06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper
Going beyond Digital Technologies as Instruments: Initial Teacher Education in (Critical) Digital Competence in Quebec
Victoria I. Marín1, Gustavo Adolfo Angulo Mendoza2
1Universitat de Lleida, Spain; 2Université TELUQ, Canada
Presenting Author: Marín, Victoria I.
Digital competence is understood as a "situated multiple integrated skills and practices (conceptual, attitudinal, procedural, and ethical) that empower people (individuals and groups) to participate and communicate efficiently in society" (Marín & Castañeda, 2022, p. 5). With the notable impact from the Covid-19 pandemic, teachers are called worldwide to develop their digital competence as professionals, especially considering their role in educating (and empowering) future citizens in the digital world (Bond, 2020).
National (or even regional) mandates for teachers to develop their digital competence are usually gathered in professional reference frameworks. Reference frameworks for teachers are relevant in that they are "policy documents that define the minimum standard of professional attributes that all educators teaching within a given educational system are expected to possess, to be able to do their jobs properly" (Villar-Onrubia et al., 2022, p. 129).
Even if some countries (or regions) have also their own digital competence framework for teachers - for example, DigCompEdu in Europe has influenced the creation of different frameworks across the continent and beyond -, these do not have the same level of use, since often take the form of non-binding documents proposed as guidance. In addition, most of those frameworks do not address the critical dimension of teachers' digital competence, which would involve going beyond effectiveness and instrumental aspects of digital competence, hence being a pending issue in teacher education around the world (Castañeda & Villar-Onrubia, 2023).
Critical digital competence involves adopting a critical approach when consuming and sharing content and dealing with data, but also developing a level of awareness of the power dynamics of ICT stakeholders and their implications (Villar-Onrubia et al., 2022). Even though this competence is key to any person, it is especially important for teachers, because they are uniquely positioned to empower younger generations in that responsible, critical and ethical engagement with digital technologies (Gouseti et al., 2021; Marín et al., 2021).
In this study we explore the specific case of the Quebec province (Canada). The province counts with an action plan for digitalisation since 2018 that will be completed in 2023. The first of its measures involved establishing and implementing a reference framework for digital competence (Ministère de l'Éducation du Québec, 2019), which connects to the new version of the reference framework for professional competences for teachers (published in 2020). The Competency 12, Mobilize digital technologies, details in its scope that “it goes beyond the technical skills needed to use digital tools for pedagogical purposes in the classroom. Teachers must be aware of the impact of these changes on the nature and value of learning” and highlights as key elements, aspects such as “exercises ethical citizenship in the digital age” or “develops critical thinking with regard to the use of digital technology”. These elements coincide with the dimensions that appear in the framework for digital competence and differ from other teacher reference frameworks worldwide in the value given to critical and digital citizenship elements (Villar-Onrubia et al., 2022).
By studying the case of digital competence integration in teacher education programmes in Quebec universities, with emphasis on critical digital competence and digital citizenship, we aim at providing insights into new ways of doing that could be useful for an European context and beyond, as well as at contributing to international research in this context.
Two research questions were posed in the study:
RQ1: How is the teacher reference framework being mobilized in terms of digital competence in teacher education programmes at Quebec universities?
RQ2: How are critical digital competence and digital citizenship considered among the development of digital competence in teacher education programmes at Quebec universities?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe study follows an interpretive approach, since the objective is to better understand how digital competence is integrated in teacher education programmes at the Canadian province of Quebec, as a potential worldwide referent (Villar-Onrubia et al., 2022).
To triangulate data and obtain a broader view and insights into the two research questions, two qualitative data collection methods have been used in parallel: semi-structured interviews and document analysis.
Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 7 higher education instructors in education departments with expertise in educational technology or distance education of 3 universities with teacher education programs in Quebec. The interviews were guided by three questions that led to open-ended and flexible answers by the participants with relation to: a) their vision of the development of the digital competence in teacher education, b) the elements of the digital competence (importance, emphasis, connection to practice) and critical digital competence and digital citizenship, and c) the further development of the digital competence in initial teacher education programs. The key elements of the digital competence of the reference framework for teachers was used as a prompt in b) (Ministère de l'Éducation du Québec, 2020). The interviews were recorded and transcribed before their analysis.
Document analysis involved the search and analysis of the website descriptions of digital technologies/competences courses within undergraduate and graduate teacher education programmes leading to teacher professional accreditation in educational compulsory levels in Quebec. 13 Quebec universities, out of the total of 18, had these kinds of teacher education study programs. 34 courses were found and analysed. Data was tabulated in a spreadsheet file with the different basic information about the courses and their correspondence to the elements of the digital competence framework.
Content analysis from interviews' data and the courses identified in the document analysis was conducted using two coding approaches in different steps. First, a deductive coding approach was applied based on the Quebec digital competence elements. A second inductive coding approach was carried out to identify further relevant codes. The qualitative analysis software MAXQDA2022 was used to support this process of analysis.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe preliminary results show that training for digital competence in teacher education programs is covered by all Quebec universities, although there is still room for improvement in terms of critical digital competence, which may relate to the fact that the new reference framework for teachers was still being deployed at the time of the study.
