Vincent. F. Ryszka
Delivering empathy via education and training in education and the arts. I am, indeed, a recognised artist in my own field of film and design.
The Secret Annex Online
The Secret Annex Online: The Secret Annex Online is a virtual, 3D version of the building at 263 Prinsengracht in Amsterdam where Anne Frank was in hiding for more than two years during World War II and where she wrote her world famous diary.
Building Schools for the Future: The Impact of Digital Technologies on Teaching and Learning.
Building Schools for the
Future: The Impact of Digital Technologies on Teaching and Learning.
Vincent Ryszka
Faculty
of Education
University
of Plymouth 2014
PGDip:
Education
Abstract
Much
research has been dedicated to teaching and learning in the technological
age. More recently research has begun to
focus on the potential of digital, social media to motivate today’s generation
of young learners.
This
paper takes specific projects undertaken between 2011 and 2013 in conjunction
with the Holocaust Educational Trust with a particular focus on Art in schools
at KS5. Data from these projects has
been analysed to interrogate the value of technology to Art education from the
students’ point of view. Anecdotal evidence
from teaching and support staff involved is also included.
Inferential
statistics are used to generalise findings, arguing that there is a strong case
for developing digital media in the schools of the future for teaching and
learning in the spirit of Constructionism, but that this must not be done at
the expense of other teaching methods, as learning styles are varied.
Contents
Introduction …………………………………………………........................ 4
Background & Literature
Review ………………………………………….. 8
Methodology
.………………………………………………………………… 21
Purpose ………………………………………… ……………….. 21
Research questions ……………………………………………... 21
Research design ……………………………… ………………... 22
Data analysis: size and nature of the
sample ……............... 23
Instruments ………………………………………………………. 23
Procedure
……………………………………………………….. 24
Descriptive and Inferential Statistics
………………………….. 24
Workshop Experiment
……………………………………………………… 25
Background ………………………………………….................
25
The Holocaust Project …………………………………………. 26
In the Classroom ……………………………………………….. 28
Does the use of digital media
improve motivation and outcomes? ………. 29
Data Analysis ………………………………………………………………. 33
Inferential statistics ………………………………………… 34
Discussion …………………………………………………………………. 37
Personal
Learning Environments – the Future? ……… 37
Teacher
perceptions of technology ……………………… 41
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………… 46
References ………………………………………………………………... 48
Bibliography ………………………………………………………………. 56
Appendix 1
………………………………………………………………… 58
Learning Style Inventory ……………………………… 60
Appendix 2
………………………………………………………………… 61
Appendix 3
………………………………………………………………… 62
Appendix 4
………………………………………………………………… 67
Appendix 5
…………………………………………………………………. 69
Introduction
Philosophies of teaching and learning abound, but two important stances
are the `Constructionist’ and the `Objectivist’. An Objectivist (Bates and Poole, 2003) believes
that reality exists independently of the human mind, unaffected by any
particular belief system. Reliable
facts, theories and laws of physics remain constant and are completely
objective in nature. As human knowledge
evolves, so we will perceive changes in our reality, but these are just there
result of the discovery of some pre-existing facts that were previously
unknown.
The Constructionist, on the other hand, aims to provide learning
environments that offer the learner real control, with meaningful learning
opportunities: that is, the learner becomes proactive in their own learning and
ways forward – they are constructive in their own development.
It is the Constructionist approach that the school of the future may
need to adopt, as digital media and technology advance rapidly, and young
people grow up with increasing fluency in its use – the Digital Natives
(Prensky, 2001) of today and tomorrow.
The digital world encroaches enormously on the art world, especially in
the contexts of film, animation, computer games and so on. These are the new art industries (although
they can be traced back through several decades now), expanding as fast as
technology can keep up. Our schools must
keep abreast of technological developments, but, not only this, they must
seriously embrace technology in teaching and learning, both as the way forward
economically and for its relevance, inspiration and motivation for current and
future generations.
Not everything was made in a point and click world. Things were not so
easy just a few short years ago. Then, everything had to embody a kind of human
physical integrity. This cannot be “Googled” anywhere; instead, people were in
a “real” place and space.
On the other hand, technology, maths and science are exciting, and lead
us into a potential, indeed predicted and expected future. Using technology to
aid thinking can be incredibly useful for solving creative as well as concrete
tasks. For example, a designer used to
design things and other people made them, but now a 3D printer can be used to
print them out with the use of maths, CAD and creativity.
In another example, the “Integration of Technological Solutions for
Imaging, Detection, and Digitisation of Hidden Elements in Artworks” project
launched in January 2013 under the EU-funded ICT initiative for Learning and
Access to Cultural Resources, a European Union-supported consortium, has
developed an advanced scanner that looks set to revolutionise the analysis of
older works of art and reveal their hidden secrets. Older artworks can be analysed when the work
has undergone skilled restoration. Apart
from knowhow – and patience! – restorers routinely call on advanced
technologies. This is an example of combined thinking and the learning of new
ways of using the whole process of traditional knowledge and skills alongside
the newer technologies in the working environment. Is this the future of the new
job market, moving away from those older, more traditional workloads and
environments? Are we prepared? With reference to our education system, I have
put forward some points from other academics in this review.
Teachers understand that technology has, for many
years now, played an important role in statistics and probability by making it
possible to generate plots, regression functions, and correlation coefficients,
and to simulate many possible outcomes in a short amount of time. Technology is
used in this way to plan programmes of study and schemes of work to encourage
student learning, and therefore make their results better. On the other hand
most teachers, in conversation, believe that data recorded against national
standards may make things quantifiable, but there is little flexibility.
If there is a lack of flexibility in the current,
structured use of data in education, this is not the fault of new digital
technology, since this is only a narrow aspect of its use and should not
inhibit its use in other aspects.
Digital technology as a teaching tool has vast, rapidly developing and
often little-explored potential for improved student motivation, and thus
increased learning potential. It must
not be forgotten that there are many different learning styles within any
classroom and that therefore digital technology can never be the only tool and
technique used. It is the view expressed
in this paper through considered research, that it must be tempered with, and
used in conjunction with, an array of other forms of teaching and learning to
be most effective.
There are constraints on building schools for the
future in terms of economics, of teacher training, especially of those teachers
who were trained some years ago, and of school organisation, both in terms of
curriculum and the physical environment.
These will take financial input, rigorous planning and rethinking of
post-graduate courses and CPD; but they are not insurmountable if the belief
and will are there.
This review explores literature and research on the
subject of digital technology in the classroom, its successes, potential and
limitations, along with potential ways forward for the improved learning that
can be achieved in future classrooms with an expansive use of digital technology.
What is the impact of digital technologies
on teaching and learning?
The review includes only findings that are derived
from studies with measured outcomes. Further
research can be viewed on my blog (Appendix 4).
Background and Literature Review
Building Schools for the
Future
Disaffection with education affects an estimated 13% of students in
secondary schools (Ofsted, 2008). It is a problem that can affect their future
career prospects, their moods, their ability to enjoy the process of learning
and their day-to-day activities.
Research on the use by young people of digital media largely suggests
that this can motivate them in a way that traditional teaching finds more
difficult. In the present paper, the
role of digital media in schools will be investigated. It is hypothesised that, if the full
potential of digital media were used in schools, given structure and focus through
good planning by the teacher, monitored by the teacher through technology,
students’ work submitted through technology and assessments returned through
technology, students’ perceptions of learning, their motivation, ownership and
autonomy would dramatically improve, and so, thus, would their ability to
learn.
In her book, Mizuko Ito (MIT Press, 2013) examines the role of social
media and the expertise of young people in using digital media. She proposes that, in some aspects, the role
of `teacher’ as we have always understood it has been superseded by a new way
of working, understanding and learning through socialising and play. Generations that are growing up alongside our
rapidly developing digital technology are more likely to become fluent with it
from a young age and to glide easily from one form of `social media’ to another
without the anxieties of older generations, who, in many cases, struggle to
keep up with developments. This becomes
apparent in the classroom where even young students can help, correct the
teacher at times, and support their peers in learning particular skills. This generation of learner has been dubbed
`digital natives’ (Prensky, 2001), although it is argued, (Helsper & Enyon,
2010) that breadth of use, experience, self-efficacy and education are just as,
if not more, important than age in explaining how people become digital
natives. White and Le Cornu (2011) build
on Prensky’s theory and revise it in the light of advancing years and digital
experiences, to refer to digital users as `Visitors’ and `Residents’, having
little or nothing to do with age, but with `tools’ and `place’. Their research into the impact of their
definition on teaching and learning is current.
