Archive of ‘INF537’ category

INF537 – Learning Reflection – Assessment 3: Part B

road-909704_1280

INF537 Digital Futures Colloquium is the capstone subject for the Master of Education in Knowledge Networks and Digital innovation (MedKNDI) and as I approach the conclusion of the subject, I am also approaching the completion of the course.  It has been interesting to look back at the goals I set and the Critical Reflections for each of the subjects studied during the course.  A motif that emerges is that it has been my goal in all subjects, including INF537, to consider my professional practice as a teacher-librarian and my responsibility to prepare students to participate and thrive in the constantly evolving landscape of the digital age.  The immersion into research, opportunities to collaborate fantionally and globally with peers and education experts, and reflective processes have certainly helped meet this goal.  In particular, my confidence as a leader has grown.

An argument that has strongly resonated with me is the need for educators to embed opportunities for participation into our programs, curriculums, pedagogies, and spaces so that our students may “develop the cultural competencies and social skills” for full involvement in society (Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison & Weigel, 2006, p.4).  The key it is suggested, is to consider how students can learn, participate, create and produce within and beyond the classroom.  As a student in Med(KNDI) I have been provided with samples of such participatory experiences.  These opportunities have included:

  • using Web 2.0 platforms including Wikis, Voicethread, Diigo, and forums;
  • communicating and collaborating with peers in social media environments such as Twitter and Facebook; and
  • reflective practice through blogging.

Importantly, participation in this community of practice, has resulted in an improvement in my own literacies, including digital, information, media, network and even traditional literacy.  I found the experience of building a Personal Learning Network (PLN) so empowering that I have embedded this into classroom teaching and students now have blogs, and use social media.  Our school library has also embraced Library 2.0 platforms to connect with our users beyond the traditional spaces of the website and the physical library.  This puts me in a better place to achieve my professional goal to enable my students to experience and learn the literacies of a connected world.  I have also had opportunities to engage colleagues at school in these communities through invitations to present professional development through our college Profressional Learning Centre.

Both of the assessed research tasks in INF537 extended my thinking about emerging trends and what the future holds for students.  This has challenged me to consider how to embrace digital scholarship in a secondary school context. The case study for INF537 provided the opportunity to investigate how myself and the team I work with can move our school library digital spaces from online content repositories to interactive and participatory learning environments.  The case study represented the research phase of our project and collecting evidence from our school context and analyzing that along with the academic research on the topic will have real life impact.  In fact, our project for new digital spaces now begins the design phase and we meet with both our chosen Library Management System and website provider next week together with the College Leadership Team, which is a direct outcome of the case study.

Finally, at the risk of using a less-than-academic tone, I absolutely loved the chance to engage in the colloquiums with other practitioners and industry experts.  An opportunity offered students in INF537 Digital Futures Colloquium, is to moderate one of the sessions with the view to interact with ideas and thought leaders.  I teamed up with classmate Patricia Buckley to host Annabel Astbury from ABC Splash.  Having the chance to listen to Annabel’s experience with the design and management of the ABC Splash site also linked closely with my case study of investigating and redesigning the digital learning environments in my own professional context.

Providing Aussie content for

This draws to a close the last blog post for the course but my reflective practice will continue because through the engagement in KNDI, I have established a strong PLN including an independent blog, and valuable connections via social media, particularly on Twitter.  It feels like a long time ago that I wrote my first ever blog post which stated:

” Well, it’s official, back to Uni!  The first job on the list is to set up this reflective journaling space and post a link to the group forum.

I guess a good place to start is to list my learning goals for this subject. These are:

  1. To participate in a connected learning environment;
  2. To continue my professional learning;
  3. To broaden my classroom practices in digital environments; &
  4. To PASS!

goals

References

Jenkins, H.,Clinton, K., Purushotoma, R., Robison, A., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st Century. Paper presented at MacArthur Foundation, Chicago. Retrieved from http://wheatoncollege.edu/president/files/2012/03/Confronting-Challenges-of-Participatory-Culture.pdf

Image Attribution

Geralt, Road Sky Mountains Clouds Black White Start End, CC0 Public Domain

 

