Theory, Reports and Trends
Technological pedagogical and content knowledge (TPaCK) is the art of using ICT resources to teach a given subject area (Teaching Teachers for the Future, n.d.). As the image illustrates, TPaCK recognises that knowing one’s subject and knowing ICT skills is different from being able to use ICT to effectively teach the subject.
The theory of using ICT in education goes beyond merely putting the content into a digital format. This site: Activity Types (College of William & Mary, School of Education), offers examples of the many activities that can be enhanced with the use of digital technology.
Inquiry-based and project-based learning can make great use of computers and the internet. In addition to using a search-engine to find articles, images and graphs, the internet can connect students with people in different areas, including students in other countries. Online discussion and collaboration allow for a more global approach to education. Websites such as Level-Up Village specialise in this form of communication.
Virtual field trips allow for students to explore, even when a physical trip would be impractical or prohibitively expensive.
In Decoding learning: The proof, promise and potential of digital education, (Luckin, R., Bligh, B., Manches, A., Ainsworth, S., Crook, C., & Noss, R. 2012), Luckin et al propose there are eight acts of learning that can improve performance:
-
Learning through inquiry
-
Learning from experts (including but not limited to teachers)
-
Learning with others (including but not limited to classmates)
-
Learning through making
-
Learning through exploring
-
Learning through practising
-
Learning from assessment (including self, peer, and school assessments)
-
Learning in and across settings (including the environment and subject-focuses)
They also state:
“no technology has an impact on learning in its own right; rather, its impact depends upon the way in which it is used.”
The paper provides details about how technology supports each of those acts of learning. For example, game-based learning assists with learning through practice. It is noted that using a game as a reward element is not as effective as using a game where the skills being practised are actively a part of the game. In terms of 21st century learning, the ‘4 Cs’ (Communication, Collaboration, Critical thinking, and Creativity) are receiving a lot of attention. Whilst these are not new skills, they are the now seen as the core skills that learners will need going forward into an economically and industrially uncertain future. Organisations like New Pedagogies for Deep Learning, add that Character and
Citizenship should be included in these skills for a total of 6 Cs. Whilst character might not be something that can be taught through direct instruction, a learner’s personal strengths in that regard can be fostered through
encouragement and opportunity. The use of ICT enables students to increase their experience in a wider community.
There have been many reports over the years that analyse trends in ICT and attempt to predict the future of education.
The most recent Horizon report highlights ten important aspects of the education environment that increase successful learning:
-
A cultural transformation within schools:
-
Classrooms laid out for active learning, and the inclusion of robotics and coding, promote experimentation, creativity and complex thinking.
-
Inter- and multi-disciplinary learning: This leads to more rounded education and skill-sets that are needed in the outside world.
-
Widespread use of technology does not, by itself, lead to equal learner achievement: Technology helps but can’t compensate entirely for gaps in engagement and performance due to social factors.
-
Continuous assessment of learning is essential to learner’s needs.
-
Digital fluency is more than understanding the technology: Learning needs more than isolated technology skills. It must go towards deep understanding that can be applied to new concepts and contexts.
-
Authentic learning is a necessity: Hands-on experiences promote self-awareness and self-reliance while stimulating curiosity and engagement. Virtual Reality and Makerspaces are two examples of this application.
-
The role of good teaching is evolving – It can’t be replaced: Students need guides to help them navigate projects. Schools must encourage and reward good teaching practices.
-
Schools are prioritizing computational thinking: Skills of using computers to gather and analyse data are increasingly necessary, even for those not engaged with coding jobs.
-
Learning spaces must reflect new approaches in education. Active learning pedagogies (e.g. incorporating VR, AR, Making and the internet of things) need a corresponding shift in the learning environment.
^Text paraphrased from the Horizon Report.
The Horizon report goes on to identify short, mid, and long-term predictions over the next 5 years and beyond:
Short-term (1-2 years)
Coding as a literacy; Rise of STEAM learning
Mid-Term (3-5 years)
Growing focus on measuring learning; Redesigning learning spaces
Long-term (5+ years)
Advancing cultures of innovation; Deeper learning approaches.
The key technological innovations identified by the report in those same time-periods are:
Short-term: Makerspaces, Robotics (in terms of classroom application)
Mid-term: Analytics technologies, VR
Long-term: Artificial Intelligence, The internet of things
The Horizon report also looks at significant challenges and classifies them as ‘solvable’, ‘difficult’ (meaning the problem is clear but the solution hasn’t been devised), and ‘wicked’ (meaning the problem is too complex to define and therefore can’t be easily solved).