Whilst one argument supports social media as potentially educational,
another is that it is very superficial (Flaherty, 2010). The founders of Twitter, she states,
attribute their technology’s appeal to the fact that “it’s connection with low
expectations” of any real commitment, and that this could also be low
expectations of any real achievement. A
constant digital presence and “the pseudo-community it links the user with”
(Flaherty, 2010) discourages' sustained reflection and mindfulness.
For the digital native the teacher is no longer the repository of
specialised knowledge, the expert to defer to.
The students often have greater knowledge of digital media than their
teachers, although not necessarily the structure to direct it within the
educational parameters of learning for future exams and careers. This could impact on future
teaching and learning in a positive way if carefully managed.
Students have achieved the ultimate in `peer learning’. They look to each other for help in
developing their own skills. They
explore the potential they clearly see in digital technology to learn
empirically; they respect peer authority and do not feel the generation
barriers that any relationship with an adult teacher presents – nor the
resentment that some students feel towards a so-called authority figure. Beyond fun and socialising, the next stage,
“geeking out”, (Ito, 2013) means more focused and academic use of technology,
especially for those using the Internet, maybe to extend classroom
learning. As with learning through
socialising, this way of working may be mainly self-directed, or
`interest-driven’ and in need of a conventional teacher only to bounce ideas
off, check academic integrity and, ultimately to give work a mark or grade.
However, the idea that peer teaching is paramount in the understanding
and use of digital media, relies on the kind of friendship groups that
individuals may have and their particular use of social media, so that the
content, ways of interacting and values imparted are widely varying and a
matter almost of chance alone. Selwyn
(2011) refers to the reality of young peoples’ `”messy”’ use of digital media
as opposed to the idealised digital native.
Much digital native literature, he contends, has little empirical
research behind it and can be grounded in anecdotal evidence in some
cases. Young peoples’ use of technology
varies greatly along many social divides.
This links to my hypothesis, in that the whole framework of teaching and
learning requires re-thinking and re-structuring to capitalise on the energy
and excitement generated in young people by this `non-way’ of learning that
neither intimidates, nor seems irrelevant, yet teaches so much of importance to
the burgeoning global careers market.
However, I believe that these ideas need tempering with some
restraint. The more cautious academic
approach supports the use of technology in the classroom, but in a traditional
approach to teaching and learning. All
education now relies heavily on data and prescribed ways of teaching and
learning. Teaching the use of digital
media cannot exist in a vacuum as a subject on its own, although traditional
ICT lessons may account for technical learning:
digital media has its place right across and throughout the curriculum. However, concern is expressed over issues
such as assessment and control over material. These were first expressed with
the advent of `Media’ courses, (which were originally confined to TV, film,
advertising etc.), but then extended to courses including Internet use and the
ability of a variety of technological items to access the internet.
`Digital media –and particularly the
internet – significantly increase
the potential for active participation; but they also
create an environment of bewildering choices, not all of which can be
seen as harmless.’ (Buckingham 2001, p.4)
Further concern has been raised over teacher training in the use of
digital media. Nevertheless, the teacher
is still able to give structure to learning and will oversee targets for each
individual student. The one thing that
should be stressed is that technology needs to be universal to become
beneficial. Student teachers need to be trained in the use of software as well
as handling peripherals, printers, scanners, digital programs and methodology
in digital learning as part of their PGCE if education is to keep abreast of
technology and the classroom use of digital media. Whilst a number of post-graduate courses in
digital arts are available across the UK, broader teacher training in the use
of digital media across the curriculum is crucial. Research in the USA shows a disappointing
paucity of such training (Bequette and Brennan, 2008) and this is a pattern
reflected in the UK.
`While most teacher training programs and
concepts have focussed
the
technological side of media, the pedagogical scenarios for
teaching and learning have been almost completely
neglected.
Teachers certainly need to be trained in the use of
technology but this
has to be done without teaching them the technological
skills but
showing them great ways to engage their students in
learning by using
technology.’ (Atwell and Hughes 2010, p.46)
Mark Bullen (2007), an education technology adviser, posits the idea that the next generation’s use of digital
technologies is more complex than has been supposed and although digital
technologies’ use is part and parcel of young peoples’ daily lives, their use
is not homogeneous. Furthermore, his findings from his study do not support the
notion of a unique learning style or preference within the current generation
of young people. His findings suggest the younger generation of students may do
things and learn slightly differently, but their way of using digital technology
is similar to older generations of learners of technology.
It is therefore important to understand how students in schools perceive
digital education where it is offered.
The research on students’ perceptions of digital learning leaves much to
be desired, both in methodology and scope.
The responses in the two studies discovered demonstrated an
unimaginative use of digital media in the Art departments in the two schools
studied, and a disappointing lack of excitement as to its possibilities. The study by Mizuko Ito in America (2013),
whilst not directly interrogating students for their perceptions of digital
learning, nevertheless demonstrates the vibrancy and imagination of a
generation who are growing up with the digital age that the responses gleaned
in research lacked (Marner, Anders, 2013:
Monahan, Torin, 2004). Based on a
study of digital technology in one KS3 Art Class in Sweden, (Marner, Anders
2013), positive but limited and predictable perceptions emerged.
Efficiency was highlighted; the search for images on the net,
then the use of Photoshop, was felt to be quicker and easier than taking
personal photographs, although students felt that their ideas were the most
important part of their work, rather than traditional skills.
Simplicity was also placed on the positive side; research for
images that would not be available to students, e.g. foreign locations, are
readily accessible on the internet.
Lastly speed was important
because of limited time-tabled time.
However, most students have access to the Internet at home or in the
library.
A study in a Los Angeles school was more critical, although neutral
rather than totally negative. Students
felt that their school used technology as a marketing tool for parents who were
concerned that Art was not a good career option. Technology, they felt, gave them another
option as a tool, but could not replace traditional art skills. Technology
creates an insular way of working that precludes the personal images gleaned
from the world around.
The final point resonates with aspects of my hypothesis; although it is
the personal opinion of a student, it is a pertinent one.
Data from a number of my workshop projects in secondary schools has been
analysed to better understand the perceptions of learners in the Art and
Humanities departments in respect of the use of digital technology in Art
(including video and photography). Workshop sizes were 110 students. Data has
been collected from questionnaires completed by the students before the
projects to ascertain their expectations, including points of interest. These were collected and noted, then
redistributed to share randomly with others. Then, after completing their
artwork, students completed questionnaires on their use and understanding of
digital technologies, followed by an evaluation sheet. This artwork involved the use of computers
with Photoshop and digital cameras or smartphones. It has been analysed in terms of students’ age,
gender, previous experience (accessibility to technology), learning experience,
teaching and learning strategies, perceived level of comfort, and perceived
success. At the end, the students had to
write down in no more than twenty words, what they had learned from the
project, and something they had learned from technology, bearing in mind what
their expectations had been. From this
analysis it should be possible to discern steps forward in digital media
education in the light of new art-industry careers. This analysis will be compared with
government statistics and information.
What is important is that we can implement elements of joy in the
development of e-learning technologies. Common themes throughout an
initial scan of the literature included learner-focus, empowerment of learners
and the positive outcomes from listening and acting on learners’ feedback to
inform pedagogy and outcomes. (Golding et al, 2012: Achren et al, 2012: Brown and North, 2010: Sawang et al, 2013: Guiney, 2012: Tyler-Smith, 2006). Also, according to the DfES (2006), if
learners have the chance to participate in the decision-making processes that
influence their education, they are more likely to be proactive in supporting
the efforts to improve the quality of their education made by the school or
college.
In an article in `The Atlantic’, `Is Google Making Us Stupid?’ (Carr,
2008), the dangers of the Net to our intellect are dramatically set out. In it, Carr and a number of his associates,
describe how their own ability to concentrate on written material has
diminished commensurate with their increased use of the Net. He points out how the written page gives
space to the individual imagination but the Net chips away at the capacity for
concentration and contemplation. We now,
he postulates, take in snippet-sized pieces of information because that is how
the Net distributes it. The digital
generation has therefore lost its ability to concentrate, to assimilate
concepts and ideas and to use its imagination.