5 reasons we need an iCentre Website

is-an-icentre-website-necessary

As we continue to travel along the path of re-visioning our iCentre virtual spaces, we have been investigating what a website, Library Management System (LMS) and social media can offer school library services.  Our research has been interesting and we easily agreed that the LMS and social media are vital virtual spaces for our services.  The Library Management Systems we have investigated are web-based, learner-centred, sophisticated and interactive and as such, we have been challenged to consider the question: is an iCentre Website necessary?  Our conclusion is a resounding YES and here are the reasons why:

screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-12-43-26-pmWe model the literacy of participation

Jenkins et al. argue that the digital divide between those who will succeed in twenty-first (21st) century futures and those that will be left behind is determined not by access to technology but by access to opportunities to participate and develop the cultural competencies and social skills necessary in new media landscapes (2006, p.3).  Crockett, Jukes and Chruches (2011, p.14), O’Leary (2012, para.18), and Seely Brown (2012, p.15) are also among those advocating the necessity of educating for participation because individuals who find themselves lacking such skills are at risk of being on the wrong side of the divide and left behind in academia and the workplace. Many of the skills and mindsets outlined by these authors, require schools to transition from a scholarship practice that uses technology as a tool to enhance research to a social scholarship practice “in which the use of social tools is an integral part of the research and publishing process and is characterized by openness, conversation, collaboration, access, sharing and transparent revision” (Pearce et al. & Cohen as cited in Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2012, p.767).  The iCentre website models this literacy of participation through publishing blogs, connecting with social media, and the open sharing of learning.

screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-12-43-39-pmWe serve a community not just students & teachers

The college community served by the iCentre is broader than the students and teachers on campus.  In particular, parents, as the primary educators, are an important part of our community.  One of the roles of the iCentre is to provide leadership in digital citizenship.  The website regularly curates and publishes information on how parents can assist their children to develop the capacity to build a positive digital footprint that showcases their learning interests, talents, and successes, and enables them to build social skills and cultural competencies.  This content also includes resources that will assist the community to use information and technology safely, legally and ethically.  To this end, the iCentre website is a valuable tool because it provides learning experiences that enable the community to engage in positive digital practices that are relevant and timely.

screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-12-43-50-pmWe value networks

Technological shifts have changed the culture of learning to one in which the classroom is now global and provides learners with access to “nearly unlimited resources and incredible instruments while connecting with one another at the same time” (Thomas & Seely Brown, 2011, loc.55).  In this new culture, learning resides in the ability to form networks and learning how to learn, what to learn, who to learn with and when to learn is more important than the mastery of content (Olsen, 2011, p.22).  It is argued that understanding both digital competencies and new ways of learning in order to model digital citizenship become possible when educators take on the responsibility of developing a Personal Learning Network (PLN) (Richardson & Mancabelli, 2011, p.10).  The iCentre website is one of the tools we use to connect with our colleagues in education – it is part of our learning network.  We have had many instances of professionals from other school libraries making suggestions for our website, contributing content to our website, and contacting us through the website in order to visit and share knowledge.  Such connections have been invaluable to the service we offer our community.

screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-12-43-59-pmWe value Open Scholarship

A trend that has been identified in 21st Century scholarship is an “openness” resultant from developing digital communication and networked technologies (Pearce et al., 2010, p.37).  According to Katz, this trend towards open content, knowledge and learning will offer great opportunities for scholars (2010, p.6).  The Creative Commons movement, which has opened up access to licensed creative content and also allows individuals to license work for others to share, is one example of how openness can lower barriers and democratize learning.  By sharing resources and learning through the iCentre website, we too are participating in a form of open scholarship.

screen-shot-2016-09-11-at-12-44-09-pmWe want to share our story

At this year’s Edutech Conference in Brisbane, both Kate Tormey, CEO of the State Library of Victoria and Dr Ross J. Todd, associate professor at Rutgers University, Department of Library and Information Sciences, stressed to delegates of the Future Libraries stream that if libraries are to thrive, then they must share their story.  The capacity of the Teacher-Librarians to share their story both within the college and beyond has valuable outcomes and the iCentre website has proved a powerful way to share our story.

References

Crockett, L.,Jukes, I., & Churches, A. (2011). Literacy is not enough: 21st-century fluencies for the digital age. [Epub]. Kelowna, B:C: 21st Century Fluency Project.

