Hvad er Digital pædagogik? – Konturer af et nyt praksis- og forskningsfelt
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v17i32.129582Abstract
Baggrund: Den pædagogisk virkelighed er i forandring, og digitale teknologier spiller en betydelig rolle i universitetsundervisningens undervisningsformer.
Formål: Formålet er at skabe overblik over det faglige domæne Digital pædagogiks betydninger og bidrage til en robust definition, der giver legitimitet og identitet og fremadrettet kan bruges i universitetspædagogikkens praksis, forskning og udvikling.
Metode: Metodisk knyttes an til en induktiv analysestrategi, som indkredser en definition af Digital pædagogik, og en deduktiv analysestrategi, som tester definitionen i forhold til eksisterende definitioner og forskningsprojekter.
Resultater: Artiklen udvikler en definition af Digital pædagogik som et tværdisciplinært fagligt domæne, der er influeret af eksisterende faglige domæner som uddannelsesteknologi, didaktik og almenpædagogik.
Konklusion: Digital pædagogik kan fungere som et teoretisk grundlag til at forstå, udvikle og undersøge den digitale virkeligheds praksis. Digital pædagogik kan både forstærke videnskabelig forståelse af undervisning, læring og vejledning og på samme tid bidrage til at udvikle innovative og effektive læringsmiljøer og didaktiske design, som kan forbedre
læringsomgivelserne.
References
Barber, W., King, S., & Buchanan, S. (2015). Problem based learning and authentic assessment in digital pedagogy: Embracing the role of collaborative communities. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 13(2), 59-67.
Basballe, D. A., Hjorth, M., Iversen, O. S., Caspersen, M., Lundgaard Hansen, B., & Holm Kanstrup, K. (2021). Gapanalyse af teknologiforståelse i det danske uddannelsessystem fra grundskole til ungdomsuddannelser. Danske Professionshøjskoler.https:/-n--danskeprofessionshjskoler-xtc.dk/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/gap analyse.2021.pdf.
Bates, A. W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Hentet fra https://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/
Bayne, S., Evans, P., Ewins, R., Knox, J., & Lamb, J. (2020). The manifesto for teaching online. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11840.001.0001
Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (Eds.). (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203961681
Coffey A (2013) Analysing documents. In: Flick U (ed.) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Sage, pp. 367-379. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446282243.n25
Conole, G. (2013). Designing for Learning in an Open World. New York, NY: Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8517-0
Croxall, B. (2012, January). Digital pedagogy. A digital pedagogy unconference. Paper præsenteret på Modern Language Association- Round Table Conference, Boston, MA. Hentet fra http://www.briancroxall.net/digitalpedagogy/what-is-digital-pedagogy/
Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. Teachers College Press.)
Cunningham, & Kelly, (2017). Epistemic practices of engineering for education. Science Education, 101 (3), 486-505. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21271
Davies, R., Sprague, C. R., & New, C. (2008). Integrating technology into a science classroom. The impact of the laboratory and technology on learning and teaching science K-16, 207-237.
Dirckinck-Holmfeld, L. (2004). Et europæisk perspektiv på e-læring. In E-læring på Arbejde, p. 15-29. Roskilde Universitetsforlag
Dohn, N. B., & Hansen, J. J. (2016). Didaktik, design og digitalisering: En begrebsoversigt. In Didaktik, design og digitalisering (pp. 21-41). København: Samfundslitteratur.
Dohn, N. B., Thorsen, M., & Larsen, S. (2013). E-læring. Universitetspædagogik. Samfundslitteratur.
Facer, K., & Selwyn, N. (2021). Digital Technology and the Futures of Education: Towards 'Non-Stupid'Optimism.
Fawns, T. (2019). Postdigital education in design and practice. Postdigital Science and Education, 1(1), 132-145.), s. 139 https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-018-0021-8
Fletcher-Flinn, C. M., & Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computer assisted instruction (CAI): A meta-analysis. Journal of educational computing research, 12(3), 219-241. https://doi.org/10.2190/51D4-F6L3-JQHU-9M31
Freire, P. (2018). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Bloomsbury publishing USA. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429269400-8
Gleason, N. W. (2018). Higher education in the era of the fourth industrial revolution. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0194-0
Goodfellow, R., & Lea, M. R. (Eds.). (2013). Literacy in the digital university: Critical perspectives on learning, scholarship and technology. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203074510
Goodlad, J.I., Klein, M.F., & Tye, K.A. (1979). The domains of curriculum and their study. In J.I. Goodlad (ed.), Curriculum inquiry, p. 43-76). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Greenhow, C., Lewin, C., & Staudt Willet, K. B. (2021). The educational response to Covid-19 across two countries: a critical examination of initial digital pedagogy adoption. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 30(1), 7-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2020.1866654
Habermas, J. (2015). Knowledge and human interests: A general perspective. G. Gutting, Continental Philosophy of Science, (pp. 310-321). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470755501.ch23
Hansen, J. J. (2010). Læremiddellandskabet. Fra læremiddel til undervisning. København: Akademisk forlag.