However, in her book, Peppler (2013) asserts that learners are unusually
motivated when digital media are used by them. Simply because this is their
mode of communication and socialising, they feel it almost excludes the `adult’
element, that is, youth feels it has ownership of social media. So when digital media are used to develop
learning, albeit on their own terms, young peoples’ attitudes and motivation
are positive.
The Eurobarometer Benchmarking Survey (2011) carried out in 2006 across
member states, found that as many as 86% of teachers in some countries claimed
that student motivation and attention were much increased when technology was
in use in the classroom. ICT was seen as
a means by which success could be achieved, making a huge impact on teaching
and learning through digital technology.
As long as the technology is available to them, young people from all
backgrounds are included in the use of social media; in a way it gives them a'
certain anonymity. Where digital media
can be used to develop knowledge and understanding in an educational mode, it
can be accepted. It must therefore be
more acceptable in an educational setting, as well.
Tapscott supports this enthusiastic view:
`For the first time in history,
youth are the authorities on something
really important. And they’re changing every aspect
of our society
from the workplace to the marketplace, from the
classroom to the
living room, from the voting booth to the Oval
Office.’
(Tapscott, 2008 advertising line)
It is easy to be drawn into this exciting vision of a digital future,
but in educational terms it is necessary to understand the counter-arguments to
these views. Whilst youth culture is charismatic and vibrant, and it uses
social technology to interact and learn, can it provide the necessary
understanding of creative (or otherwise) employment in the global workplace? (Cazden, Cope, et
al, 1996) take a broader and less excitable view of the situation. They set motivation as the attainment of an
affluent lifestyle. This may not,
however, be the only aspiration. They
also point out that some young people may be excluded from the pursuit of
affluence because of their education and training, whether or not they are
conversant with digital media. Herein
lies an area of difficulty. It is
generally assumed that interest-driven digital learning will take place, not
only in the classroom, but will be extended into the home. According to the BBC news report (4th
January 2013), a third of the poorest students in the UK are without Internet
facilities at home. This creates a huge
digital divide, disadvantaging many.
According to the E-Learning Foundation,
`The
data shows that while 99% of children in the richest 10% of households can
access the Internet via a computer, this dropped to 57% in the poorest 10% of
households with children. In the poorest
households 29% had no computer, 36% had no Internet and 43% had no Internet
connection via a computer. According to
the E-Learning Foundation this translates to a total of 750,000 school age
children living in households with no Internet, and some 650,000 without a
computer.’ (BBC News 4th January 2013)
An important issue that impacts on teaching and
learning with digital technologies will be the ability of schools and colleges
to adapt. Whilst school environments try
to adapt to the future of perceived social networks, with the VLE (Virtual Learning Environments), they
are rapidly falling short in meeting the demands of a networked society. Web
2.0 and social networks are proving to offer a more personalised, open
environment for students to learn formally as they are already doing
informally. With the eruption of social media into society, and therefore,
education, many voices claim the need of new models that demonstrate the
transferability and scalability of e-learning. (Salmon, 2005), (Sclater, 2008),
(Atwell, 2007) et al, concur with the
relevance of PLEs as useful, or indeed central, to learning as well as their
potential for knowledge development and sharing. Much has been written on PLEs:
Attwell (2007), Wheeler (2010), et al,
all provide insightful definitions of PLEs leading to greater understanding of
the educational potential therein.
Further to the adaptation of the learning environment, the next impact
of digital technologies on teaching and learning will be course design. Although referring to online courses for
adult education, the essential issues outlined by Eastmond and Ziegahn (1995) remain relevant to all levels
of education. These considerations
include overall course design issues, resource allocation, syllabus creation,
activity selection, online structure production, and evaluation planning.
Appropriate attention to these items during the design phase informs the
development and delivery phases of the online course, thereby creating a good
learning experience for adult college students. Without good course design in
place the success of online learning can relate only to the teachers’
experience, who may be apt to under-utilise specific technologies that could be
beneficial to the diverse learners in their classrooms. Eastwood and
Ziegahn (1995) acknowledge that the methods of teaching in online learning
should not only be different, but should nevertheless fit into the rigid
programs of the education system.
Bauerlein (2008) poses a strong counter-argument to our current courting
of digital education in his book `The Dumbest Generation’ (Bauerlein,
2008). He has cogent arguments for the
retention of traditional educational systems and values. Bauerlein believes the push for digital media in the
class- room, the cultural emphasis on having an identity without the presence
of a proper knowledge-base, and the lack of support for the traditional values
of the past have all hindered teachers from giving students a proper education
that will sustain them. This, in short,
promotes intellectual laziness in future generations.
Linking the potential pitfalls of course design with the fun and
pleasure element experienced by young people in using technology mentioned
previously, Gee (2008) advocates playing video games as a good exemplar for
teaching; how do good gamers think about the design of the game and its rules
to accomplish success; how do they become `modders’, learning to use the game’s
software to redesign the game? He
equates this with the good teacher, considering the design of learning, the
classroom, the language of learning and its content. He states that good gamers seek out
instruction from experts and strategy guides; they consult the Internet for
examples of strategy and problem-solving; that is, they surround themselves
with relevant support. He argues that
good teachers should create classrooms that work this way, as well, with many
different tools and many different forms of instruction.
The Department for Education Report, (December 2011) cites a MORI poll
of teachers, finding that
`32% of teachers have used ‘games designed for entertainment’ in
their lessons and 59% would consider using
them. Their study found
that 63% thought players learn higher order
thinking skills and 62%
thought players learnt specific content knowledge.
Many, however,
expressed the view that games teach
stereotypical views (62%) and
anti-social
behaviour (71%).’ (DfE Report 2011, p. 8 – 9)
What is the impact of
digital technologies on teaching and learning?
An overall view of the research explored in
this review indicates general support for developing improved digital media and
technology in education. Enthusiasm for
harnessing the aspects of youth culture that motivate learning via digital
social media is at its highest in America.
It could be a positive move, especially in addressing disaffected
learners, if explored in a structured way and if researched using a structured
methodology directed at providing the maximum educational benefits through
social- and interest-driven use of digital media. Student motivation and student autonomy in
learning are given a high priority in the conclusions drawn from much
research. Clearly, data shows that there
is a groundswell of support in the teaching profession, already using or poised
to use not just the technology we are already familiar with (the internet,
Photoshop) but also games: teachers recognise the educational value of games
and gaming and many are ready to incorporate these into their teaching
strategies. Importantly, this also
reflects on the need for developing teacher training, both at PGCE level and
CPD. The counter-balance in the argument
is that there is a significant place for digital media, but that it needs to be
used alongside traditional teaching methods and skills in order to meet the
needs of global industry, business and management, not to mention students’
differing learning styles and widely differing levels of expertise with digital
technology.
Methodology
Purpose:
The purpose of his paper is to explore the validity of
the use of technology in the classroom through an analysis of the responses of
330 students, half a control group, working through traditional didactic
teaching methods with demonstrations, against the second half – the programme
group – using technologies for research, development and production, of
artwork.
It is to test the hypothesis that digital media
enhances teaching and learning with added relevance and motivation, explicitly
in Art departments, therefore improving student attainment.
Research
Questions:
How can teachers make best use of new
technologies? What are teachers'
perceptions of technology? Should
the methods of teaching and learning be different?
What are learners' perceptions of technology, their
attitudes and motivation? Will
local teaching of technology change? What about accommodating diversity,
freedom of choice, learning techniques?
What are the teaching and learning activities and outcomes? How will the new experience of digital learning fit into the rigid content-driven programmes of education?
Research Design:
The research project was
designed to use a `control’ group of students who were guided through their
work by traditional teaching methods, that is, a mixture of didactic teaching,
booklets of information and practical work – exploration of materials,
development of ideas through drawing and experiment leading to a final outcome,
and a separate group that worked with computer technology to research topics, including
tourism and the Holocaust, research potential images and use Photoshop to
develop a final idea before producing their artwork.
These students all responded
to a questionnaire, both before their work, citing their expectations, then
after completing their work. A pre-test,
post-test two-group randomised experimental design was used in this study, in
notational form as follows:
R O X O
R O O
Where:
R = randomly assigned
groupings
O = pre-test and post-test
questionnaires
X = use of digital media in
developing artwork.
This data has undergone
analysis to reveal answers to the research
questions.
Using this research design
with groups of secondary schoolchildren was appropriate to the situation. It presented a selection bias threat, in that
the groups were unlikely to be exactly balanced in terms of prior experience,
ability, or socio-economic background, however, the nature of the work, being
art, was felt to neutralise this threat to a greater extent and that there
existed a probabilistic equivalence.