Jenkins, H.,Clinton, K., Purushotoma, R., Robinson, A., J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Paper presented at MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-E807E1B0AE4E%7D/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF.

O’Leary, T. (2012, October 10). Making connections to end digital divide. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/making-connections-to-end-digital-divide-20121009-27aul.html#ixzz2nF0cHrLS

Olsen, R. (2011). Understanding virtual pedagogies for contemporary teaching & learning (pp. 1-32, Rep.). Victoria: IdeasLAB.

Pearce, N.,Weller, M., Scanlon, E., & Ashleigh, M. (2010). Digital scholarship considered: How new technologies could transform academic work. In Education, 16(1), 33-44.

Richardson, W., & Mancabelli, R. (2011). The power of networked learning. In Personal Learning Networks: Using the power of connections to transform education (pp. 1-14). Moorabbin, Cictoria: Solution Tree Press.

Seely Brown, J. (2012, November 21-22). CJ Koh Professorial Lecture Series No. 4 in Singapore: Learning in and for the 21st Century Singapore. Retrieved from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/CJKoh.pdf

Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. Lexington, KY: CreateSpace.

Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2012). Networked Participatory Scholarship: Emergent techno-cultural pressures toward open and digital scholarship in online networks.  Computers & Education, 58,, 766-774. Retrieved from http://10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.001

 

Case Study: iCentre digital spaces: what path should we take now?

Title:
Designing iCentre digital spaces for school library service delivery: what path should we take now?

Goal:
The goal of this study is to evaluate both our current digital spaces and potential design changes in order to maintain dynamic and appropriate school library web services.

case-study-hs1

Description:
The library team at an all-girls secondary college in Brisbane, Queensland have begun a new phase in strategic directions. In 2016, new contexts have demanded a change in thinking about learning, life and work in the modern world.  The world now is change-filled and necessitates an approach that understands “everything we produce remains a work in process, in perpetual beta” (Richardson, 2016, para.5). This has implications for the services offered by the iCentre.  Evaluating and re-visioning the iCentre digital spaces is an important step in this process. A new vision and mission statement have been developed and the team has identified that the purpose of a revisioned digital space for the iCentre is to allow the college community to experience and learn the literacies of a connected world.  Due to timeframes and practical implications, this case study will only investigate the Library Management System and the iCentre Website.  Despite being essential to the provision of literacy development by the iCentre, social Media services will not be investigated at this time.

Expected Outcome of the project:
This case study will detail and analyse two of the existing virtual spaces, the Library Management System (LMS) and the iCentre Website with a view to understanding the contextual school library needs of the community and make recommendations to the iCentre team for their ongoing strategic plans.  The case study aims to adopt an evidence-based approach with an information science focus, incorporating user feedback, best research evidence and the professional experience and expertise of the iCentre team and external partners (Booth, 2002, p.53).

Two key research questions will guide this case study:

RQ.1   Do the current iCentre digital spaces meet our communities needs for school library services?

RQ. 2 What are the key considerations for the future of iCentre digital services and spaces identified from research evidence, user feedback and professional experience and expertise?

Case study plan:
The major steps required to complete the case study project include:

Digital School Library Services Research

*   Research the literature on best practice in digital school library services

*   Research the context of the iCentre school library services

*   Research the literature on emerging trends in school library services

Library Management System Research

*   Identify the needs for an LMS

*   Identify the contextual positives & negatives of the current LMS

*   Research and evaluate alternative LMS providers

Website

*   Identify the needs for an iCentre Website

*   Identify the contextual positives & negatives of the current iCentre Website

*   Research and evaluate design changes for the iCentre Website

The resources required:

*   Research for literature review

*   Meeting time with iCentre team

*   Contact details for LMS system providers and schools using those systems

*   Meeting with Website developers

*   Release time to visit school and investigate a variety of LMS

*   Survey artefacts

*   Focus Group interviews

*   PMI feedback on LMS choices for iCentre team

A projected timeline (Due October 10)

July 11 –  August 31

Focus Group – iCentre team complete a PMI of current LMS

Focus Group – iCentre team brainstorm needs of the iCentre website

Survey – students needs of the iCentre website (10% of student population – equal horizontal representation of students from year 7 – 12)

Survey – staff needs of iCentre website

Visit schools to view a range of LMSs

Meeting with website developers

Meetings with LMS providers for professional demonstration of products

LMS PMI artifact completed by iCentre staff

September 1 – 30

Literature review –  best practice in digital school library services

Literature review – emerging trends in school library services

Focus group with students finding information in different web environments – observational data and interview

Drafting case study report including recommendations for potential design changes in order to maintain dynamic and appropriate school library web services.