The analysis of the 34 courses related to digital competence for teachers shows that the dimensions regarding harnessing of the potential of digital resources for learning and developing and mobilizing technological skills are among the most frequently present elements. Developing critical thinking regarding the use of digital technology is the third element in the list in terms of frequency, present in about half of the courses. Other dimensions such as adopting an innovative and creative approach to the use of digital technology or solving diverse problems via digital technology were barely present (in two courses). On the other hand, most of the courses included in their descriptions some connection to critical digital competence and digital citizenship.
These findings coincide partially with what interviewees stated. They mostly agreed on the digital competence elements that were more emphasised (the more instrumental ones, e.g., communication or content production), and the less emphasised (e.g., innovation and creativity or critical thinking) in the teacher education programs. Most interviewees stated that all dimensions were important and interrelated, but that developing and mobilizing technological skills was the basis. Also, they highlighted the importance of critical thinking regarding the use of digital technology.
This study contributes to the further international development of the (critical) digital competence for pre-service teachers in higher education, and involves the consideration of implications at the institutional and teaching and learning levels, e.g., approaches to digital competence that consider its cross-curricular status.
ReferencesBond, M. (2020). Schools and emergency remote education during the COVID-19 pandemic: A living rapid systematic review. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(2), 191-247. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4425683
Castañeda, L., & Villar-Onrubia, D. (2023). Beyond functionality: Building critical digital teaching competence among future primary education teachers. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(1), ep397. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/12599
Gouseti, A., Bruni, I., Ilomäki, L., Lakkala, M., Mundy, D., Raffaghelli, J. E., Ranieri, M., Roffi, A., Romero, M., & Romeu, T. (2021). Critical Digital Literacies framework for educators— DETECT project report 1. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5070329
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) (2019). ISTE Standards for Educators. https://www.iste.org/standards/for-educators
Marín, V. I., Carpenter, J. P., & Tur, G. (2021). Preservice teachers’ perceptions of social media data privacy policies. British Journal of Educational Technology, 52(2), 519-535. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13035
Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (2019). Digital Competency Framework. http://www.education.gouv.qc.ca/en/current-initiatives/digital-action-plan/digital-competency-framework/
Ministère de l’Éducation du Québec (2020). Reference Framework for Professional Competencies for Teachers. https://cdn-contenu.quebec.ca/cdn-contenu/adm/min/education/publications-adm/devenir-enseignant/reference_framework_professional_competencies_teacher.pdf?1611584651
Villar-Onrubia, D., Morini, L., Marín, V. I., & Nascimbeni, F. (2022). Critical digital literacy as a key for (post)digital citizenship: an international review of teacher competence frameworks. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 18(3), 128-139. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1135697
---
Victoria I. Marín acknowledges the support of the Grant RYC2019-028398-I funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and FSE “El FSE invierte en tu futuro”.
06. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Paper
Gamification as a Didactical Method in a University Course. Reflection on Students’ Participatory Work with Digital Media.
Ulrike M. Stadler-Altmann, Susanne Schumacher
Free University of Bolzano, Italy
Presenting Author: Stadler-Altmann, Ulrike M.
Understanding participation as a general form of involving individuals or groups in democratic decision-making processes, participatory action staged by teachers when designing learning environments is finally a form of "enacted participation" (Mayrberger, 2013: 1) in systemic structured educational contexts. This critical view is supported by the research findings to reveal contradictions in staged participation and describe the resulting tensions conducted by Bonk et al. (2009) using web-based surveys, e-mail interviews and Budde (2010) analysing video protocols. Although participation in substantive decision-making is considered ambivalently in the context of university courses, procedural democratic actions can take place between learners indeed.
In our paper, the research context results from students' interaction within a first-year course in the master's programme in Primary Education at the Free University of Bolzano. The enhancing learning environment in the EduSpace Lernwerkstatt facilitates collaborative work in a range from instruction to co-construction (cf. Hildebrandt et al., 2014) as well as fairly interaction at partnership on equal terms (Rumpf & Schmude, 2021: 57). The framework is a university seminar on general didactics, in which the students translate their theoretical knowledge of general didactics into a learning game for themselves and their fellow students. A digital medium is to be actively used for this purpose.
The opted task sets the content development of a media based educational game for repeating didactic basic concepts. Therefore, nine digital game formats are offered for selection in a technical application. According to Knapp, the implementation of game elements, approaches and mechanics in a non-game context (Kapp 2013) is a central feature of gamification. Following Deterding’s et al. (2011) definition of non-game contexts, the study programme Master in Educational Sciences for the Primary Sector represents the corresponding setting. The students are encouraged to conduct a communicative negotiation on the presentation of relevant content, to agree on a suitable game format and to try out the result together with their fellow students. In this way, they interweave factual knowledge on lesson planning with their own teaching perspectives and play experiences.