This research design also posed a social threat, in that students
socialised during their breaks and the control group became aware of the work
of the programme group, indeed desiring the same digital input for
themselves. Fortunately, they did not
have access to the appropriate equipment.
Data Analysis:
size and nature of the sample:
The sample used for analysis
consisted of three groups of 110 students, making 330 students in total, aged
between 16 – 18 years old. These
students were all from the South-West area of the UK. Only 7% of these were of ethnic origin and
64% of the sampled students were female: 13% were from under-privileged
backgrounds. There were social and
cultural constraints due to social grouping, gender, and ethnicity because of
the location, that is, the South-West.
Instruments:
Data was gathered using
students’ Application Monitoring Forms for the workshops and secondly from the
students’ responses to their questionnaires.
The Monitoring section of
the Application Forms gave basic gender, ethnicity and ability to pay for the
workshop (grants were available for those who could not pay).
The questionnaires gave data
on five main areas:
◦
Personal expectations of learning
◦
Previous personal experiences of learning
◦
Perceptions of learning
◦
Use of technology in their personal lives
◦
Use of technology for learning
Procedures:
Ethical protocols were observed (Appendix 5)
according to the University of Plymouth Ethics
Guidelines. Analysis of data was
undertaken using descriptive and inferential statistics.
Descriptive and Inferential Statistics
Descriptive statistics is the term given to the analysis of data that
helps demonstrate or summarise data in a meaningful way. This method might usefully reveal patterns,
for example. However, descriptive
statistics are limited; they cannot see beyond the data we have, or make any
significant conclusions relevant to any hypothesis that is proposed. It does give a straightforward interpretation
of data.
Inferential statistics are as they sound; the researcher infers from the
sample data what a wider conclusion might be in, for instance, the general
population. So the sample that has
contributed the data becomes a potential mirror reflecting a large
population. Judgments are to be made on
probabilities based on the data obtained.
Using this method of statistical analysis on the pre-test/post-test
two-group randomised experimental design leads to conclusions in line with the
proposed hypothesis of this paper.
Workshop
Experiment:
Background
This part explores my
experience of teaching Holocaust and Human Rights Art workshops to schools and
the way the experiment for analysis underpinning the hypothesis was set up. The
project was designed to use traditional and computer based art tools. It argues
the relevance of combined arts or inter-disciplinary art forms.
The Human Rights Commission,
but mainly The Holocaust Educational Trust, were worried that the survivors and
victims of crimes against humanity would be forgotten in the near future as
nearly all the victims of the Holocaust had died due to age and illness. The Holocaust Trust decided to start
recording all the victims’ experiences and utilise these as a resource. These recorded testimonies can have a
dramatic impact on students watching and listening to them, however, there may
be a certain `immunity’ imposed on the viewer by exposure to film and TV – a
sort of fictionalising of the matter viewed.
There were some actual
face-to-face talks given to the students on the project by living survivors;
the reality of this made a huge emotional impact on students. However, there is a rapidly dwindling number
of Holocaust survivors to tell their stories directly to students. Those that are left are able to tell their
life stories to video equipment, however, and this makes their memories
accessible and valuable to future generations – a historical record more
meaningful than book learning.
The Holocaust Project
The project was directed at
giving students aged 16 – 18 an informed picture of the Holocaust to enable a
creative, visual response underpinned by empathy and understanding. Students were taken to Auschwitz as part of
this project, which then culminated in a day of working on individual art
pieces in response to all they had researched and learned. In each workshop, half of the students – the
programme group – had digital input in the research stages and were enabled to
respond through digital means. The
control group used traditional methods of teaching and learning.
The research had four points
of instruction, one was the initial seminar, the second the visit to the site,
and the third a follow up seminar. The fourth was a selection of art-based
lessons for which a local well-known human rights artist and myself were commissioned.
Initially, the art of the
Holocaust was discussed. At the beginning participants spent ten minutes
working with their partner and a questionnaire. At the end they spent fifteen
minutes on anther questionnaire, they were also allowed five minutes to reflect
on their learning at a later date and these comments were picked up from the
schools at a later date.
The students carried out two tasks in the
first double period lesson. The first task was to browse the given website on
the Holocaust, the idea was to give them the facts and let them explore the
Holocaust denier sites and discuss this in small groups. The students found
these sites useful.
The students were organised
into groups with very short sessions at Auschwitz, as it was likely to be
crowded at the site for our lesson. There were selected sites for each group to
respond to, some students were given talks around areas of interest e.g. the
gas chamber, barracks and museum displays of items preserved for visitors. Selected students were directed to other
experiences, where there were rooms that were accompanied by visual aids, i.e.
DV recorded images and the opportunity to listen to testimonies and watch
visual images on PDAs. The artists {myself
included} and teachers had two groups of learners that would experience two
different approaches. This was organised to help save time and to deal with the
amount of students we had, but also to subject half of the students to the use
of technology. PDAs were given out on
site to the technology group for their research. The visit outline was set out
as follows: the railway track, quarantine barracks and latrines, cattle wagon,
unloading ramp, gypsy camp, crematoria II & III, the Birkenau Memorial,
sauna building and photo exhibition. The students selected to use traditional
approaches had the same orientation seminar as the other, digitally supported
students, but then, having traditional talks and teaching, posed challenging
responses and behaviour to the educators during the talks they were given. Educators were instructed to read out
strictly regulated responses laid down by the Holocaust Educational Trust if
this should happen. Statements were issued to each educator/teacher for each
location. There were other
people and TAs present for `crowd control’.
A learner will always be
subjected to influences from the social and cultural setting in which the
learning occurs. E-learning in modern
schools should consider students’ behaviour, learning as the construction of
knowledge and meaning, and learning as social practice that underlies
individual performance.
A constructivist perspective
is the assumption that learning must be personally meaningful, and that this
has very little to do with the informational characteristics of a learning environment. Activity, motivation and learning are all
related to a need for a positive sense of identity (or positive self-esteem),
shaped by social forces. It was important
to demonstrate in the project that events around 70 years ago are still
relevant to young people today and not mere history.
In the Classroom:
Between 2011 and 2013, three
groups of 110 students each, aged 16 – 18, were given the broad topic of Human
Rights to respond to in a piece of artwork.
The groups were randomly split into two.
The students had no indication at first of which group were doing what,
as they were combined for an initial digital presentation. After this, the `control’ group went to one
art room along with the professional artist who works in paint. The other `programme’ group stayed in a
different art room with myself to use digital technology to produce their
artwork.
Scenarios were presented
verbally in the traditional class whilst the research was online in the
programme group who were using technology.
Students’ approaches to learning will usually relate to their teachers’
approaches and how this motivates them, in my personal experience.
Each group was shown skills to
use; the `control’ group was shown pencil and charcoal techniques for their
preparatory drawings, then acrylic paint and inks to experiment with for their
final outcomes. The `programme’ group
was shown how to use Photoshop to develop ideas and images. Halfway through the workshop they were given
a `booster’ session of techniques to advance their skills. They then worked on
their best image, using combinations of print with other media, such as pastel
and paint, creating mixed media pieces.
The `control’ group produced more traditional pieces. At the end all the students came together to
assess and discuss their outcomes followed by a short session to complete the
questionnaire to be used for data collection to assess the hypothesis that
digital media in the classroom motivates and inspires learning.
Does the use of digital media improve motivation and
outcomes?
Students completed a
questionnaire after the project. This,
in conjunction with pre-test expectations, forms the basis of data collection
for analysis. Both from observations
made during the workshops and from open-ended questions in the questionnaire, in the classroom
the students who worked with online research felt that it allowed them deeper
perception and quicker access to the material they felt they needed to form
opinions. This avoided this difficulty of focused investigating that the second,
traditionally taught group had, with less information and images to learn from.
A former human rights artist provided their information, he directed the
students’ ideas, and he found that he had to justify an opinion more, whilst
the online groups sorted their own opinions and were directed to do so, given
that they had the appropriate tools. When confronted by the deeper components
of their perceptions in making their idea work, successful integration of
learning technologies into classrooms was proven.
The result of the work from the control group
demonstrated that they had drifted from the original intended outcomes. The
work was superficial; this had to do with the perceived need to comply with
what was understood as the artist/teacher requirements. The technology-based
group was more involved and had deeper critical reflection on their work. These
results were observed and re-tested by a Q & A evaluation.
