www.esri.ie/publications/growing-up-in-ireland-the-lives-of-9-year-olds-of-cohort-08

European Commission. (2019). Key Data on Early Childhood Education and Care in Europe – Eurydice Report 2019. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/national-policies/eurydice/content/key-data-early-childhood-education-and-care-europe-–-2019-edition_en

Marsh, J. 2014. The Relationship Between Online and Offline Play: Friendship and Exclusion. In Children’s Games in the New Media Age, edited by A. Burn and C. Richards, 109–134. London: Ashgate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303572020_The_relationship_between_online_and_offline_play_friendship_and_exclusion

National Council for Curriculum Assessment. (2009). Aistear: the Early Childhood Curriculum Framework. Dublin: NCCA. https://ncca.ie/media/4151/aistear_theearlychildhoodcurriculumframework.pdf

O’Neill, S. (2018). Technology Use in Early Learning and Care: A Practice Dilemma. ChildLinks: Children and the Digital World, Barnardo’s, Issue 3, 2018. https://shop.barnardos.ie/products/ebook-childlinks-children-and-the-digital-world-issue-3-2018

OECD. (2021). Using Digital Technologies for Early Education during COVID-19: OECD report for the G20 2020 Education Working Group. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/using-digital-technologies-for-early-education-during-covid-19_fe8d68ad-en

Managing Digital Learning during COVID-19 and Beyond

by Dr Baxter, Dr Jewitt, Professor Floyd | BERA, NW 16 ICT in Education and Training, NW 23 Policy Studies and Politics of Education, NW 26 Educational Leadership

It is undisputed that Covid has had a massive impact on education and the way it is delivered, both in the UK and internationally. Whilst there have been a number of papers on the ways in which teachers have innovated during this time, and the impact this has had on their workload and mental health, there has been little on how school leaders and their senior teams have taken a strategic overview of online and blended learning. This post takes a look at a funded research project and explores why this area is so important for school leadership, both during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

The recent pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges for school leadership teams and their staff. Almost overnight, they have had to create policies and working practices in a very short timeframe. One leader reported that a strategy meant to take three years had been achieved in three weeks!

In England, secondary schools have been shut down for the duration of two lockdown periods for all but the children of essential workers. Evidence from our pilot project suggests that school leaders have not only changed policies and practices but in many cases, their vision for education. The project, leading school learning through Covid 19 and beyond: online learning and strategic planning through and post lockdown in English secondary schools, investigates how senior leaders strategically planned for online learning – before, during, and after the pandemic. Our sample includes interviews with 70 senior leaders from English secondary schools, along with a questionnaire sent out via project partners to 4000 schools, and an analysis of 200 school websites.

level I – this is the lowest level of digital planning, in which technology is used passively by particular teachers in particular subjects to support learning. This level is termed – substitution. Level II this is where traditional pedagogy is adapted for online, this level is termed – augmentation. Level III – modification – this is where strategic thought is given to the design of online learning and enhancements that add value are implemented. Level IV – strategic planning for online learning – this links to a whole school or departmental approach.

Figure 1 : Strategic Planning for Online learning: Level 1 to 4, adapted from Puntedura, 2021.

Our project classifies the different levels of strategic planning for online education, via an adapted version of Puntedura’s (Puentedura, 2010), SAMR Model, in which the lowest level of planning is termed substitution, the second level is termed augmentation, the third level is termed modification, and the final and most advanced level is termed strategic planning for online learning. (See figure 1). It adopts a strategy as a learning approach which we have used successfully in previous projects relating to educational leadership and management (Baxer & Floyd, 2019; J. Baxter, 2020; J Baxter & John, 2021).

Challenges

Analysis of the pilot project suggests some key themes that are emerging in both qualitative and quantitative data. It is clear that school leaders made some substantial changes to the management of online learning in the period between the first lockdown in March 2020 and the second principal lockdown in the winter of 2020/ 2021. For example, school leaders reported considerable issues with hardware and connectivity, particularly during the first lockdown. Evidence suggests that they have subsequently been creative in acquiring these elements, ensuring that learners were properly equipped to engage with learning during lockdown two.