Seek feedback on processes and findings on INF537 Forums & via blog posts

October 1 – 10

Finalise case study report for submission

References

Digital Scholarship: uptake by the schooling sector in a state of ongoing development

Statement

Participatory technologies and cultures are a dominant trend impacting scholarship.  Despite arguments for the schooling sector to incorporate networked participatory media into learning, the uptake of this form of scholarship has been slow and remains, just as it does in the academic context, in a phase of ongoing development.

Introduction

Technological changes and widespread internet connectivity have transformed contemporary life.  Specifically, it is argued that the transition from the read-only Web 1.0 to the read-write Web 2.0 has resulted in an environment that facilitates participation and values the user as much as the content they share (Greenhow, Robelia & Hughes, 2009, p.247).  Research indicates that it is the participatory, collaborative and distributed facilities of the Web that have changed everyday life (Greenhow et al., 2009, p. 247 & Rheingold, 2012, p.148) including the nature of information, forms of media, business models, social environments and modes of civic engagement (Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison and Weigel, 2006, p.3).  Consequently, it has been suggested that one label for contemporary society is the “Age of Participatory Media” (Bull et al., 2008, p.100).

Such societal changes are increasing the need for schools to change their pedagogy and learning areas so that students are prepared for ‘tomorrow’s world’ (Murray, 2007, p.19).  Jenkins et al. argue that the digital divide between those who will succeed in twenty-first (21st) century futures and those that will be left behind is determined not by access to technology but by access to opportunities to participate and develop the cultural competencies and social skills necessary in new media landscapes (2006, p.3).  Crockett, Jukes and Chruches (2011, p.14), O’Leary (2012, para.18), and Seely Brown (2012, p.15) are also among those advocating the necessity of educating for participation because individuals who find themselves lacking such skills are at risk of being on the wrong side of the divide and left behind in academia and the workplace. Many of the skills and mindsets outlined by these authors, require schools to transition from a scholarship practice that uses technology as a tool to enhance research to a social scholarship practice “in which the use of social tools is an integral part of the research and publishing process and is characterized by openness, conversation, collaboration, access, sharing and transparent revision” (Pearce et al. & Cohen as cited in Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2012, p.767).

This interpretive discussion paper begins by defining networked participatory technologies and cultures and then considers the existing and potential implications that they hold for scholarship.  Following this, the paper explores the arguments surrounding the requirement for schools to embrace this form of scholarship.  Finally, the investigation discusses how schools have responded to the advocated necessity of incorporating networked participatory scholarship into programs and practices.

The Age of Participatory Media

Numerous authors point to the explosion of new media technologies and correlate these to changes in the way people operate and interact (Bull et al., 2009, p.101; Greenhow et al., 2009, p.247 & Katz, 2010, p.3).  Others, however, point out that attributing the causality of cultural change to technology may not reflect a reality that is somewhat more complex and interrelated.  Veletsianos and Kimmons label this a “fuzzy area” stating that technology does not exist in a vacuum and “may just as validly be seen as a reflection of cultural trends as a cause of them” (2012, p.769).  This is reinforced by Gee who states that digital tools cannot be studied in isolation (2010, p.32) and Jenkins et al. who believe that technology tools and the activities they support, only become widespread if they fulfill a cultural need (2006, p.8).  Regardless of causation, all of these authors suggest that participation is a dominant trend in both contemporary technology and culture.

