Design principles for higher education teacher development
the Teknosofikum course/concept
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/lom.v15i27.134151Nøgleord:
higher education teacher development, digital competence, learning design, design-based researchResumé
This study moves from the research question: how to design a professional course/concept for the development of higher education teachers’ digital competences? It presents Teknosofikum, a project funded by the Danish Ministry of Higher Education and Science between 2020 and 2023. The outcome of the project is a course for higher education teachers with a focus on digital competence. Grounded in sociomaterial theories, digital competence refers here to the capacity to develop agency towards professional changes driven by technology. It comprises teachers’ abilities to evaluate why, when, how and with what effects to include digital technologies in teaching. The study draws on qualitative and quantitative data gathered through design-based research along the first three course iterations, with a total of 64 participants. The findings show the emergence of three design principles: (i) relational approach to technology; (ii) praxis; and (iii) organized non-linearity. These principles will guide the final format of Teknosofikum course/concept.
Downloads
Referencer
Abrahamson, D. (2015). Reinventing learning: A design-research odyssey. ZDM Mathematics Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0646-3
Aldon, G., Arzarello, F., Panero, M., Robutti, O., Taranto, E., & Trgalová, J. (2019). MOOCs for mathematics teacher education to foster professional development: design principles and assessment. In Technology in Mathematics Teaching, 223-246. Springer, Cham.
Bagga-Gupta, S., & Messina Dahlberg, G. (2019). On epistemological issues in technologically infused spaces: notes on virtual sites for learning. In: Virtual Sites as Learning Spaces (3-25). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Barab, S. A., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1
Bardzell, S., Bardzell, J., Forlizzi, J., Zimmerman, J., and Antanitis, J. (2012). Critical design and critical theory: The challenge of designing for provocation. Proc. of DIS'12. ACM Press.
Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, V., Matarranz, M., Casado-Aranda, L. A., & Otto, A. (2022). Teachers’ digital competencies in higher education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 1-16.
Bayne, S., & Gallagher, M. (2021). Near Future Teaching: Practice, policy and digital education futures. Policy Futures in Education, 19(5), 607-625.
Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education. In: Internet Environments for Science Education, 73–88. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational researcher, 33(8), 3-15.
Bovill, C., Jordan, L., & Watters, N. (2015). Transnational approaches to teaching and learning in higher education: challenges and possible guiding principles. Teaching in Higher Education, 20(1), 12-23, https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2014.945162
Bressler, D.M., Shane Tutwiler, M. & Bodzin, A.M. (2021). Promoting student flow and interest in a science learning game: a design-based research study of School Scene Investigators. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 2789–2811. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10039-y
Brodie, K. (2021). Teacher agency in professional learning communities. Professional development in education, 47(4), 560-573, https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1689523
Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Publishing.
Caena, F., & Redecker, C. (2019). Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence. Framework for Educators (DigCompEdu). European Journal of Education, 54(3), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12345
Cesco, S., Zara, Z., De Toni, A., Auhli, P., Betta, G., Evancs, A., & Orzes, G. (2021). Higher education in the first year of COVID-19: Thoughts and perspectives for the future. International Journal of Higher Education, 10(1), 285–294. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n3p285
Cobb, P. & Gravemeijer, K. (2008). Experimenting to support and understand learning processes. In: Handbook of Design Research Methods in Education, New York, NY: Routledge.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15-42.
Compton, V., Jones, A. (1998). Reflecting on Teacher Development in Technology Education: Implications for Future Programmes. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 8, 151–166.
Cook, S. D., & Brown, J. S. (1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization science, 10(4), 381-400.
Decuypere, M. (2019). STS in/as education: where do we stand and what is there (still) to gain? Some outlines for a future research agenda. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1), 136-145.
diSessa, A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological Innovation and the Role of Theory in Design Experiments. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77–103. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1301_4
Dohn, N. B., & Hansen, J. J. (2018). Design in educational research - clarifying conceptions and presuppositions. In N. B. Dohn (Ed.), Designing for learning in a networked world (25–47). Oxon: Routledge.
