16 SES 04, ICT in Higher Education
In this research we have raised the following questions:
- What are the main learning activities that university teachers carry out in their classrooms?
- What kinds of technologies do university teachers use to support the development of learning sequences?
- What are the processes by which university teachers develop the techno-pedagogical content knowledge?
- What are the components and patterns that characterize the design of the learning with ICT by university teachers
The progressive implementation of the European Area of Higher Education, known as the Bologna process, has introduced a broad set of reforms and innovations in university teaching. From the point of view of teaching, steps have been taken to promote a model of education that promotes independent learning by students. It is teachers who lead these changes, including methodological innovations, in which ICTs are part of the process.
Technology is becoming a clear ally of teachers in the design process of students’ learning. The process of technological implementation at universities and in the classroom has been accompanied by major efforts from the teaching staff. Initially, staff development activities were centered on the need for technological literacy among teachers. The training model used consisted of training in technologies. It was the case of teaching teachers to use computer programs, independently of their actual educational use (Koehler & Mishra, 2005; Koehler, Mishra, & Yahya, 2007; Mishra & Koehler, 2006).
However, despite the fact that the process of technological implementation has been far from successful, it is thanks to the incorporation of technologies that there are a number of projects that have generated change and improvements in university teaching. In this case, what the authors of this paper are searching is directly linked to what a number of other authors—including (Harris, Mishra, & Koehler, 2009; Koehler & Mishra, 2009; Mishra & Koehler, 2006), (Yeh, Hsu, Wu, Hwang, & Lin, 2013) and (Angeli & Valanides, 2009)—have proven about what has been called techno-pedagogical content knowledge.
From this standpoint, the successful incorporation of technologies takes place when teachers focus their attention on the process of designing learning experiences, rather than on the actual technological resources. We understand that designing teaching materials by sequencing a set of learning activities and tasks for the student, requires that the teacher have a profound knowledge of the material that he or she is teaching, as well as the pedagogical content knowledge required to transform that content into teachable knowledge (Shulman, 1986).
The term “learning design” is used to refer to the human activity in which people outline and plan the learning activities that a person must do to learn (Koper & Tattersall, 2005). As Koper & Bennett (2008) specified, that learning design refers to the learning activities that are necessary to attain specific learning objectives by the student. These, for the most part, are carefully sequenced in keeping with pedagogical principles. As well as the resources and necessary support mechanisms to help the student in his or her development and understanding. The learning design specifically defines under which circumstances said activities are to be performed by the students so that they achieve determined learning goals (G. Conole, 2007; R. Koper & Olivier, 2004).
When a teacher designs learning material for students—with or without technologies—what he or she is doing is a representation or anticipation of a sequence of actions, processes and relationships, which informs other teachers and students about the itinerary to be followed to learn specific content or skills (Conole, 2012).
Agostinho, S. (2006). The use of a visual learning design representation to document and communicate teaching ideas. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education: Who’s Learning? Whose Technology?, Sydney. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, R. (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning. Oxon: Routledge. Boyle, T. (2010). Layered learning design: Towards an integration of learning design and learning object perspectives. Computers & Education, 54, 661–668. Boyle, T. & Ravenscroft, A. (2012). Context and deep learning design. Computers & Education, 59, 1224–1233. Conole, G. (2012). Designing for Learning in an Open World. London: Springer. Cox, S. & Graham, C. R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in Practice: Using an Elaborated Model of the TPACK Framework to Analyze and Depict Teacher Knowledge. TechTrends, 53(5). Harris, J. & Hofer, M. (2009). Instructional planning activity types as vehicles for curriculum-based TPACK development. In C.D Madux (Eds.), Research highlights in technology and teacher education. Chesapeake: Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE). Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Examining some assumptions and limitations of research on the effects of emerging technologies for teaching and learning in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 536–543. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. Koper, R., & Bennett, S. (2008). Learning Design: Concepts. In H. H. Adelsberger, J. M. Pawlowski, Kinshuk & D. Sampson (Eds.), Handbook on Information Technologies for Education and Training. Heidelberg: Springer. Koper, R., & Olivier, B. (2004). Representing the Learning Design of Units of Learning. Educational Technology & Society, 7(3), 97-111. Laurillard, D. (2006). Learning design futures: What are our ambitions? Paper presented at the JISC Online Conference: Innovating e-Learning. Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. New York, Routledge. Oliver, R., Herrington, A., Herrington, J., & Reeves, T. (2007). Representing Authentic Learning Designs Supporting the Development of Online Communities of Learners. Journal of Learning Design, 2(2). Schmidt, D. et al. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK): the development and validation of an assessment instrument for pre-service teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. Vo. 42, No. 2, pp. 123-149. Shulman, l. (1992). Renewing the Pedagogy of Teacher Education: The Impact of Subject Specific Conceptions of Teaching. Paper presentado en el Simposium sobre Didácticas Específicas en la Formación de Profesores, Santiago de Compostela.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.