Based on the model of Autenrieth, Baumbusch, and Marquardt (2020: 241), the issue whether and how media education in the university stimulates aesthetic education, democratic education, and political education is analytically reflected. Furthermore, the question is on both how the few participatory approaches find a place in the narrow structure of teacher education (cf. Grell & Rau 2011) and whether this claim can be fulfilled in a seminar, even to a certain extent.
In our contribution, we describe the participatory design process and the democratic negotiation processes within the development stages of a digital game. On the other hand, the students' work results are evaluated regarding aspects of general didactic, gamification and participation in university courses.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedInitially, the students' work results and the lecturers' systematic observations are analysed and presented. Analysis criteria for the student results are: Fit between the content and the chosen game form, degree of gamification according to Kapp et al. (2013) and Deterding et al. (2011), as well as reaction and comments of fellow students to the offered game. By means of the observations, the student’s working methods can be considered. Participative possibilities and democratic negotiation processes become visible. These are even different in each student group.
Secondly, the two-step analysis is used to determine the extent to which the model of political-cultural media education according to Autenrieth, Baumbusch and Marquardt (2020: 241) becomes visible. Subsequently, the question can be answered whether their idea of a transversal competence education can be proven in media education, democracy education and aesthetic education.
Thirdly, the growth of student's knowledge achievement is recorded. If students have actually learned something in terms of subject matters by implementing the content in a digital game can be proved with results of the module examination. The formative assessment measurement instrument of the portfolio is used for this purpose. In their portfolio, the students must reflect on the development process of the digital game and describe their own learning progress. Finally, the students also have to comment on the digital tool with which they implement their game. Considering that, they also have to assess the possibilities and the usefulness of the technical tool for the primary education. The students' portfolio is evaluated following the same criteria as described above. The combination of the different survey methods results in an almost comprehensive picture of the seminar and the students' learning process.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThis explorative study examines the didactic setting of a seminar more closely. Van Staalduinen et al. (2011: 51) emphasise that it is important for the research design to ensure that different aspects - such as instruction, player behavior and engagement as well as user feedback - are connected and aligned. Thus, to illustrate the student's work as encompassing as possible, various analytical perspectives and approaches are combined. Given that a seminar in academic teacher education is seen as an integral part of developing future teacher's professionalism, greater attention must be paid to this element of higher educational didactic. The aim of this presentation is to show how didactic thinking can be specified. The transformation on part of students will become more apparent: their altered perspective on didactic theory, their assured handling of a digital device and their explorative attitude towards didactic methods
ReferencesAutenrieth, D., Baumbusch, C.; Marquardt, A., (2020) «Lehren und Lernen mit und über Medien in Kooperation von Schule, Hochschule und Museen: Am Beispiel des Projekts ‹Reuchlin digital›». MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung 17 (Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik): 531–63. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/jb17/2020.05.21.X.
Autenrieth, D., & Nickel, S. (2022). KuDiKuPa – Kultur der Digitalität = Kultur der Partizipation?! Verschränkung von Theorie und Praxis in partizipativ angelegter Hochschullehre durch Gaming und Game Design – ein Praxisbeispiel. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie Und Praxis Der Medienbildung, 18(Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik), 237–265. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/jb18/2022.02.26.
Bonk, C. J., Mimi Miyoung L., Nari K., & Meng-Feng G. L. (2009). The tensions of transformation in three cross–institutional wikibook projects. The Internet and Higher Education 12.3–4, S. 126–135.
Budde, J. (2010). Inszenierte Mitbestimmung?! Soziale und demokratische Kompetenzen im schulischen Alltag - In Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 56(3), S. 384-401.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”., Tampere. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
Grell, P. & Rau, F. (2011). Partizipationslücken - Social Software in der Hochschullehre. In MedienPädagogik, (21/1), S. 1-23.
Hildebrandt, E., Peschel, M& Weißhaupt, M. (Eds) (2014). Lernen zwischen freien und instruiertem Tätigsein. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt
Kapp, Karl M.; Blair, Lucas; Mesch, Rich (2013): The Gamification of Learning and Instruction Fieldbook: Ideas into Practice. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Mayrberger, Kerstin. 2013. Partizipatives Lernen Mit Dem Social Web Gestalten. Zum Widerspruch Einer Verordneten Partizipation. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie Und Praxis Der Medienbildung 21, S. 1-25.
Rumpf, D., & Schmude, C. (2021). Von der Herausforderung, die Vielfalt von Hochschullernwerkstätten in einer Definition abzubilden. In B. Holub, K. Himpsl-Gutermann, K. Mittlböck, M. Musilek-Hofer, A. Varelija-Gerber, & N. Grünberger (Eds.). lern.medien.werk.statt. Hochschullernwerkstätten in der Digitalität (p. 53-69). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt.
van Staalduinen; Jan-Paul; Freitas, Sara de (2011). A Game-Based Learning Framework: Linking Game Design and Learning Outcomes. In M. Swe Khine (Ed.): Learning to play. exploring the future of education with video games. New York: Peter Lang, p. 29–54.
|