Easterday, M. W., Rees Lewis, D. G. & Gerber, E. M. (2018). The logic of design research, Learning: Research and Practice, 4:2, 131-160, https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1286367
Ejsing-Duun, S., & Pischetola, M. (2022). ‘Does it matter?’: Learning through Aesthetic Experiences in a Higher Education Communication Design Course. Postdigital Science and Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00322-3
Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2017). Teaching with technology in higher education: understanding conceptual change and development in practice. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 73-87.
European Commission (2018). Proposal for a Council recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union.
Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2011). Introduction: Reclaiming and renewing actor network theory for educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(sup1), 1-14.
Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2016). Exploring the impact of digital technologies on professional responsibilities and education. European Educational Research Journal, 15(1), 117-131, https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041156083
Ferrari, A. (2012). Digital Competence in Practice: An Analysis of Frameworks. JRC Technical Reports. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Geitz, G., & de Geus, J. (2019). Design-based education, sustainable teaching, and learning. Cogent Education, 6(1), 1647919.
Gravani, M. N. (2012). Adult learning principles in designing learning activities for teacher development. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 31(4), 419-432.
Gresalfi, M. (2015). Designing to support critical engagement with statistics. ZDM Mathematics Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0690-7
Guppy, N., Verpoorten, D., Boud, D., Lin, L., Tai, J., & Bartolic, S. (2022). The post‐COVID‐19 future of digital learning in higher education: Views from educators, students, and other professionals in six countries. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1750-1765.
Hansen, J. J., & Dohn, N. B. (2019). Design principles for professional networked learning in ‘learning through practice’ designs. I: A. Littlejohn, J. Jaldemark, E. Vrieling-Teunter, & F. Nijland (eds.), Networked professional learning: Emerging and equitable discourses for professional development, 129-146. Springer, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18030-0_8
Hasse, C. (2017). Technological literacy for teachers. Oxford Review of Education, 43(3), 365-378.
Hawley, W. D., & Valli, L. (2007). Design principles for learner-centered professional development. In Willis Hawley and Donald Rollie (editors): The keys to effective schools: educational reform as continuous improvement, 117-137, Thousand Oaks (CA): Corwin Press.
Heinsfeld, B. D.; Pischetola, M. (2019). Discourse on technologies in public policies on education. Educação & Pesquisa, 45(1), 1-17, https://doi.org/10.1590/s1678-4634201945205167
Hilliger, I., Aguirre, C., Miranda, C., Celis, S., & Pérez-Sanagustín, M. (2020, March). Design of a curriculum analytics tool to support continuous improvement processes in higher education. In Proceedings of the tenth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge (pp. 181-186).
Howard, S.K., Gigliotti, A. (2016). Having a go: Looking at teachers’ experience of risk-taking in technology integration. Education and Information Technologies, 21(5), 1351–1366.
Jónsson, B. T.; Pischetola, M.; Inie, N.; Daniels, M.; Brabrand, C. (2022). Student Perspectives on On-site versus Online Teaching throughout the Covid-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Education (FIE) Conference 2022, Uppsala, Sweden, 8-11 October 2022, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FIE56618.2022.9962707
Kazemi, E., & Hubbard, A. (2008). New directions for the design and study of professional development: Attending to the coevolution of teachers' participation across contexts. Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 428-441.
Kemmis, S. (2010). Research for praxis: Knowing doing, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 8(1), 9–27, https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360903556756
Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Examining some assumptions and limitations of research on the effects of emerging technologies for teaching and learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 536–543.
Knowles, M. (1990). The adult learners: A neglected species. Houstan: Gulf Publishing Co.
Korthagen, F. (2017) Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: towards professional development 3.0. Teachers and Teaching, 23(4), 387-405, https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1211523
Jones, A. (2009). The Development of Technology Education Internationally. In International Handbook of Research and Development in Technology Education. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.
Juuti, K., & Lavonen, J. (2006). Design-based research in science education: One step towards methodology. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 2(2), 54-68.
Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., & Kantosalo, A. (2016). Digital competence–an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and information technologies, 21(3), 655-679.
