| 1. |
- Fransson, Göran, 1968-, et al.
(författare)
-
On the Swedish National Grade School for Digital Technologies in Education – GRADE : Expectations and experiences of doctorial students and supervisors
- 2018
-
Ingår i: ICERI2018 Proceedings. - Sevilla : IATED. - 9788409059485 ; , s. 769-774
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Swedish National Graduate School for Digital Technologies in Education (GRADE) is a cooperative venture between six Swedish universities established during 2018. Within the field of educational sciences and in the area of digital technologies in education, GRADE aims to strengthen the expertise in the area and to increase national and international cooperation in research training activities.Over a number of years, and from multitude of sources (cf. Brown & Davis, 2004; Fisher, Higgins & Loveless, 2006; Kafai & Resnick 1996), research has stressed that increased digitalization in schools leads to a complexity that needs to be taken into account on different levels, from different perspectives and with different designs, methodologies and theoretical perspectives (cf. Olofsson, Lindberg, Fransson & Hauge, 2015; Price, Jewitt & Brown, 2013; Tondeur, Valcke & van Braak, 2008). At a micro-level, the learning situation of students, teachers and school-leaders changes and it becomes important to deepen the knowledge about the impact digital technologies has on the fundamental conditions for teaching and learning of different school subjects (cf. Chun, Kern & Smith 2016; Leung & Baccaglini-Frank, 2017). On a macro-level, conditions for education as such changes and digital technologies becomes an important object of study as agents of change (Wong & Li, 2008). The digitalization of K-12 schools has long been highlighted in policy as a necessity (cf. Kirkman et al, 2002; OECD, 2010). However, research and evaluations (cf. Fransson et al, 2012; OECD, 2015; Wastiau et al, 2013) show that many substantial challenges remain. One of the fundamental pillars of GRADE is the interdisciplinary approach. Several disciplines are present (Applied IT, Curriculum studies, Education, Informatics, Technology and Learning, Educational work, Work-interated Learning) in researching digital technologies in K-12 schools with the ambition to contribute to the continued implementation, integration and use of digital technologies in Swedish K-12 schools that stems from the evidence-based knowledge produced within the activities of GRADE. The research within GRADE will be characterized by close cooperation with stakeholders from school practice, with the aim to contribute to concrete school development. In GRADE, a multi-level approach that involves multiple layers or levels of school activities will be encouraged. When possible, studies will be longitudinal. This will imply studies from an organizational and management perspective, e.g. studies of school leaders and other members of senior management positions responsible for digital technology use and implementation. Also implied are studies of teachers' teaching practices and didactical considerations, as well as studies of the students in classrooms and their learning using digital technologies. This will also imply that several issues with a bearing on the digitalization of education, for example regarding school policy, teaching, learning, assessment and professional development will be researched from different perspectives and with different methodological approaches. In this paper, these points of departure will be explored based on the expectations and experiences of the first twelve admitted doctoral students and their supervisors.
|
|
| 2. |
- Hrastinski, Stefan, 1980-, et al.
(författare)
-
Critical Imaginaries and Reflections on Artificial Intelligence and Robots in Postdigital K-12 Education
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Postdigital Science and Education. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2524-485X .- 2524-4868 .- 2662-5326. ; 1:2, s. 427-445
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- It is commonly suggested that emerging technologies will revolutionize education. In this paper, two such emerging technologies, artificial intelligence (AI) and educational robots (ER), are in focus. The aim of the paper is to explore how teachers, researchers and pedagogical developers critically imagine and reflect upon how AI and robots could be used in education. The empirical data were collected from discussion groups that were part of a symposium. For both AI and ERs, the need for more knowledge about these technologies, how they could preferably be used, and how the emergence of these technologies might affect the role of the teacher and the relationship between teachers and students, were outlined. Many participants saw more potential to use AI for individualization as compared with ERs. However, there were also more concerns, such as ethical issues and economic interests, when discussing AI. While the researchers/developers to a greater extent imagined ideal future technology-rich educational practices, the practitioners were more focused on imaginaries grounded in current practice.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Hrastinski, Stefan, et al.
(författare)
-
How and why do students of higher education participate in online seminars?