Participatory culture may be defined as a culture in which the community provides strong incentives for artistic expression, sharing creativity, collaborative problem solving and civic engagement (Jenkins et al., 2006, p.3).  In such cultures, members feel their contributions matter (Greenhow et al., 2009, p.247) and a degree of social connection to one another (Jenkins et al., 2006, p.7).  In contemporary society, it is argued that interactive technologies are enablers of participation (Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2011, p.771) through affordances such as online social networking communities, content and media creation mechanisms, publishing platforms, large scale collaborative projects and prominent personal profiling (Jenkins et al. 2006, p.8 & Greenhow et al., 2009, p.247).  Some examples of popular platforms that provide these affordances include Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, WordPress, Flickr, Diigo, Skype, Blogger, and Wikipedia.

Implications for Scholarship

A discussion about digital scholarship necessitates exploring how participatory technologies and cultures are impacting concepts of knowledge.  On this point, Veletsianos and Kimmons identify that the emergence of participatory and collaborative approaches to knowledge building within dominant cultural practices are leading to new theories of knowledge construction (2011, p.769). This point is reinforced by Buckley and De Toit who argue that new economies value tacit knowledge that is community-based and derived from experience above explicit knowledge that is a personal and individual activity derived from content (2010, p.495).  Starkey similarly maintains the impact of connected environments is changing the nature of knowledge.  Her research finds that “ideas about ‘knowledge’ appear to be changing from something that is found in the heads of individuals or in books to something that is not fixed, is debatable, accessible through a range of media and created through networks, connections and collaboration” (2011, p. 22).  That these approaches to knowledge building pose important changes to scholarship is further evident in the emergence of learning approaches such as conectivist and constructivist theories (Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2011, p.770).

Investigating scholarship on another level, several authors discuss how participatory technologies and cultures are impacting the functions of scholarship (Scanlon, 2014, p.13, Katz, 2010, p.5 and Pearce et al., 2010, p.35, Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2010, p.766).  These functions, originally identified by Boyer, include discovery, integration, application and teaching (Boyer, 1990, p.17-25).  Significantly, those who share this view, highlight that all four functions of scholarship are impacted by an “openness” resultant from developing digital communication and networked technologies (Pearce et al., 2010, p.37).  On this point, Katz claims such technologies provide scholars with open content, knowledge and learning (2010, p.5).  The scholarship functions of discovery and integration, it is argued, are being changed by the availability of rich content and large datasets equally accessible through search engines by both professional and amateur researchers (Katz, 2010, p.6, and Pearce et al., 2010, p.37).  Commentators in this area also believe that open publishing, evidenced by the growth of platforms such as blogs, is impacting the scholarly function of application.  Consequently, long held traditions and non-negotiable scholarly artifacts such as journal publications and peer-review are being questioned (Pearce et al., 2010, p.38, and Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2011, p. 770).  The function of teaching is also being challenged by open education and new communication channels that are opening up the boundaries between faculties, institutions and even between academia and the ‘real world’ (Scanlon, 2014, p.15, Katz, 2010, p.7, Pearce et al., 2010, p.40 and Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2011, p.771).  According to Katz, these changes are liberating for the scholar and scholarship but will reshape scholarly enterprise and nearly all our institutions, including colleges and universities, will undergo fundamental alterations (2010, pp.7-14).

What about schools?

Changing ideas about knowledge and scholarship also have implications for schools.  Starkey asserts that the digital age necessitates a changed focus in this sector from one that has been centered on learning prescribed knowledge “towards a focus on critical thinking skills, knowledge creation and learning through connections” (2011, p.19).  Seely Brown agrees that schools can no longer restrict learning to explicit and prescribed knowledge.  He argues, that as the world is now in a state of constant flow, the knowledge that is created is tacit because the pace of change does not allow such information to be distilled, encoded and re-communicated before the next shift happens (2012, p.14).  Others, such as Rheingold (2012, p.53), Jenkins et al. (2006, p.7) and Veletsianos & Kimmons (2011, p.769) state that participatory culture shifts the focus of literacy from one of individual expression to community involvement and as such, schools need to focus on the literacies, cultural competencies and social skills necessary for success in the age of participatory media.

A key authority on future trends that will impact learning and teaching in the schooling sector is the New Media Consortium (NMC) Horizon Report: K-12 Edition.  The 2015 publication of this report agrees that participatory technologies and cultures are important future considerations for the schooling sector.  In particular, the report identifies that two of the trends and technologies that will drive education over next five years include: (1) collaborative learning approaches (2015, pp.12-13); and (2) a shift from students as consumers to students as creators (2015, pp.14-15).