Lampert, M., Franke, M. L., Kazemi, E., Ghousseini, H., Turrou, A. C., Beasley, H., ... & Crowe, K. (2013). Keeping it complex: Using rehearsals to support novice teacher learning of ambitious teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(3), 226-243, https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487112473
Langelotz, L., Mahon, K., & Dahlberg, G. M. (2020). Walking on the edge: Educational praxis in higher education. Learning and Teaching, 13(3), v-xv.
Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575-614.
Lee, C. J., & Kim, C. (2014). An implementation study of a TPACK-based instructional design model in a technology integration course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(4), 437-460.
Leonardi, P. M. (2012). Materiality, sociomateriality, and socio-technical systems: What do these terms mean? How are they different? Do we need them. Materiality and organizing: Social interaction in a technological world, 25(10), 1093.
Llorente-Cejudo, C., Barragán-Sánchez, R., Puig-Gutiérrez, M. et al. (2022). Social inclusion as a perspective for the validation of the "DigCompEdu Check-In" questionnaire for teaching digital competence. Education and Information Technologies, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11273-4
Lu, L., Mirpuri, S., Rao, N., & Law, N. (2021). Conceptualization and measurement of digital citizenship across disciplines. Educational Research Review, 33, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100379
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting educational design research. New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.3102/0013189X12463781
Miranda, L. V. T., & Pischetola, M. (2020). Teaching as the emergent event of an ecological process: Complexity and choices in one-to-one programmes. Explorations in Media Ecology, 19(4), 503– 519, https://doi.org/10.1386/eme_00065_1.
Nespor, J. (2004). Educational scale-making. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 12(3), 309-326.
NLEC (Networked Learning Editorial Collective), Gourlay, L., Rodríguez‐Illera, J. L., Barberà, E., Bali, M., Gachago, D., Pallitt, N., Jones, C., Bayne, S., Hansen, S. B., Hrastinski, S., Jaldemark, J. Themelis, C., Pischetola, M. et al. (2021). Networked Learning in 2021: A Community Definition. Postdigital Science and Education, 3, 326–369, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00222-y
Núñez-Canal, M., de Obesso, M. D. L. M., & Pérez-Rivero, C. A. (2022). New challenges in higher education: A study of the digital competence of educators in Covid times. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121270.
Pischetola, M. (2020). Exploring the relationship between in-service teachers’ beliefs and technology adoption in Brazilian primary schools. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32, 75-98, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09610-0
Pischetola, M. (2021a). Re-imagining Digital Technology in Education through Critical and Neo-materialist Insights. Digital Education Review, 40(2), 154-171, https://doi.org/10.1344/der.2021.40.154-171
Pischetola, M. (2021b). Teacher Professional Development in Higher Education and the Teknosofikum Project. Learning Tech, 10(1), 47-75, https://doi.org/10.7146/lt.v6i10.125259
Pischetola, M., Miranda, L. V. T. & Albuquerque, P. (2021). The Invisible Made Visible through Technologies’ Agency: a Sociomaterial Inquiry on Emergency Remote Teaching in Higher Education. Learning, Media, and Technology, 46(4), 390-403, https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1936547
Pischetola, M., Møller, J. K., Malmborg, L. (2022). Enhancing teacher collaboration in higher education: the potential of activity-oriented design for professional development. Education and Information Technologies, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11490-x
Priestley, M., Biesta, G., Philippou, S., & Robinson, S. (2015). The teacher and the curriculum: Exploring teacher agency(Vol. 27). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Punie, Y., & Redecker, C. (editors) (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P. et al. Balancing Technology, Pedagogy and the New Normal: Post-pandemic Challenges for Higher Education. Postdigit Sci Educ 3, 715–742 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00249-1
Riedner D. D. T.; Pischetola, M. (2021). A inovação das práticas pedagógicas com uso de tecnologias digitais no ensino superior: um estudo no âmbito da formação inicial de professores. ETD – Educação Temática Digital, 23(1), 64-81, https://doi.org/10.20396/etd.v23i1.8655732
Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action, New York: Basic Books.