There are issues with some aspects of this categorisation. For example, ‘Teaching computational thinking’ is not a ‘difficult’ problem in the sense that it can be solved through simple pedagogies. Giving the students the chance to engage with robotics and computational systems from a young age leads to familiarisation and competence. Like learning any other skill, it is merely a case of finding a way to connect to the material and then practising. A traditional artist may say “I can’t do computational thinking, and I don’t need it.” but give them the choice of choosing a brush, mixing paints, stretching a canvas on an easel, and finding a subject to paint, they will be easily able to tell you the optimal order of activities and give clear instructions. If the mix of paints fails to produce the right pigment, they will be able to analyse why and retrace their steps. That’s even before we look at the rise of digital arts technologies.
Similarly, while ‘Sustaining innovation through leadership changes’ is indeed a complex problem, it is not one that can’t be addressed. The introduction of wider policies, cemented in a ‘school constitution’ agreed upon by the school board (or at higher, state levels), can make the stalling of innovation into an active decision, rather than a passive event. This would place pressure on future leaders to continue the pathway of innovation to keep education of future generations at the forefront of society’s needs.
​
As the Horizon report itself acknowledges, there are recurring trends that perhaps don’t come to fruition in the time-frame predicted. It is therefore necessary to proceed with an open mind and flexible attitude, while still pushing the boundaries forwards.
Growth in percentage of internet users from 1990 to 2014
​
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Percentage_of_individuals_using_the_Internet_1990-2014.gif
Looking at the growth rate of internet users and the current penetration rates, it is clear that the world is becoming more and more connected. The trend is towards a near total coverage and students need to be prepared for a future that will include online creativity, collaboration and competition.
These are skills that can be developed alongside the corresponding face to face ones.
Another report worth considering is the Australian Education and Technologies Trends Report 2018 (ACCE. 2018). This covers some of the same ground as the Horizon Report and agrees on some key issues, especially in regard to Makerspaces and flexible learning environments. However, the ACCE report puts the use of Makerspaces outside the classroom at least for the same time-frame. The report identifies cost issues regarding the establishment of more flexible learning spaces and access to technologies like 3D-printing. 1:1 device programs could also have high initial costs, though a BYOD policy could alleviate that with a need for school devices only for the poorer students. But there could also be initial cost-savings with a move to subscription-based software licenses and, at least for some students, the use of personal home and school-use licenses.
The ACCE report suggests that teachers will be primarily concerned with digital presentation, online video access, and effective internet filtering. This is short-sighted and overlooks the desire for teachers to embrace effective learning strategies whether or not it involves direct instruction. While the above is important, teachers will also be interested in technology that helps with cross-curricular, project-based learning, and professional development training that helps them to make the most of the new resources.
As with the Horizon report, ACCE predicts growth in project-based learning, Deep Learning, and the 4Cs.
When predicting the future, it is important to have a flexible outlook. As Joseph Voros illustrates with the ‘Voroscope’, there are different potential futures, with some being more likely than others.
Looking at the available reports, the areas where probable and preferable futures overlap are likely to include the rise of online collaboration, creative and design thinking, the use of VR and AR, and student-led education. Advancement in technology will include the replacement of smart-phones with wearable-tech driven by voice and gesture interfaces, however, this will take longer to filter down to the educational setting due to the cost of new technology.
The Australian Curriculum (ACARA. 2018) emphasises the need for technologies education by having two core teaching areas (‘Design and Technologies’, and
Voroscope – Voros (2017) Retrieved from:
https://thevoroscope.com/2017/02/24/the-futures-cone-use-and-history/
‘Digital Technologies’) as well as the General Capability of ‘ICT Capability’ that runs through the whole curriculum. The latter especially recognises that ICT skills are no longer restricted to specific areas of industry but are necessary in all aspects of the modern world.
Australian Curriculum (ACARA https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/ . 2018.)
There are, on the other hand, those who are against the introduction or expansion of digital technologies in schools. The Guardian Online published an article (Glaser, E. 2018.) entitled “Children are tech addicts – and schools are the pushers”. This somewhat provocative title is included in this report as an example of the kinds of public opinion that a school will have to deal with if it is to effectively incorporate ICT into its teaching and learning cycle. The article puts forward some of the more common arguments against the use of digital technologies in schools. For instance:
“According to Public Health England, extended screen use correlates to emotional distress, anxiety and depression in children. The American College of Paediatricians associates it with sleep problems, obesity, increased aggression and low self-esteem.”