The Reality in Schools

When it comes to the uptake of participatory technologies into curricula, pedagogies and assessment instruments, schools have been slow to react (Bull et al., 2008, p.102, Greenhow, 2009, p.43, Jenkins et al., 2006, p.4 & Selwyn, 2010, p.66). This slow uptake is not restricted to schools and the research of both Scanlon (2014, p.20) and Pearce et al. (2010, p.34) indicates that the extent to which academics have embraced participatory technologies and cultures is also a long way behind the uptake of individuals and industry.  Jenkins et al. note that while there are examples of individual schools and educators experimenting with participatory technologies and processes, a more systemic change is required for all students to develop the literacies they need to function in today’s hyper-mediated environments (2006, p.57).

A number of initiatives to bring about change can be identified on both an international and a national level.  At an international level, such provision for participatory literacies is reinforced by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), who have composed standards to support twenty-first century learning with clear guidelines for the skills, knowledge and approaches students need to succeed in the digital age (2016).   On a national level, the responsibility for schools to create learning environments that provide students with opportunities to be global, digital citizens was agreed upon by Australian Education Ministers with the signing of the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians in 2008.  The Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) established the general capabilities, including the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) capability in order to realise the goals of the Melbourne Declaration (ACARA, 2016).  It is specified in the ICT general capability that, “to participate in a knowledge-based economy and to be empowered within a technologically sophisticated society now and into the future, students need the knowledge, skills and confidence to make ICT work for them at school, at home, at work and in their communities” (2016, para 2).

These international and national directions have made teachers increasingly aware of the necessity of using technology to support both higher-order and future-proof learning in their practice, yet what is often overlooked are the difficulties experienced in altering pedagogy and curricula to reflect these needs (Lindsay, 2015).  Jenkins et al. identify one such difficulty is that the school day is already “bursting at the seams” and teachers feel they cannot cram any new tasks into their instruction (2006, p.57).  Bull et al. also identify a number of challenges to the application of new techniques of knowledge production and participatory learning in schools.  These include time constraints, limited access to online media tools by some educational bodies, an increased complexity of classroom management when technology is introduced, limited research available to guide best practice and limited models of effective integration for teachers to follow (2008, p.102).  The reality, however, is not all negative, and both Greenhow and Bull et al. suggest trends in social scholarship are connecting traditional or formal scholarship with informal, social networking tools to integrate participatory learning into existing subjects and assessments (2009, pp.43-45, & 2008, p.104).  Greenhow provides the use of social bookmarking tools and social bibliographic sites as evidence of this type of scholarship in practice (2009, pp.43-45).  Other research, provides evidence that blogging is an emerging academic practice that is becoming more prevalent and provides scholars with the opportunities for sharing, conversation, collaboration, “soft” peer-review and building an academic identity (Scanlon, 2014, p.18, Weller, 2011, p.4, Kirkup, 2010, p.81, Greenhow et al., 2009, pp.249-251).  According to Jenkins et al., this mixed reality “functions as a new form of the hidden curriculum, shaping which youth will succeed and which will be left behind as they enter school and the workplace” (2006, p.3).  If these authors are correct, then a failure by individual schools to develop a suitable approach to networked participatory scholarship puts their students at risk of being significantly disadvantaged and unprepared for lifelong learning beyond school.

Conclusion

This paper has discussed the impact of networked participatory technology and cultures upon scholarship.  Moves towards tacit knowledge construction, openness and collaborative practices have been identified as key trends impacting scholarship.  The research for this discussion paper suggests that the take-up of digital scholarship in the schooling context has been slow and inconsistent.  As such, commentators in the field are concerned that the next digital divide will between those have developed the skills and competencies to participate in networked environments and those who do not.  This is an important consideration for all educators and those who care about the academic and working futures of today’s youth. 

References

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2016). Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Capability. Retrieved from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/generalcapabilities/information-and-communication-technology-capability/introduction/introduction

Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. California: Jossey-Bass Inc.

Buckley, S., & Du Toit, A.. (2010). Academics leave your ivory tower: From communities of practice. Educational Studies, 36(5), 493-503.