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Education and Information Technologies. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1360-2357 .- 1573-7608. ; 17:3, s. 253-271
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Online education is continuing to gain popularity in educational institutions and organizations. Hitherto, most research has occurred at aggregated levels, while few researchers have studied how and why individuals participate in online education. It is essential to examine individual perceptions and relationships in order to understand how students behave in relation to others. This paper investigates how students of higher education participate in online seminars and why they participate in certain ways. An online class that attended asynchronous and synchronous online seminars was studied. Electronic logs were used to examine how students participated and interviews were used to illustrate why they participated. It was revealed that the participation of students varied between aspects such as exchanging information, managing tasks and providing social support and the emphasis of these aspects were related to the tool they communicated through. A number of participation inhibitors were identified and it was also suggested how these inhibitors can be addressed.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Networked Learning Editorial Collective, (NLEC), et al.
(författare)
-
Networked Learning in 2021: A Community Definition
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Postdigital Science and Education. - : Springer. - 2524-4868 .- 2524-485X. ; 3, s. 326-369
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Introduction (Networked Learning Editorial Collective): Since the turn of this century, much of the world has undergone a tectonic socio-technological change. Computers have left the isolated basements of research institutes and entered people's homes. Network connectivity has advanced from slow and unreliable modems to high-speed broadband. Devices have evolved: from stationary desktop computers to ever-present, always-connected smartphones. These developments have been accompanied by new digital practices, and changing expectations, not least in education, where enthusiasm for digital technologies has been kindled by quite contrasting sets of values. For example, some critical pedagogues working in the traditions of Freire and Illich have understood computers as novel tools for political and social emancipation, while opportunistic managers in cash-strapped universities have seen new opportunities for saving money and/or growing revenues. Irrespective of their ideological leanings, many of the early attempts at marrying technology and education had some features in common: instrumentalist understanding of human relationships with technologies, with a strong emphasis on practice and 'what works'.It is now clear that, in many countries, managerialist approaches have provided the framing, while local constraints and exigencies have shaped operational details, in fields such as e-learning, Technology Enhanced Learning, and others waving the 'Digital' banner. Too many emancipatory educational movements have ignored technology, burying their heads in the sand, or have wished it away, subscribing toa new form of Luddism, even as they sense themselves moving to the margins. But this situation is not set in stone. Our postdigital reality results from a complex interplay between centres and margins. Furthermore, the concepts of centres and margins 'have morphed into formations that we do not yet understand, and they have created (power) relationships which are still unsettled. The concepts … have not disappeared, but they have become somewhat marginal in their own right.' (Jandrić andHayes 2019) Social justice and emancipation are as important as ever, yet they require new theoretical reconfigurations and practices fit for our socio-technological moment.In the 1990s, networked learning (NL) emerged as a critical response to dominant discourses of the day. NL went against the grain in two main ways. First, it embarked on developing nuanced understandings of relationships between humans and technologies; understandings which reach beyond instrumentalism and various forms of determinism. Second, NL embraced the emancipatory agenda of the critical pedagogy movement and has, in various ways, politically committed to social justice (Beaty et al. 2002; Networked Learning Editorial Collective 2020). Gathered around the biennial Networked Learning Conference,1 the Research in NetworkedLearning book series,2 and a series of related projects and activities, the NL community has left a significant trace in educational transformations over the last few decades.Twenty years ago, founding members of the NL community offered a definition of NL which has strongly influenced the NL community’s theoretical perspectives and research approaches (Goodyear et al. 2004).3 Since then, however, the world has radically changed. With this in mind, the Networked Learning Editorial Collective (NLEC) recently published a paper entitled 'Networked Learning: InvitingRedefinition' (2020). In line with NL's critical agenda, a core goal for the paper was to open up a broad discussion about the current meaning and understandings of NL and directions for its further development.The current collectively authored paper presents the responses to the NLEC's open call. With 40 contributors coming from six continents and working across many fields of education, the paper reflects the breadth and depth of current understandings of NL. The responses have been collated, classified into main themes, and lightly edited for clarity. One of the responders, Sarah Hayes, was asked to write aconclusion. The final draft paper has undergone double open review. The reviewers, Laura Czerniewicz and Jeremy Knox, are acknowledged as authors.Our intention, in taking this approach, has been to further stimulate democratic discussion about NL and to prompt some much-needed community-building.
|
|
