In the “call for proposals” we can read that “transition within education is never an easy or smooth process; it raises questions and creates power struggles due to a diversity of values, interests, motives, positioning and statuses.” The last decades we have observed and experienced how digital technologies impacts on how we live our lives and work, but also on how students relate to knowledge, learn and express themselves. But what happens with how educators educate? And what are the consequences of attempts to transform learning, teaching and assessment practices to better take advantage of the digital resources and develop skills described to be needed in our 21st century, or resist change?
In a European context, Norwegian schools are of interest studying issues about technology and education. First, Norway is the OECD-country with best Internet-coverage in schools and private. Second, 93,3 % of our high-school students had their own laptops in 2013 (Hatlevik, Egeberg, Guðmundsdóttir, Loftsgarden, & Loi, 2013). Third, in our national curriculum “ability to use digital tools” is listed as a basic skill on par with being able to express oneself orally, read, write and calculate (KD, 2006). Fourth, from 2008 digital exams have been standard in high school. Introducing digital exams does not mean that the tasks have changes radically, but tasks are solved digitally. The premises for teaching, learning and assessment have changed with Norwegian students’ access to digital technologies.
The following research question has guided my work:
ICT in Norwegian and Media subjects: Which practices develop with students’ access to technologies, and how do these practices challenge teachers?
Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) (Engeström, 1987) is used as main theoretical framework for understanding the challenges emerging in technology-rich classroooms, and how teachers approach these challenges. The theory describes mechanisms with impact on development and transformation of institutional activities, and has been used to analyze how teachers from two different subjects contribute to development of institutional and subject-specific didactical practices. This is a theory about institutional learning, but individuals, here teachers, are paid attention, because institutional learning usually starts on the initiatives of individuals who respond expansively to challenging contradictions.