Bull, G.,Thompson, A., Searson, M., Garofalo, J., Park, J., Young, C., & Lee, J. (2008). Connecting informal and formal learning experiences in the Age of Participatory Media. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 100-107.

Crockett, L.,Jukes, I., & Churches, A. (2011). Literacy is not enough: 21st-century fluencies for the digital age. [Epub]. Kelowna, B:C: 21st Century Fluency Project.

Gee, J.P. (2010). New digital media and learning as an emerging area and worked examples as one way forward. Massachusetts: MIT Press. Retrieved from

Greenhow, C. (2009). Social scholarship: Applying social networking technologies to research practices. Knowledge Quest, 37(4), 42-47.

Greenhow, C. (2011). Youth learning, and social media. J. Educational Computing Research, 45(2), 139-146.

Greenhow, C.,Robella, B., & Hughes, J.E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a Digital Age. Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). ISTE Standards for Students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students-2016

Jenkins, H.,Clinton, K., Purushotoma, R., Robinson, A., J., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Paper presented at MacArthur Foundation. Retrieved from http://digitallearning.macfound.org/atf/cf/%7B7E45C7E0-A3E0-4B89-AC9C-E807E1B0AE4E%7D/JENKINS_WHITE_PAPER.PDF.

Katz, R. (2010). Schoalrs, scholarship, and the scholarly enterprise in the digital age. Educause Review, 45(2), 44-56.

Kirkup, G. (2010). Academic blogging: academic practice and academic identity. London Review Of Education, 8(1), 75-84. Retrieved from http://10.1080/14748460903557803

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs. (2008). Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved from http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf

Murray, C. (2007). Changing landscapes: Schools of the future. In S la Marca (Ed.). Rethink! Ideas for school library design (pp. 19-29). Carlton, VIC: School Library Association of Victoria Inc.

New Media Consortium. (2015). NMC Horizon Report: 2015 K-12 Edition. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2015-nmc-horizon-report-k12-EN.pdf

O’Leary, T. (2012, October 10). Making connections to end digital divide. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/making-connections-to-end-digital-divide-20121009-27aul.html#ixzz2nF0cHrLS

Pearce, N.,Weller, M., Scanlon, E., & Ashleigh, M. (2010). Digital scholarship considered: How new technologies could transform academic work. In Education, 16(1), 33-44.

Rheingold, H. (2012). Net Smart: How to Thrive Online. MA: Cambridge.

Scanlon, E. (2014). Scholarship in the digital age: Open education resources, publication and public engagement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(1), 12-23.

Seely Brown, J. (2012, November 21-22). CJ Koh Professorial Lecture Series No. 4 in Singapore: Learning in and for the 21st Century Singapore. Retrieved from http://www.johnseelybrown.com/CJKoh.pdf

Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 65-73.

Starkey, L. (2011). Evaluating learning in the 21st century: a digital age learning matrix, Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 20(1), 19-39.

Veletsianos, G., & Kimmons, R. (2012). Networked Participatory Scholarship: Emergent techno-cultural pressures toward open and digital scholarship in online networks. Computers & Education, 58,, 766-774. Retrieved from http://10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.001

Weller, M. (2011). The digital scholar: how technology is transforming scholarly practice. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Moderating a Colloquium: Annabel Astbury from ABC Splash

Providing Aussie content for

An opportunity offered students in INF537 Digital Futures Colloquium, is to moderate one of the sessions with the view to interact with ideas and thought leaders.  This week, I teamed up with classmate Patricia Buckley to host Annabel Astbury from ABC Splash.

This was an insightful presentation of the history and development of the ABC Splash site, the resources and artefacts available in the collection, and the design considerations and use of analytics by the team at ABC Splash.

ABC Splash was established in 2012 and produced in partnership with Educational Services Australia.

The initial funding ran out 2014, but the team was able to keep the pilot programme running due to  frugal management and are now taking it to its next stage. This was just one of many government projects funded to demonstrate fast broadband and promote the Australian Curriculum.

Initially, there were two main aims of ABC Splash:

  1. to digitise archive resources for education and the new Australian curriculum.
  2. to develop interactives, infographics, games and other digital tools.

The team now comprises of seven staff members and funding has been extended to continue the site.  There are presently over 3000 resources mapped to the Australian Curriculum. This is an impressive effort and the result is a very useful resource for Australian teachers and students.