Harbo, T., Lysne A. & Stenhouse L. (1974). Pedagogisk perspektiv: Knud Grue-Sørensen, Oslo: Aschehoug, 1974.
Harris, K. D. (2013). Play, Collaborate, Break, Build, Share:"Screwing Around" in Digital Pedagogy. Polymath: An Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences Journal, 3(3).
Heimann, P. (1976). Didaktik als Theorie und Lehre. In P. Heimann (Ed.), Didaktik als Unterrichtswissenschaft (pp. 142-167). Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag.
Henderson, M., Selwyn, N., & Aston, R. (2017). What works and why? Student perceptions of 'useful'digital technology in university teaching and learning. Studies in Higher Education, 42(8), 1567-1579. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946
Henriksen, D., Richardson, C., & Mehta, R. (2017). Design thinking: A creative approach to educational problems of practice. Thinking skills and Creativity, 26, 140-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2017.10.001
Herbart, Johann Friedrich (1887/1964): Allgemeine Pädagogik aus dem Zwecke der Erziehung abgeleitet, in: Sämtliche Werke, Bd. 2. Neudruck der Ausgabe Langensalza 1887.
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27 March.
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441-456.) https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000219
Imsen, G. (2013). Lærerens verden - indføring i almen didaktik (5. udg.). København: Gyldendal.
Jank, W. & Meyer, H. (2012). Didaktiske modeller. Grundbog i didaktik. København: Gyldendal.
Jones, C. (2015). Networked learning: An educational paradigm for the age of digital networks. London/NY: Springer Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01934-5
Jones, C. (2015) "Theories of Learning in a Digital Age", i: Jones, C: Networked Learning. An Educational Paradigm for the Age of Digital Networks, London/NY: Springer Publishers, s. 47-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01934-5_3
Jones, W. A. (2011). Variation among academic disciplines: An update on analytical frameworks and research. Journal of the Professoriate, 6(1), 9-27.
Kemper, L., Vorhoff, G., & Wigger, B. U. (2020). Predicting student dropout: A machine learning approach. European Journal of Higher Education, 10(1), 28-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2020.1718520
Kergel, D., Heidkamp-Kergel, B., Arnett, R. C., & Mancino, S. (Eds.). (2020). Communication and Learning in an Age of Digital Transformation. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429430114
Kivunja, C. (2013). Embedding digital pedagogy in pre-service higher education to better prepare teachers for the digital generation. International Journal of Higher Education, 2(4), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v2n4p131
Kirkwood, A. & Price, L. (2014). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is 'enhanced' and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1) p. 6-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404
Koschmann, T. (2012). CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203052747
Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203304846
Laurillard, D. (2008). The teacher as action researcher: Using technology to capture pedagogic form. Studies in Higher education, 33(2), 139-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070801915908
Laurillard, D. (2013). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. Routledge.
Laurillard, D. (2008). The teacher as action researcher: Using technology to capture pedagogic form. Studies in Higher education, 33(2), 139-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070801915908
Lewin, D., & Lundie, D. (2016). Philosophies of digital pedagogy. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 35(3), 235-240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-016-9514-7
MacKenzie, T. (2016). Dive into inquiry: Amplify learning and empower student voice. EdTechTeam Press.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2018). Conducting educational design research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315105642
Means, B., Bakia, M., & Murphy, R. (2014). Learning online: What research tells us about whether, when and how. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203095959
Mitcham, C. (2001). Philosophizing about technology: Why should we bother? Hentet fra: http://ethix.org/2001/06/01/philosophizing-about-technology-why-should-we-bother
Morris, S. M. (2013). Decoding Digital Pedagogy, pt: 1 Beyond the LMS. Hybrid Pedagogy. Hentet fra https://hybridpedagogy.org/decoding-digital-pedagogy-pt-1-beyond-the-lms/
Nathan, M. J., & Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Foundations of the learning sciences. In The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 21-43). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.004
Nelson, H. G., & Stolterman, E. (2012). The design way: Intentional change in an unpredictable Cambridge, MA: MIT https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9188.001.0001
Nia, M. G., & de Vries, M. J. (2016). "Standards" on the bench: Do standards for technological literacy render an adequate image of technology? Journal of Technology and Science Edu cation, 6(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.207. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.207
Nwana, H. S. (1990). Intelligent tutoring systems: an overview. Artificial Intelligence Review, 4(4), 251-277. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00168958
Nørgård, R.T. & Hansen, J.J.: Definition af Digital pædagogik and learning in higher education. Hentet fra: https://dun-net.dk/sigs-special-interest-groups/dip-digital-pedagogy-and-learning-in-higher-education/
Nørgård, R.T. (2021). Hybrid undervisning og læring: Principper, formater og aktiviteter. I: Kognition & Pædagogik, Bind 31, Nr. 122, 2021, s. 20-34.