I developed and administered a posttest
questionnaire to each of the groups of 110 students enrolled in the introductory
tutorial groups to evaluate the students’ perceptions of technology-based
tutorials and outcomes. Participants
were asked to describe what they perceived as the way in which they learnt most
effectively. Each participant in this
formal questionnaire offered responses and comments. The survey results indicate that a high
percentage of study respondents perceived digital research to be at least as
effective as lectures and the technology skills learned to be equally as
important as the tutorials if not more so.
Information on student perceptions of tutorials with
technologies in place showed that students felt they gained more reflective
time and they were more effective in reflecting on their overall experiences.
This supported the concept that their learning environment and stimulating
tutorials improved student learning and led to higher levels of student
satisfaction with their learning experiences.
The same study conducted on
student participants in the traditional classes revealed that they thought the
tutorials were useful in learning and reviewing the material. The majority of
these participants thought the tutorials helped them spend less time in having
to learn the technology-based material and more time completing the assignment.
All participants made a clear distinction
between passively learning, for example being talked to and watching
demonstrations, compared to digital learning online. This was evident in
students’ perceptions of e-learning.
Most students, from both
groups, favoured the use of technology to develop the work and were excited by
its potential. Many in the `control’
group were disappointed that they had not had the opportunity to use the
technology. They were asked how they might use it in the future and in discussion
decided the benefits of technology in art were the increased options it gives
the artist and the potential breadth of visual development offered. On the downside, lack of technical knowledge
and expertise could restrict the outcomes.
The latter was apparent during the workshops in weaker students who had
sought greater input from the teacher, and who had produced just a print from
the computer as their final outcome, without being able to use this creatively
with other media.
The students produced highly
emotive work in general, strongly influenced by their Holocaust experience.
Data Analysis:
Data from the students involved in the workshops was
analysed in relation to the areas outlined above (p. 23-24). A percentage (5%) of questionnaires were of
no value, as they were incorrectly filled in, or not filled in at all and were
not included in the test results. The
remaining 95% gave data on the significance of the use of technology in
teaching and learning compared to traditional teaching and learning methods.
The analysis concerns the effects of teaching
through traditional versus e-learning style instructional methods on three
urban sample groups of 110 students each, 16 – 18 years of age, mixed-grade
students and mixed in attitude, empathetic tendencies and transfer skills in
response to lessons on the Holocaust. Empirical
methods were used to achieve the data and pre-test percentages were based on
yes/no/not sure student answers (Appendix 1).
Post-test percentage results were based on a sliding scale of students’ 1
– 5 responses, combined with a series of yes/no/not sure answers. Open-ended questions supported observational
data, exploring how much students gained or did not gain from using technology
(Appendix 2). The data gathered tested
the hypothesis:
Alternative
hypothesis: Digital media enhances the relevance of teaching
and learning and the motivation of
students.
Null hypothesis: Digital media make no difference to the
relevance
of teaching and learning or the motivation
of students.
Dependent variables for this investigation were
gain scores on achievement in post-tests, these mean scores were obtained from
pre-test (Appendix 1) and post-test (Appendix 2) questions. The independent variable was the
instructional method. I administered the
Learning Style Inventory (Dunn, Dunn & Price, 1989) as part of the pre-test
questionnaire to determine learning style preferences, although student
groupings were randomly assigned. The
control group was taught about the Holocaust with a traditional teaching method
(lecture, group discussion, visual resources) and the programme group was
taught the same content with the aid of technologies. The data that was subjected
to statistical analysis supported the implementation of a digital rather than a
traditional approach for teaching lessons concerned with emotionally charged
events.
The pre- test questionnaire showed that students had some degree of
understanding of technology prior to engaging in the workshop.
The 9.5 mean difference (between Fig. 3 and Fig. 4, Appendix 3)
indicated that a significant percentage of students benefited from digital media technologies
in arts and humanities education in the schools that undertook the projects. This mean difference gave an early indication that
the null hypothesis might be rejected, once p-values were fully ascertained.
Inferential Statistics
It could be inferred from the descriptive data statistics (Appendix 3) that
in the general population, young people would benefit substantially from using digital
media in the arts and humanities when engaged in project work. The veracity of this inferential statistic
has been substantiated via t test
calculations (Appendix 3). The t test
provides a numerical basis from which to work out the p-value, and it is this
value that provides the percentage of error on the descriptive statistic if
applied to the general population. A low
p-value indicates that the alternative hypothesis may be accurately applied
generally, in this case to sixth-form students engaged on project work
involving Art and Humanities, as there is a small percentage error. This is how we may construct inferential
statistics. Once the descriptive
analysis was done, the p-values, for pre-test groups before they were split
into control and programme groups, then for the technology group only pre- and
post-test, were found to be statistically insignificant (Appendix 3).
The t tests revealed a positive and
statistically significant impact on achievement test scores (p >
.001). When students were taught using technology, gain scores revealed
significance (p > .001) that indicated that students’ performance was
higher (p > .001) on the transfer of skills when students were
instructed with a digital instructional method rather than with a traditional
approach. Large to resounding effect sizes were revealed for each of the
dependent variables.
The probability is that, whatever statistic
was realised from a sample it would be consistent, providing that the true mean
is what was assumed in the null hypothesis. Thus a very low p-value indicates a
low probability that there would be that sample statistic, given the null
hypothesis, and we tend to say that this is enough evidence to reject the null
hypothesis. This really depends on the alpha level set. The number alpha is the threshold value that we measure p-values against,
usually set at 0.05 or 0.01. It tells us how extreme observed results must be
in order to reject the null hypothesis of a significance test. As
the p-value is lower than both, I therefore feel confident that I have enough
evidence to reject the null hypothesis.
Discussion
Personal Learning Environments – the future?
Graham Atwell (2007) suggests in his paper
that there is a major issue in that everyday informal learning is disconnected
from the formal learning that takes place in our educational institutions. For
younger people there is a danger that they will increasingly see school as a `turn
off’ – as something irrelevant to their identities and to their lives.
`By contrast, the new
and emergent features of the social
Web are created and
maintained by the users themselves.’
(Wheeler 2009, p.4)
Personal Learning Environments have the
potential to bring together these different worlds and inter-relate learning
from life with learning from school and college, but there are also many
unresolved issues, including who provides technology services, post-graduate
teacher training and in-service CPD, security of data and of course the personal
safety of students all of which need to be considered.
The need for enhanced teacher training at
post-graduate level, and the need for CPD for teachers already in post is
emphasised in this paper elsewhere, but it as been given close attention as an
issue by the Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive
Agency with support from the European Commission. This Agency has been working on MUVEnation (Multi-Users
Virtual Environments) since 2007 until 2009.
The final report (2010) explains that the aim of the project was to
enable teachers across Europe to use and embrace the challenges of technologies
for enhanced learning in the classroom as we currently perceive them. It was seen as an initiative needed to
satisfy the needs of a growing and relatively uncharted area of classroom
practice, but one which is seen to be of major importance over the coming
years. The final report claimed that the
project aimed ` to create new models for collaborative
learning in virtual environments; with teacher's training being part of the
problem and of the solution.’ (2010: 7)
By involving teachers from across Europe and
five Universities in a complex and demanding programme of study, including the
use of not only Virtual Environments, but also Second Life in teaching and
learning, it was hoped to bring widespread CPD on the use of fast-emerging
technologies to motivate learners in the classroom.
The potential of MUVEnation is to create an
exciting and much-needed advance in digital education through educating
teachers.
Learning platforms are already
being used across schools to successfully support or transform existing
practice in a variety of ways including enhancing data management and
communication. For example, tracking
learners’ behaviour and attendance, enabling teachers to share resources and
keeping parents/carers informed and involved in their child’s learning. It is
difficult to establish causality of ICT on attainment due to the number of
variables that are impossible to control in a school environment. However, two of the largest
studies in the UK looking at ICT’s impact on attainment, the ImpaCT2 2002 study,
(Harrison et al 2002), and the Test
Bed Project, (Somekh et al 2007) have
found there are statistically significant positive relationships between the
use of ICT and achievement in mathematics, English and science.
A proven benefit in social
and educational terms is that technology enables schools to collaborate together. One established example of this is ‘The
Dissolving Boundaries’ programme that uses ICT to enable schools in Northern
Ireland and the Republic of Ireland to work together on agreed projects.