​
This, however, is only the case when screen use is unsupervised, limited to games and social media, and most importantly, at the expense of face to face interaction and off-screen, hands-on activities. This extreme view is not recommended in this report, where the use of digital technology is being put forward as a part of the learning environment, not the whole.
Another example from the article:
“A 2015 OECD report found that the impact of computers on pupil performance was “mixed, at best”, and in most cases computers were “hurting learning”.”
That report (Peña-López, I. 2015) cites the PISA rankings but also notes that the failure is not with the technology but rather the way in which it is used. The report also notes:
“...it takes educators time and effort to learn how to use technology in education...Meanwhile, online tools can help teachers and school leaders exchange ideas and inspire each other, transforming what used to be an individual’s problem into a collaborative process.”
And:
“In the end, technology can amplify great teaching, but [it] can’t replace poor teaching.”
The Guardian article states:
“Silicon Valley executives restrict their own social media use and send their own kids to tech-free schools.”
​This point doesn’t take into account that those Silicon Valley executives can afford to send their children to well-funded schools with a low ratio of students to teachers. Nor does it recognise that those executives have sufficient means to enable their children to learn the computational side of things at home and probably ensure that their children are well-travelled - something not always available to families.
It is not being suggested in this report that students at schools should be spending lots of time on social media. The use of social-media-style platforms like EdModo does not lead to excessive time spent on it. It is however useful for communicating between teachers and students, and can involve parents too. The solution is neither to remove technology nor to use it as a crutch but to use it as a tool.
Finally, the Guardian article ends with:
“I don’t want my kids fed into the sausage machine of standardised testing and the bureaucratic “information economy”. I don’t want them to become robotic competitors to the robots we are told are taking their future jobs.”
Which is an excellent point to remember. Education should never be about passing a standardised test, nor about developing simplistic robotic thinking in the students. This, however, was a problem long before computers entered the classroom. The industrial model of education led to standardising and factory-line education. Digital technology, used appropriately, can actually enhance critical and creative skills.
References:
Teaching Teachers for the Future. What is TPaCK? n.d. https://www.ttf.edu.au/what-is-tpack/what-is-tpack.html
College of William & Mary, School of Education. (n.d.). Learning Activity Types. http://activitytypes.wm.edu/
Freeman, A., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., and
Hall Giesinger, C. (2017). NMC/CoSN Horizon Report 2017 K-12 Edition. (Retrieved from https://www.nmc.org/publication/nmccosn-horizon-report-2017-k-12-edition/)
Zagami, J., Redmond, P., Joy, T., Flintoff, K., Speranza, A., Shires, R., Harris, N., Sleeman, T., Canning, C., Vernon, K., Sercombe, P., Madsen, S., Finch, R., Jones, M., Hogan, A., Urban, S., Moreton, B., Harrison, Y., Hunt, CJ., Lonergan, P., Finger, G., Feain, P., Levins, M., Angell, J., Jorgensen, M., Brandenburg, T., Stanhope, L., Banjer, F., Docherty, K., Thompson, P., Stephen, A., Rablin, A., Garvey, L., King, J., & Campbell, C. (2018). Australian Education Technologies Trends 2018. Australian Council for Computers in Education.
Voros, J. (2017). The Futures Cone, Use and History. (Retrieved from https://thevoroscope.com/2017/02/24/the-futures-cone-use-and-history/)
Luckin, R., Bligh, B., Manches, A., Ainsworth, S., Crook, C., & Noss, R. (2012). Decoding learning: The proof, promise and potential of digital education. (Retrieved from http://apo.org.au/node/32254)
ACARA. (2018). Australian Curriculum. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
McEachen , J. Fullan, M. Quinn, J. 2018. New Pedagogies for Deep Learning 2018 Global Report (Retrieved from npdl.global)
Glaser, E. (2018, January 26). The Guardian Online, Australia Edition. Children are tech addicts – and schools are the pushers. (Retrieved on October 10, 2018 from:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/26/children-tech-addicts-schools)
Peña-López, I. (2015). Students, Computers and Learning. Making the Connection. PISA, OECD Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/students-computers-and-learning/executive-summary_9789264239555-2-en