Throughout the colloquium with Annabel Astbury, I was struck by the many connections to motivations and processes identified in the literature research studied for INF536: Designing Spaces for Learning.  Many of these motivations and processes were also utilised by the ABC Splash team in the development and delivery of this resource.  Some of these included: 

  1. Annabel’s leadership of this project demonstrates a commitment to championing the resource within and beyond the ABC Splash team.  This proactive publicising of the site provides the perseverance that is necessary throughout a project in order to see the vision through to reality (Kuratko, Goldsworthy & Horsby, 2012, p.111).
  2. The ABC Splash team’s commitment to an ever-changing and evolving resource and learning space demonstrates a successful mindset for design which values the ongoing assessment of learning spaces, resulting in iterative design and continuous improvement (Oblinger, 2005, p.18).
  3. The ABC Splash team have a commitment to more than just providing quality resources – through initiatives such as the live events and competitions they also promote student achievement and build community, thus creating new patterns of social and intellectual interaction.  Within learning space design literature, this is identified as an important philosophy that assists in maintaining learner-centred and education-centred change (Istance & Kools, 2013, p.47).

A second connection that I made during Annabel’s presentation was an idea raised by Selwyn who asks researchers to consider “the organizational, political, economic and cultural factors which pattern the design, development, production, marketing, implementation and ‘end use’ of a technological artefact” (2010, p. 69).  An example of this drawn during the colloquium is that the initial funding for ABC Splash was driven by the political pressure to push the Australian Curriculum and in recent time the STEM agenda.

References

Istance, David, and Marco Kools. “OECD Work on Technology and Education: Innovative Learning Environments as an Integrating Framework.” European Journal of Education 48.1 (2013): 43-57. Web. 29 Sept. 2014

Kuratko, Donald F., Michael G. Goldsby, and Jeffrey S. Hornsby. “The Design Thinking Process.” Innovation Acceleration: Transforming Organizational Thinking. Boston: Pearson, 2012. 103-23. Print.

Oblinger, Diana. “Leading the Transition from Classrooms to Learning Spaces.” Educause Quarterly 1 (2005): 14-18. Web. 27 Sept. 2014.

Selwyn, N. (2010). Looking beyond learning: notes towards the critical study of educational technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 65–73. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00338.x.

Learning in the Digital Age = Participation

Lighthouse

One of the key themes that have been impressed upon students engaged in the Master of Education Knowledge Networks and Digital Innovation course (MedKNDI) is that learning in the digital age involves understanding and participating in digital cultures.

Throughout these studies, I have also been introduced to some expert educators and researchers discussing the idea of participatory digital cultures.  Some researchers that appear regularly in my reference lists include Henry Jenkins, Mimi Ito, Danah Boyd, John Seely Brown, Doug Johnson, Howard Rheingold, Christine Greenhow, Mike Ribble, Helen Haste, Will Richardson, Selen Turkay and James Paul Gee.

The challenge these thought provokers pose to those of us teaching in schools is:

How can we embed opportunities for participation into our programmes, curriculums, pedagogies, and spaces so that our students may “develop the cultural competencies and social skills” for full involvement in society (Jenkins, Clinton, Purushotma, Robison & Weigel, 2006, p.4)?  The key it is suggested, is to consider how students can learn, participate, create and produce within and beyond the classroom.

As we complete the course and engage in the colloquiums on offer, it is my goal to consider my professional practice as a teacher-librarian and my responsibility to prepare students to participate and thrive in the constantly evolving landscape of the digital age.

A useful guide for this reflective investigation is the 2016 standards for students recently produced by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE).  I have used this publication to develop goals for enhancing my professional practice during and beyond the studies undertaken in INF537: Digital Futures Colloquium.

Learning goals for digital futures

References

Jenkins, H.,Clinton, K., Purushotoma, R., Robison, A., & Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st Century. Paper presented at MacArthur Foundation, Chicago. Retrieved from http://wheatoncollege.edu/president/files/2012/03/Confronting-Challenges-of-Participatory-Culture.pdf

International Society for Technology in Education. (2016). THE 2016 ISTE standards for students. Retrieved from http://www.iste.org/standards/standards/for-students-2016