`Data both from pupils and
teachers have shown that pupils have
been highly motivated by
the sense of audience that
their links have provided
and this has led to improved literacy,
oracy, ICT and communication
skills. Other reported benefits
included better
concentration, improved problem-solving and a
better sense of
responsibility for ensuring that work was completed
by agreed deadlines.’
(Austin, Smyth et al, 2009, p.3)
When ‘Moodle’ was introduced
in 2006 ‘wikis’ could be utilised by students. Wikis are online collaborative
areas and in ‘Dissolving Boundaries’ projects they have allowed both schools in
a given partnership to contribute to and edit a shared on-line workspace, and
have given teachers the opportunity to more easily monitor the contributions
from both sets of students (Austin et al
2010).
However, whilst research
shows a large body of support for classroom use of digital media, including
harnessing social media to education (Ito, 2013) research for the Education
Endowment Foundation, Durham University, (Higgins, et al 2012), provides evidence that, as posited earlier in this
paper, the use of digital media in classrooms must be tempered with other
teaching strategies.
`The crucial lesson
emerging from the research is that it is the
pedagogy underpinning
technology use which is important: the how
rather than the what.
The challenge is to ensure that technology is
used to enable and to
advance effective teaching and learning
practices.’ (Higgins et al 2012, p.3)
It is argued from research into the impact of
technology on learning, that on it’s own there is no benefit in the use of
technology unless clear learning objectives are in place with the digital
activity to be undertaken.
This is supported by Dunn, Dunn and Price, who
have spent approximately three decades researching learning styles, to produce,
(Dunn, Dunn and Price, 1989) a Learning Style Model, as they believed, from
such lengthy and exhaustive research, that varying environments, resources and
approaches in teaching must be used to respond to different learning-style
strengths. As Burke, Guastello et al (1999-2000) point out, because everyone is
different with different strengths and weaknesses, there can be no formula for
a best way to learn.
This suggests that PLEs, whilst they would
undoubtedly work well for some students, there would be others whose learning
styles did not accommodate them well. From
the workshop detailed previously, whilst there was enthusiasm generally for
using technology, the scope offered was necessarily limited by a lack of
students’ prior knowledge of the software used, the relatively short timescale
of the practical work and the computer hardware available. Widespread creation of PLEs in educational
institutions must be a long way off as teachers in all subject areas will need
sufficient training, not just to understand the why and how of PLEs, but to
feel comfortable with them and able to work with students to create them.
Teacher perceptions of technology:
Staff from the schools involved, who were
supporting the workshop activity, had almost no knowledge of the software, and
learnt alongside the students. This
underscored the need for positive teacher and support staff interaction with
digital media, but, importantly, teachers and other staff embraced the
potential of the technology as they saw the students’ research, ideas and final
pieces developing with its use.
Teachers expressed some enthusiasm for developing more digital skills of
their own for use in the classroom, but did not feel that technology was the
only way forward for artists and designers of the future and demonstrated a
firm belief in traditional skills - that could be enhanced by technology, but
never replaced - and traditional teaching methods, with which they felt a lot
more confidence. There was an awareness
of the need for CPD in order to be effective in classrooms, hence schools, of
the future.
Development of situated assessment, or
assessment in real life situations that entail communication and collaboration,
such as on-site Holocaust education field trips, requires flexible use of
digital media and presentations, that inform and challenge the specific on-site
environment in ways that meet the needs of the 21st century. Technology allows us an unprecedented opportunity
to develop tasks in this context. There
are many improvements that could be added, virtual field trips and web quests,
among others. In our Holocaust project
we used a tour and subsequent commentary on the history of Auschwitz, then
development of tasks which incorporated higher order thinking skills and
metacognition, such as knowledge and how to use it, analysing and improving
cognitive processes, supporting reflection, critical analysis and different
thinking styles.
Feedback with technology gave rich
opportunities for students, both from immediate feedback and structured
feedback, using PDAs, social networking, Twitter, and links to staff and
educators. The Microsoft Word
application `Track Changes’ and the use of audio and podcasting to deliver
commentary on tasks that also included links to RSS feeds, were also useful in
this respect. Students also collaborated
using digital media on the project, which included peer group assessment using
all of the above technologies. Clearly,
however, not all young people are `digital natives’ (Prensky 2001); a small,
but significant, number needed help.
Some staff and educators were able to do this, but most of the help came
from the students’ peers, supporting much of the writing from Ito (2013) and
Tapscott (2008). It is possible, even
likely, that the reason for this was more about the younger generation’s
perceived `ownership’ of digital media than actual staff lack of knowledge of
it, that encouraged students to ask each other for help rather than turning to
an adult.
The extended use of Micro blogging sites such
as Twitter provided a useful means of enquiry by students who especially felt
empathetic through the Holocaust project toward other social issues and gave
them more confidence to ask, reflect and comment. For instance, during a session that was
attended by a Prime Minister’s representative, a student asked, `What is the
Prime Minister’s response to refugee arrivals?’
Anecdotally, this demonstrates that social networking sites offer wide
ranging opportunities, confidence building and are informative. Students who were connected to the Holocaust
`Lessons from Auschwitz’ blog (Holocaust Educational Trust 2014) used it to
facilitate reflection and, when questioned on their use of social networking,
related their connections to other relevant sites. They used all this in their e-portfolios,
which provided opportunities for students to collate digital artifacts such as
relevant podcasts, web links, video clips, written responses and
reflections.
Student reflections demonstrated good levels
of depth, knowledge and understanding:
e-portfolios also showed clear development of research skills. It could be argued that this would be the
case anyway and there would naturally be growth in maturity and skills
development over time. However,
e-portfolios have a number of significant advantages over paper-based
portfolios; a greater variety of stored artifacts multi-media driven,
accessibility by a larger, wider audience and easier storage among others. Apps have contributed to these advantages:
`OneNote’ and `EverNote’ have given us great possibilities in this respect. Easy storage, filing and retrieval of past
work to contribute to development of ideas also have the potential to lead to
the achievement of desired standards.
After the Auschwitz visit and during and after
the art workshop, social media was heavily used by students for peer assessment
and reviews, along with exchange of files and information. On completion of their work this developed
into informed discussion and commentary.
Significantly, used for this were Twitter and wikis, which were used as
a tool for the collaborative writing skills that were necessary for
presentations that students were to make in their `next steps’ project – a
follow-up that schools organised for themselves.
The experiences from the Holocaust projects
question the proposition by Carr (2008) that using technology on a frequent
basis leads to lack of concentration. He
refers specifically to the written page, however: the immersive concentration
demonstrated by our students was about focusing on a subject, finding out about
it through a variety of means – online research, hands-on situational
experience, talks, video and so on – a much broader spectrum of concentration
than reading a written page only.
Reading a page is one form of concentration; our students clearly
demonstrated that there is more breadth to concentration than this.
A final note must be made on assessment
procedures online. Whichever digital
media is used by students to enhance their learning, formative feedback is
highly valued by them.
`Increasing the frequency of
formative feedback is known to be
desirable, helping students
to judge their progress, reassure them or
spur them on, and thereby
contributing to improved retention and
progression. Computer-based
approaches afford opportunities for self-
paced and on-demand self
assessment.’ (McCulloch et al 2004, p.4)
It has been shown to improve students’
perceptions of learning as well as its usefulness to students who are reluctant
to engage in classroom discourse. The
collaborative aspect of digital learning is particularly valuable here; as learning
takes place in a social context.
`Collaboration is vital to
learning so that students understand questions, develop arguments, and share
meaning and conclusions among a community of learners.’ (Bender, 2003, p.8)
For those students who feel reluctant to be
heard in a public context, social media, online assessment and discourse are
highly instrumental in their learning and development. Within the Holocaust projects, assessment was
tracked through individual and group interviews and written feedback, both
formative and summative at different stages of the project. However, the real impact and real achievement
of these projects could not be summed up in data or assessments; it lay in the
spiritual and emotional responses of the learners. The information and visual development
afforded by technologies gave those students in the programme group a wider
cultural appreciation, broadened participation and personalised learning
experience.
Conclusion
A basic tenet of constructionism is that any
idea, developed and discovered by the learner, is valid, and that multiple
representations and interpretations of knowledge are encouraged. Learning is a social and active process, where
the focus shifts from teacher-directed to student-directed learning. For the students involved in the programme
group of the Holocaust project the focus shifted from student as passive
recipient of information to active constructor of knowledge. Constructionist thinking entails building
knowledge from personal experience. However,
quite how learning through technology serves in the development of experience
is a question needing further, future research.
