I’ve recently been considering digital pedagogy from more of an organisation and systems level, as I look into how to refine my school’s use of technologies as tools for learning and teaching. As I begin a search of what research literature might offer us in this realm (please, if you have a seminal paper or reference here – pass it my way!) I have a couple of reflections. One is that, as technology moves quickly and research moves slowly (from data generation to publication), research on digital pedagogy needs to be treated with caution. Research around technology is emergent and fast changing; by the time it is published, it may be well out of date.
My other initial reflection is that there seems to be a discrepancy between the use of digital technologies promoted by enthusiastic teachers, conferences, and technology companies, and the discussion about education technologies in academic research. The former often promotes the possibilities of technologies for learning as future-building and positive. The latter tends to reveal a more cautious or critical approach to what digital technologies can offer teaching and learning.
It’s not surprising that tech giants promote themselves to schools, but there are some worrying reports that tech corporates, such as Edmodo and Google, use schools and students to collect and track big data. Corporate agendas are something we might consider when thinking about how technologies infiltrate or colonise our schools.
Neil Selwyn (in his 2016 book Education and Technology: Key Issues and Debates) points to the limitations of digital technologies, arguing that there is a lack of genuine diversity in the educational opportunities provided by educational technologies, but rather more of the same. He notes that “any ‘individualisation’ or ‘personalisation’ involves fitting individuals around preconfigured outcomes and expectations rather than offering genuinely bespoke education. … an individual is not actively self-determining but conforming to the requirements and expectations of a mass system” (p.161).
I share Selwyn’s cautiousness around technology in schools when it is seen as a shiny new thing or an end in itself. I am more comforabtle when digital pedagogy is about choosing the tool fit for the purpose, aligned with learning objectives. Technology is part of the teacher and learner’s arsenal, not the end point in themselves.
Additionally, while digital pedagogies are often viewed with much hope for their possibilities, the realities seem to be more disappointing. Marte Blikstad-Balas and Chris Davies (in their recent Oxford Review of Education paper ‘Assessing the educational value of one-to-one devices: Have we been asking the right questions?’) show that one-to-one devices are often positioned as having benefits to pedagogical change, development of future skills, and efficiencies and cost savings. (Interestingly, at my school the photocopying bill did not decrease with the move to one-to-one devices.) In looking at three schools (two in the UK and one in Norway), Blikstad-Balas and Davies found some benefits of one-to-one devices, but these tended to be focused on convenience, instrumental use, and functionality, rather than pedagogy. The three schools studied raised concerns including ad hoc teacher enthusiasm and uptake of one-to-one-devices, and teacher scepticism around implementation of digital technologies as part of pedagogy. Students reported feeling either pressured to use devices they didn’t want to use, for purposes they didn’t see as valuable, being distracted from their learning by one-to-one devices, and finding one-to-one devices unreliable. Year 11 and 12 students reported using their one-on-one devices for whatever they wanted (such as social media and online gaming), which was often not what the teacher was instructing. These findings are a sober reminder to schools about the realities of implementing educational technologies.
The educational world is saturated with information and promotions of various digital technologies. The 2016 Horizon Report for Higher Education, for instance, identifies a number of future trends and technologies predicted to influence education. Those working in education institutions need a way to make sense of the digital noise. Selwyn’s 2016 book Is technology good for education? provides useful questions to ask ourselves when considering digital pedagogy (p.24):
- What is actually new here?
- What are the unintended consequences or second-order effects?
- What are the potential gains? What are the potential losses?
- What underlying values and agendas are implicit?
- In whose interests does this work? Who benefits in what ways?
- What are the social problems that digital technology is being presented as a solution to?
- How responsive to a ‘digital fix’ are these problems likely to be?
At my school we are working with a purposeful and transparent frame for making decisions about digital technologies and pedagogies. This frame is based around our strategic intents for our students, and our beliefs around learning, good teaching, and the core business of schools. No matter what the latest tech fad or shiny device, any pedagogy needs to start with the purpose of the learning and the design of curriculum. Pedagogy first. Digital if and when appropriate.
The research and writing about the Australian pedagogical framework for technology enhanced learning known as “High Possibility Classrooms” (the subject of the Routledge monograph) that arose from exemplary teachers knowledge of technology integration will be of interest to you as you ponder the bigger questions. The HPC framework is now validated in all KLAs and a recent peer-reviewed paper about research conducted in secondary school classrooms will be out soon in the journal : “Technology, Pedagogy and Education”. Keep in touch.
Thank you, Jane!
Another great critique helping us with praxis! I started a Digi-Class in 2005 (sort of 1-1 but you didn’t have to have BYO to be included). Our purpose statement was “its about the pedagogy not the technology”. 12 years later I think there’s so many more tools and as you mentioned the biggies in tech – but I still believe we need a framework such as your school has and the one we had 12 years ago.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks, Jennie. As I’ve worked on our framework it’s privileging curriculum, assessment, and pedagogy before tech, but one challenge I’m finding is that teachers need to know what’s available and how to use it if they are going to integrate technologies.
Sounds like you have already looked at Gabriel Salomon’s work as you mention second order effects….how about Scardamalia and Bereiter?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you! Those names were useful leads.
Also, in the work we do in Ontario, Dr. Chris Dede has been our critical friend – we have more info on the work here on our website – the classroom educator tab is the most updated…http://www.edugains.ca/newsite/21stCenturyLearning/index.html
Chris has this piece that you might find interesting – https://studentsatthecenterhub.org/resource/the-role-of-digital-technologies-in-deeper-learning/
Thank you! I am becoming increasingly interested in what’s happening, education wise, in Ontario. I am beginning to hatch a plan to visit …
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Metaphors for digital spaces: Considering Westworld | the édu flâneuse
Ah…you will have to come and visit us! I’m with the 21st Century Learning Unit in the newly formed Incubation and Design Branch of the Min of Ed. I’m on secondment from a school district near Toronto. I met some wonderful Australia educators several years ago when I was a connected coach with the Powerful Learning Practice – teams of educators were engaged in action research – and it was great learning! I recall being up at 2 am for some webinars. 😉
I really like your blog which I’ve just recently started exploring – trying to spend more time on mine this summer…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Choosing the (digital) pedagogical tool fit for the learning | the édu flâneuse
Pingback: What’s the point of technology in education? | the édu flâneuse
Pingback: Getting my Library on | the édu flâneuse