Paulsen, M., & Tække, J. (2021). A New perspective on education in the digital age: Teaching, Media and Bildung, Bloomsbury Acedemic.
Richey, R.C. (2008). Reflections on the 2008 AECT Definitions of the Field. TechTrends. 52 (1): 24-25. doi:10.1007/s11528-008-0108-2. S2CID 189912472.) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-008-0108-2
Rienecker & Stray Jørgensen, Universitetspædagogiske praksisser, Samfundslitteratur, 2015
Ryberg, T. (2021). Historisk blik på uddannelsesteknologi og online undervisning. Kognition & Paedagogik, 31(122), 8-19.
Säljö, R. (2000). Læring i praksis. Et sociokulturelt perspektiv. Hans Reitzel.
Schubert, W. H. (2008). Curriculum Inquiry. I: Connelly, M.F., He, M.F. & Phillion, J. (eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Curriculum and Instruction. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, 2008. pp. 399-419. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976572.n19
Seels, B. B. & Richey, R. C. (1994). Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational Communications and Technology.
Selwyn, N. 2011. "Editorial: In Praise of Pessimism - The Need for Negativity in Educational Technology." British Journal of Educational Technology 42 (5): 713 - 718. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01215.x
Selwyn, N. (2016). Minding our language: why education and technology is full of bullshit… and what might be done about it. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(3), 437-443. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1012523
Sharpe, R., & Oliver, M. (2007). Supporting practitioners' design for learning: Principles of effective resources and interventions. In Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (pp. 137-148). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203961681-20
Smyth, R. (2004). Exploring the usefulness of a conceptual framework as a research tool: a researcher's reflections. Issues in educational research, 14(2), 167-180.
Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. D. (2006). Computer supported collaborative learning. In R. Keith, Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-425). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833.025
Stommel, J. (2014). Critical digital pedagogy: a definition. Hybrid Pedagogy. Hentet fra: http://www.digitalpedagogylab.com/hybridped/critical-digital-pedagogy-definition
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 8(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45
Uljens, M. (1997). Grunddrag til en reflektiv skoldidaktisk teori, in: Uljens, Michael (red.). Didaktik, Studenterlitteratur
Uljens, M. (2001). On general education as a discipline. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 20(4), 291-301. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011830623420
Väätäjä, J. O., & Ruokamo, H. (2021). Conceptualizing dimensions and a model for digital pedagogy. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 15, 1834490921995395. https://doi.org/10.1177/1834490921995395
Van Valkenburg, W., Dijkstra, W., de los Arcos, B., & Goeman, K. (2020). European Maturity Model for Blended Education.
Veletsianos, G., and Moe, R. (2017). The rise of educational technology as a sociocultural and ideological phenomenon. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2017/4/the-rise-of-educational-technology-as-a-sociocultural and-ideological-phenomenon. Hentet 30/11 2021.
von Oettingen, A. (2010). Almen pædagogik: pædagogikkens grundlæggende spørgsmål. Gyldendal Uddannelse.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
DUT udkommer elektronisk via Statsbibliotekets Open Journal System (Tidsskrift.dk) og DUNs hjemmeside (DUN-net.dk) forår og efterår. Det er gratis og frit tilgængeligt at læse og downloade artikler fra tidsskriftet.
Det er ikke muligt at abonnere på Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, DUT, men hvis du er medlem af DUN, får du tilsendt en nyhedsmail med link til udgivelsen, når den nyeste udgave er online. Linket vil også være tilgængeligt her på siden, så snart tidsskriftet er publiceret.
© Copyright
Artikler publiseret i Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, DUT, må bruges (downloades) og genbruges (distribueres, kopieres, citeres) til ikke-kommercielle formål med reference til forfattere og Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift.
Artikler indsendt til Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift må ikke publiseres i andre tidskrifter.
Betingelser
Artikler i Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, DUT, er omfattet af ophavsretsloven, og der må citeres fra dem.
Følgende betingelser skal dog være opfyldt:
- Citatet skal være i overensstemmelse med „god skik“
- Der må kun citeres „i det omfang, som betinges af formålet“
- Ophavsmanden til teksten skal krediteres, og kilden skal angives ift. ovenstående bibliografiske oplysninger.