Selwyn, N., & Husen, O. (2010). The educational benefits of technological competence: an investigation of students’ perceptions. Evaluation & Research in Education, 23(2), 137–141.
Silva, E., Loureiro, M. J., & Pischetola, M. (2019). Competências digitais de professores do estado do Paraná (Brasil). Eduser – Revista de Educação, 11(1), 61-75, http://dx.doi.org/10.34620/eduser.v11i1.125
Stephan, M. L. (2015). Conducting classroom design research with teachers. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(6). doi: 10.1007/s11858-014-0651-6
Thelin, K. (2020). Creating a reflective space in higher education: The case of a Swedish course for professional principals. Learning and Teaching, 13(3), 1-17.
Thompson, A. D., & Mishra, P. (2007). Editors’ remarks: Breaking news: TPCK becomes TPACK! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(2), 38-64.
UFM (2018). Call for Action: Teknologisk upgrade på de videregående uddannelser. Uddannelses- og Forskningsministeriet.
Ustun, A. B., & Tracey, M. W. (2020). An effective way of designing blended learning: A three phase design-based research approach. Education and Information Technologies, 25(3), 1529-1552.
Vieira, D. V., Pischetola, M. (2022). A relação crítica entre inovação pedagógica e ensino remoto emergencial. Revista da Faeeba – Educação e Contemporaneidade, 31(65), 42-58, https://doi.org/10.21879/faeeba2358-0194.2022.v31.n65.p42-58
Watermeyer, R., Crick, T., Knight, C., & Goodall, J. (2020). COVID-19 and digital disruption in UK universities: Afflictions and affordances of emergency online migration. Higher Education, 81, 623–641. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10734-020-00561-y
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23.
Wang, Y. H. (2020). Design-based research on integrating learning technology tools into higher education classes to achieve active learning. Computers & Education, 156, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103935.
Williamson, B., & Komljenovic, J. (2022). Investing in imagined digital futures: the techno-financial ‘futuring’of edtech investors in higher education. Critical Studies in Education, 1-16.
Wright, S., & Greenwood, D. J. (2017). Universities run for, by, and with the faculty, students and staff: Alternatives to the neoliberal destruction of higher education. Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 42-65.
Zhao, Y., Llorente, A. M. P., & Gómez, M. C. S. (2021). Digital competence in higher education research: A systematic literature review. Computers & Education, 168, 104212, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104212
Ørngreen, R. (2015). Reflections on design-based research. In IFIP working conference on human work interaction design (20-38). Springer, Cham.
Downloads
Publiceret
Citation/Eksport
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Copyright (c) 2023 Magda Pischetola, Jeppe Kilberg Møller
Dette værk er under følgende licens Creative Commons Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel – Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd).
Artikler publiceret i Tidsskriftet for Læring og Medier er licenseret under en Creative Commons Navngivelse-IkkeKommerciel-IngenBearbejdelse 4.0 Unported Licens.
Forfattere bevarer deres ophavsret og giver tidsskriftet ret til første publicering, samtidigt med at værket er omfattet af Creative Commons Attribution-licensen: Navngivelse – Ikke-kommerciel - Ingen Bearbejdede Værker (by-nc-nd). Læs om licensen på http://www.creativecommons.dk/om/.
---
På LOM.dk kan du endvidere finde artikler fra det nu nedlagte Tidsskrift for Universiteternes Efter- og Videreuddannelse (UNEV). Vær opmærksom på, at der gælder særlige regler for UNEV artikler:
Det er forfatterne og evt. andre ophavsret indehavere, der har ophavsretten til artikler udgivet i UNEV regi, og det er en betingelse for adgang til artiklerne, at brugere anerkender og overholder de juridiske retningslinjer forbundet hermed.
- Brugere må downloade og printe én kopi af en hvilken som helst UNEV artikel mhp. private studier eller forskning.
- Det er ikke tilladt at videredistribuere artikler eller anvende disse til indtægtsdækkede aktiviteter eller kommercielle formål.
- Det er tilladt at distribuere URL’en til UNEV artikler.