One of the major categories that has emerged within the study is well-being and care: this in terms of both teacher and learner welfare. School leaders appear to have placed the well-being of their staff and learners first and foremost. They report considerable stress amongst staff, and challenges in relation to learners, particularly those with particular learning needs, and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds. This aligns with the findings of a report by the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development).

Leaders have also reported the considerable investment of time needed in building the competencies of parents and carers. This has offered both challenges and opportunities with engaging parents more fully in the learning processes of their children. Communication with parents and learners, and not least in managing online teachers and teams, was also a challenge. Yet again, out of the crisis, there appears to have been some considerable learning taking place, with senior leaders speaking to SEN students and their carers, in some cases on a weekly or even daily basis.

Leaders report that one of the most important tasks during lockdown has been establishing a baseline for effective teaching. Some schools cut down on curriculum to focus on the essentials. Sorting out policies and protocols with staff, governors, and unions, has taken up a great deal of management time, but respondents largely feel that it has been a worthwhile task going forward.

Opportunities

There is considerable evidence of pedagogical innovation and creativity, particularly during the second lockdown when school staff were taken less by surprise. Leaders report evidence of new ideas being tried and tested by teachers, free from the normal constraints. They also report new roles being created as a result of an enhanced focus on digital learning. For example, a new head of digital strategy and innovation at one multi-academy trust; a new head of digital training and development for both teachers and parents in the same MAT.

There is also evidence that some senior leaders are beginning to view education in a different way: one head of a multi-academy trust had already brokered a relationship with Apple to move the whole curriculum online. New and innovative practices adopted during Covid, born out of necessity, are reported as now being ‘business as usual’. An example of this is parent evenings – once held face-to-face and often poorly attended, particularly in schools in challenging areas – which have been much more successful online. Several school leaders state their intention to continue this practice and extend it to governor meetings and, in some cases, staff meetings too.

In terms of quality assurance, this is one area that presented school leaders with their biggest challenges. But from the second lockdown onwards, some schools had already introduced strategies for peer observation of teaching, virtual learning walks, and other innovations to promote and sustain good practice. Some respondents reported using online engagement statistics to measure learner engagement.

One particularly interesting area reported by one senior multi-Academy trust leader: a number of teachers and headteachers across over 15 schools reported that quieter pupils, those who didn’t normally respond well in class, had engaged far more fully with lessons when delivered digitally. This is a potentially intriguing area that could be taken forward concerning introverted students and their more extroverted peers.

Going Forward

The central part of the framework links to well-being and access to learning in the next concentric circle moving outwards, is trust, communication, data privacy. The next concentric circle contains four quadrants, four aspects of digital learning in secondary schools: one – design differentiated learning experience for all students; two – build competencies of teacher students parents and carers; three – collaborate in multilateral strategies with teacher voice at the core; four – develop the digital environment with a combination of approaches. Outside the circle are for headings these headings indicate that the subjects are overarching in relation to the other quadrants of the circle: pedagogical innovation, flexibility and partnership, resources and infrastructure, equity ability and inclusivity.

The pilot research has revealed some interesting findings that will be taken forward into the main phase. It has also resulted in a theoretical framework for our research. This is illustrated in figure 2.

As can be seen in the framework, we place well-being and access to learning central to the future development of digital innovation in secondary schools.

The second part of our framework includes:

designing a differentiated learning experience for students
the importance of building the competencies of teachers, students, parents, and carers
collaboration in multilateral strategies with teacher voice at the core
developing a digital environment via a combination of approaches.

We look forward to continuing our reporting on the project, which will give rise to a free online course for school leaders hosted on the Open University’s open learning platform.

Further details of our project, or to take part, see our website at: https://www.open.ac.uk/projects/leading-online-learning/

or follow us on Twitter at: https://twitter.com/Covid_EduLeader

References and Further Reading

Baxer, J., & Floyd, A. (2019). Strategic narrative in multi‐academy trusts in England: Principal drivers for expansion. British Educational Research Journal, 45(5), 1050-1071.