The research carried out for this paper
contains a number of significant variables, notably the previous experience of
technology of the members of the programme groups, their previous experiences
when related to the instructor and the kind of instruction received at the
time. When both the programme group and
the control groups’ outcomes and motivation were observed, a picture arose that
both digital and traditional approaches to Art work were valid; students were
clearly seduced by the potentials of technology and worked well with it,
achieving exciting, creative responses.
Students in the control group also worked well, but with less
depth. Their use of materials, however,
showed a good level of skill. The
implication of this is that the research and investigation stages benefited
most from the use of technology in this case, although the use of Photoshop to
develop responses was also of considerable value.
In conclusion, the proposition that digital
media is exciting, motivating and improves achievement, needs modifying, in the
light of the experiment that was carried out, observations from it and the
review of the research of others, to the proposition that digital media needs
to be used in conjunction with a range of other teaching styles. This can be referred to as blended or hybrid
conditions for learning (Research and Evaluation Team, University of Minnesota
2011). In building schools for the
future, we must take account of the differences in learning styles that reflect
the differences in young people. It is
the pedagogy that makes the most difference to learning, but the teacher’s
willingness to embrace technology creatively and in step with young peoples’
lives has the potential to motivate significant groups of our future
generations.
Word Count: 10,182
REFERENCES
Attwell, G: (2007) The Personal Learning
Environments - the future of eLearning? eLearning
Papers: Vol 2, (1) [online] Available at www.elearningpapers.eu [9th May 2014]
Attwell, G. and Hughes, J (September 2010) Pedagogic
Approaches to Using Technology for Learning Lifelong
Learning UK p.4 – 65 [online]
Available at www.webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk [12th May 2014]
Austin, R., Smyth, J., Mallon, M., Rickard,
A., Metcalfe, N., Grace, A (2009) Cross-border digital school partnerships Dissolving Boundaries 1999-2009: [Online]
Available at http://www.dissolvingboundaries.org/4/research.html [9th September 2014]
Austin, R., Smyth, J., Mallon, M., Rickard,
A., Metcalfe, N., Grace, A (2010) Enterprise, ICT and intercultural learning An Interim Report on the Dissolving
Boundaries/Joint Business Council Enterprise Pilot Programme [Online]
Available at http://www.dissolvingboundaries.org/4/research.html [9th September 2014]
Bauerlein, M (2008) The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age
Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes our Future New
York, NY: Tarcher/Penguin
Bender, T. (2003) Discussion-based Online Teaching to Enhance Student Learning: Theory,
Practice and Assessment Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing LLC
Buckingham, D (March 2001) Media Education: a
Global strategy for Development A policy paper prepared for UNESCO p1-16 [online] Available at http://www.mediaculture-online.de: [11th
May 2014]
Bullen, M and Janes, D.P (2007) Making the Transition to E-Learning:
strategies and issues Hershey PA: Information Science Publishing
Burke, K., Guastello, F.,
Dunn, R., Griggs, S. A., Beasley, T. M., Gemake, J., Sinatra, R., &
Lewthwaite, B. (1999-2000) Relationship(s) between global-format and
analytic-format learning style assessments based on the Dunn and Dunn model National
Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal 13(1), 76-96.
Cazden, C. Cope, B.
Fairclough, N. Gee, J. et al (1996) A pedagogy of
multiliteracies: Designing social futures Harvard Educational Review: Vol. 66, (1) p.60-89 [online]
Available at http://www.pwrfaculty.net/summer-seminar/files/2011/12/new-london-multiliteracies.pdf: [25th
May 2014]
UK, Department for Education (2011) What is the evidence on technology supported
learning? London The National Archives (UK Gov) Available at http://www.education.gov.uk/a00201823/digital-technology-in-schools
[22nd May 2014]
Dunn, R., Dunn, K., Price, G. E (1989) Learning styles Inventory Lawrence, KS:
Price Systems
Eastmond, D. and Ziegahn, L. (1995) Computer Mediated Communication and the
Online Classroom in Distance Learning in Berge, Z.L, and Collins M.P (eds),
Instructional Design for the Online Classroom Cresskill NJ: Hampton
Press
Education, Audiovisual &
Culture Executive Agency (2010) MUVEnation:
Motivating pupils, linking teachers through active learning with Multi-Users
Virtual Environments http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/llp/project_reports/documents/comenius/all/com_mp_134221_muvenation.pdf [14th September 2014]
Ehlers, U.D. and Schneckenberg, D. (2010) Introduction
In U.D. Ehlers and D. Schneckenberg
(eds) Changing Cultures in Higher
Education: moving ahead to the future Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag
Flaherty, J. (2010) Bridging the Digital
Divide Academic Matters: the journal of
higher education October 2010 [online] Available at: www.academicmatters.ca/2010/10/bridging-the-digital-divide/ [12th
August 2014]
Gee, J. P. (2008) What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy: 2nd
Ed Pallgrave: McMillan
Harrison, C et al (2002) ImpaCT2: the impact of information and communication
technology on pupil learning and attainment University of London Institute
of Education [online] Available at www.dera.ioe.ac.uk
[15th September 2014]
Helsper, E. and Enyon R (2010) Digital
Natives: where is the evidence? British
Educational Research Journal 36 (3). 503-520 [online] Available at http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/27739/1/Digital_natives_(LSERO).pdf: [27th
May 2014]
Higgins, S. et al (2012) The Impact of Digital Technology on Learning
A Summary for the Education Endowment Foundation [Online] Available at http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/uploads/pdf/The_Impact_of_Digital_Technology_on_Learning_-_Executive_Summary_(2012).pdf
A Summary for the Education Endowment Foundation [Online] Available at http://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/uploads/pdf/The_Impact_of_Digital_Technology_on_Learning_-_Executive_Summary_(2012).pdf
[16th September
2014]
Holocaust Educational Trust (2014) Lessons From Auschwitz www.het.org.uk/index.php/lessons-from-auschwitz-general [September
2013]
UK, JISC Innovation Group
(2010) Assessment in a Digital Age A
guide to technology-enhanced assessment and feedback: [Online] Available
from: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearning/digiassass_eada.pdf [20th September 2014]
Ito, Mizuko (2013) Hanging Out, Messing Around and Geeking Out: Kids living and learning
with new media Cambridge MA: MIT Press
Marner, A. (2013) Digital Media Embedded in
Swedish Art Education Education Enquiry 4 (2) 355-373 [online]
Available at www.education-inquiry.net/index.php/edui/article/download/.../28814: [21st
May 2014]
McCulloch, M., Macleod, H.,
Mogey N (undated): Assessing Online: Post
workshop report: The University of
Edinburgh, Edinburgh: [Online] Available at http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/report/assessing-online-post-workshop-report.pdf?sfvrsn=20 [20th September 2014]
Monahan, Torin (2004) Digital Art Worlds:
Technology and Productions of Value in Art Education: in Foundations in Art:
Theory and Education in Review 26: p.7-15 [online] Available at http://torinmonahan.com/papers/Digital_Art_Worlds.htm [10th May 2014]
UK, Ofsted (2008): Good practice in re-engaging disaffected and reluctant students in
secondary schools: London (070255)
Pellegrino, J.W., Chudowsky, N., Glaser, R.
(eds) (2001) Knowing What Students Know: The
Science and Design of Educational Assessment Board on Testing and
Assessment, Center for Education, National Research Council [Online]: Available
at http://www.nap.edu/catalog/10019.html [20th September 2014]
Peppler, K. (2013) New Opportunities for
Interest-Driven Arts Learning in a Digital Age [Online] Indiana University: Available at http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/arts-education/key-research/Documents/New-Opportunities-for-Interest-Driven-Arts-Learning-in-a-Digital-Age.pdf [9th May 2014)]
Prenksy, M. (2001) Digital natives, digital
immigrants On the Horizon Vol. 9 No. 5, pp. 1-6
[onine] Available at http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf [8th May 2014]
Research and Evaluation Team, Office of
Information Technology (2011) Is
Technology-Enhanced Learning Effective? Recent Research and Best Practices:
[Online] University of Minnesota:
Available at www.oit.umn.edu/research-evaluation [19th September 2014]
Salmon, G (2005) Flying not Flapping: a
strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical innovation in higher
education institutes ALT-J, Research
in Learning Technology, 13, (3),
p. 201–218 [online] Available at
Sclater, N (2008) Web
2.0, Personal Learning Environments, and the Future of Learning Management
Systems Educause Centre for Applied
Research, Volume 2008 (13) [online] Available at http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERB0813.pdf [June 5th 2014]
Somekh, B., Underwood, J.,
Underwood, C. et al (2007) ICT Test Bed
Project London: BECTA
Selwyn, N. (2011) The Digital
Native: Myth and Reality Aslib
Proceedings 61 (4) 364-379 [online]
Available at http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~tefko/Courses/e553/Readings/Selwyn%20dig%20natives,%20Aslib%20Proceedings%202009.pdf [2nd September 2014]
Tapscott, D. (2008) Grown Up Digital: how the net generation is changing the world NY: McGraw-Hill
Wheeler, S
(2009) Learning in Collaborative Spaces in Wheeler, S (ed) Connecting
Minds Emerging Cultures: Cybercultures in Online Learning Charlotte, North Carolina: Information in Age
Publishing Inc.
White, D. & Le Cornu, A (2011) Visitors
and Residents: A new typology for online engagement First Monday 39 (5) 775-786 [online] Available at http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3171/3049 [2nd September 2014]
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Armstrong, V and Curran, S (2006) Developing a
collaborative model of research using digital video Computers and Education, 46 (3), 336-347.
Bassey M (1995) Creating Education Through Research Edinburgh: British Educational
Research Association.
Beardsley, L., Cogan-Drew, D. and Olivero, F.
(2007) Videopaper: bridging research and practice for pre-service and
experienced teachers In Goldman, R.,
Pea, R.D., Barron, B. and Derry, S.J. (Eds.)
Video Research in the Learning Sciences Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Clarke, D. (2002). The Learner's Perspective
Study: methodology as the enactment of theory of practice, Paper presented at
the interactive symposium, 'International Perspectives on Mathematics
Classrooms', at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 1-5:
Available at http://www.lps.iccr.edu.au/images/Publications/AERA_Clarke_Method.pdf
Facer, K., Furlong, J., Sutherland, R. and
Furlong, R. (2003) Screenplay: Children
and computing in the home London: Routledge.
Hensley, D. (2013) Good E-Practice Guidelines for
disadvantaged learners in VET: Melbourne, Victoria: Flexible Learning
Advisory Group [Online]: Available at http://flexiblelearning.net.au/wp-content/uploads/Good-e-practice-guidelines-for-disadvantaged-learners-in-VET-Final-Report.pdf
Olivero, F., Sutherland, R. & John, P.
(2004) Learning lessons with ICT: Using videopapers to transform teachers’
professional knowledge Cambridge Journal
of Education 34 (2) 179-191.
Vaidhyanathan, S (2008) Generation Myth: in The Chronicle of Higher Education [Online]
Available at http://www.itma.vt.edu/modules/spring11/efund/lesson3/Vaidhyanathan2008MythOfDigitalNatives.pdf
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge
University Press.
APPENDIX 1
PRE-TEST QUESTIONNAIRE
Gender: Male Female
1.
On
average, how many hours per week do you use a computer for study purposes?
How many hours per week do you use a computer in total?
|
||
Weekly time spent on a computer
for studying purposes
|
Weekly time spent on a computer in
total.
|
|
No answer
|
||
0 hrs
|
||
1 – 5 hrs
|
||
6 – 10 hrs
|
||
11 – 15 hrs
|
||
16 – 20 hrs
|
||
21 – 30 hrs
|
||
30 + hrs
|
2.
Are
you capable of managing the following tasks using ICT?
|
|||
YES
|
NO
|
NOT
SURE
|
|
Can you use a printer?
|
|||
Can you file transfer on the web?
|
|||
Can you use a Virtual Learning
Environment?
|
|||
Can you develop spreadsheets?
|
|||
Can you make a presentation using PowerPoint?
|
|||
Can you retrieve information from the library databases?
|
|||
Can you handle attached files in emails?
|
|||
Can you use search engines to retrieve general information on the web?
|
|||
Can you word process?
|
3. What are
your experiences of using ICT creatively for learning?
|
|||
YES
|
NO
|
NOT
SURE
|
|
Have you, or do you, use a video camera?
|
|||
Have you, or do you, use any creative programmes, e.g. video editing
programmes, sound editing, etc?
|
|||
Have you, or do you, use any image processing programmes, e.g.
Photoshop, Flash etc?
|
|||
Do you have a mobile phone or PDA that you use for media, e.g. music
or film? Taking photos and emailing them or uploading them to Facebook etc?
|
|||
Do you think that you need the skills mentioned in the above
questions?
|
|||
Do you have an internet connection at home?
|
|||
Do you feel that you have enough access to computers at school?
|
|||
Do you have access to a photocopier or scanner?
|
By
taking part in this study, you are agreeing to the use of your responses in
data collection and analysis. You have
the right to withdraw from this activity if you do not agree. Please understand that the answers you
provide are anonymous.
Learning
Style Inventory
On a scale of 1
– 5 with 1 being not important and 5 being very important, how do you rate
the following influences on your learning?
|
|||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
|
Noise
|
|||||
Music
|
|||||
Lighting
|
|||||
Temperature
|
|||||
Comfort/seating
|
|||||
Self-motivation
|
|||||
Structured
classes
|
|||||
Perseverance
|
|||||
Responsibility
|
|||||
Working
alone
|
|||||
Working
in pairs
|
|||||
Working
in a team
|
|||||
Working
with an adult
|
|||||
Have
you eaten?
|
|||||
Time
of day
|
|||||
Moving
around
|
|||||
Quiet
reflection
|
|||||
Being
impulsive
|
By taking part in
this study, you are agreeing to the use of your responses in data collection
and analysis. You have the right to
withdraw from this activity if you do not agree. Please understand that the answers you
provide are anonymous.
APPENDIX 2
Post-test
questionnaire
By
taking part in this study, you are agreeing to the use of your responses in
data collection and analysis. You have
the right to withdraw from this activity if you do not agree. Please understand that the answers you
provide is anonymous.
Answer the
following questions using a scale of 1 – 5, (1 being very poor, 5 being
excellent),
1. How do you rate your ability to use
appropriate and effective search terms and queries?
|
||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
2. How much do
you feel that new technologies enable and enhance your development and
collaboration with teachers?
|
||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
3. Do you think that the different ways
digital technologies are being incorporated into the classroom helps you?
|
||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
4. Do you think that teachers’ personal use of
and attitudes toward different digital technologies in the classroom was
useful to you?
|
||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
5. Overall, would you say that the impact of
the Internet on your research habits have been mostly positive?
|
||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6. To what extent did technology aids make it
harder or easier to follow the narrative of a particular part of the project,
on a scale of 1 – 5 (1 being hard, 5 being easy).
|
||||
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
7. Did you find that tuition for the
technology used took more or less time than traditional teaching/instruction?
|
||
More
|
Less
|
Not sure
|
8. Which programmes did you find most useful?
|
||
9. Overall,
what would you say is the most NEGATIVE aspect of today’s access to conduct
research online?
|
||
10. What
did you find was the advantage or disadvantage of audio and PDAs on the visit
to the site?
|
Appendix 5
Ethics Protocol
In the students’ application
to enroll on the Holocaust Project, consent was sought and obtained from their
parents/carers to visit a sight of genocide and to follow this up with visual
responses. Initial information to
parents/carers established the nature of data gathering that would take place. All
information on individual students’ backgrounds, student responses to the
material and the visual and emotional impact of the visit to Auschwitz would be
monitored for their own safety as well as for the benefit of the educators and
other staff involved, as the project involved very sensitive issues. Observations, they understood, would be made
in the case that they might have some emotional upset and educators and other
staff would need to be very aware of issues and situations that might arise. Staff, at all levels, were instructed on the
protocol.
Students were made aware, on
the questionnaires that they used, that the data and responses they gave would
be used for analysis for the benefit of future educational projects and for
other students undertaking similar project work. They were also made aware that it would be of
benefit to the educators.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
The Secret Annex Online
The Secret Annex Online : The Secret Annex Online is a virtual, 3D version of the building at 263 Prinsengracht in Amsterdam where Anne Fran...
-
The MOOCs and e-portfolios. ABSTRACT. Digital tools are increasingly being used to support teaching in higher education. T...
-
Using Technology in the class. There was constant projection of film connecting to the issues of the day, which I had made. T...
-
Constructivism is basically a theory. Based on observation and scientific study about how people learn. It says that people construct t...