Baxter, J. (2020). Schemes of delegation as governance tools : the case of multi academy trusts in education under review.

Baxter, J., & John, A. (2021). Strategy as learning in multi-academy trusts in England: strategic thinking in action. School Leadership & Management, 1-21. doi: 10.1080/13632434.2020.1863777

Jewitt, K., Baxter, J., & Floyd, A. (2021). Literature review on the use of online and blended learning during Covid 19 and Beyond. The Open University The Open University

Dr Jacqueline Baxter

Associate Professor in Public Policy and Management The Open University Business School

Dr Jacqueline Baxter is Associate Professor in Public Policy and Management and Director for the Centre of Innovation in Online Business and Legal Education (SCILAB). She is Principal Fellow of The Higher Education Academy, Fellow of The Academy of Social Sciences and Elected Council Member of Belmas. She is outgoing Editor in Chief of the Sage Journal Management in Education (MiE) Her current funded research projects examine the interrelationship between trust, accountability, and capacity in improving learning outcomes; and the strategic management of online learning in secondary schools during and beyond Covid19.

Dr Baxter is based in the Department of Public Leadership and Social Enterprise at the Open University Business School.

She tweets @drjacqueBaxter and her profile can be found at: http://www.open.ac.uk/people/jab899. Her latest book is: Trust, Accountability and Capacity in Education System Reform (Routledge, 2020).

X

Dr Katharine Jewitt

Research Fellow and Educational Technology Consultant at The Open University

Dr Katharine Jewitt is a Research Fellow and Educational Technology Consultant at The Open University. Katharine works across four faculties (Faculty of Wellbeing, Education & Language Studies, Faculty for Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics, Faculty of Business and Law and The Centre for Inclusion and Collaborative Partnership) and teaches at access, undergraduate and postgraduate levels.

Professor Alan Floyd

University of Reading

Alan Floyd is a Professor of Education and his research and teaching activity focus on two substantive areas: educational leadership and doctoral education. Specific areas of interest include:

Academic leadership
School leadership and Multi Academy Trusts (MATs)
How people perceive and experience being in a leadership role
Distributed and collaborative leadership
Leadership development
Career trajectories
Identity Insider research and associated ethical issues
Supporting doctoral researchers

Beyond the stereotype of GenZ

Understanding the new generation of university students

Flexible learning models

Relationships

Engaging students

Summary

Key Messages

Blog Authors

Elif Taslibeyaz

Feng Su

Margaret Wood

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

Fostering creativity in the classroom – developing the module

Our reflections

Students’ impressions

Fin

Key Messages

Dr Peter Tiernan

Dr Fiona Gallacher

Dr Irene White

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

Using ChatGPT in an educational technology course

Students’ experiences using ChatGPT

Final thoughts

Key Messages

References and Further Reading

About the educational science course

On AI and accuracy

Dr Bengi Birgili

Other blog posts on similar topics:

Key Messages

Conceptualising learning design roles

Christine:

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Dr Eamon Costello

Other blog posts on similar topics:

References and Further Reading

A study on the effect of digital tools on learning situations in preschool

Development of didactic flexibility and digital literacy

Role of the reflection sessions

Collegial Learning and digital literacy– some reflections

Key Messages

Other blog posts on similar topics:

Dr Karin Forsling

References and Further Reading

Environmental impact of users’ digital lives

Current focus of digital literacy and digital literacy frameworks

Shifting our focus

Conclusion

Key Messages

Other blog posts on similar topics:

Dr Peter Tiernan

References and Further Reading

From passive to active use of technology

Examples of active uses of technology

The future of technology in ECEC

Other blog posts on similar topics:

Paula Walshe

References and Further Reading

Figure 1 : Strategic Planning for Online learning: Level 1 to 4, adapted from Puntedura, 2021.

Challenges

Opportunities

Going Forward

References and Further Reading

Dr Jacqueline Baxter

Dr Katharine Jewitt

Professor Alan Floyd

Recent Posts

Categories

Topics