New training itineraries for the acquisition of digital competence and collaborative work. According student demands.
Author(s):
María-Teresa Becerra-Traver (presenting / submitting) Prudencia Gutierrez-Esteban (presenting)
Conference:
ECER 2016
Format:
Paper

Session Information

16 SES 10 A, Developing Digital Literacy

Paper Session

Time:
2016-08-25
15:30-17:00
Room:
OB-H1.49 (ALE 2)
Chair:
Philippe Gabriel

Contribution

In recent years, advances in technology have made possible that people work together, regardless of how far they are. Web 2.0 is not only useful to support formal education learning, but the ways in which these technologies are an important part for the outside school student life have to be considered (Grunwald Associates, 2007; Green and Hannon, 2007). Therefore, we must be aware that this is a change and impact on learning process design (Torres-Kompen, Edirisingha & Mobbs, 2008). However, Personal Learning Environments also bring new teaching methodologies to get successful learning so teachers must rethink its uses (Johnson & Sherlock, 2014), reorder their methodologies and go beyond usual restrictive environments, a migration from a controlled environment by teachers to a collaborative work environment led by the students themselves must occur (Elliott, 2010).

Nowadays, anyone with an Internet connection can publish their thoughts through blogs, forums, videos... This leads to the increase of new information sources. Coates (2009) indicates that we are flooded with petabytes of varying quality information. But how do students manage this information?, is there any pattern in the incorporation and selection of these means?, how are they incorporated?, which are the links between formal and informal learning in digital environments?.

According McElvaney (2009) to create a Personal Learning Network, it is necessary firstly  to explore existing personal web technologies, secondly to see where they are and finally how to use them. PLE is an environment where people, communities, tools and means interact in a very flexible manner. It promises students important learning outcomes and it provides them greater autonomy and managed tool control along their learning (Wilson, 2008 and Peña-López, 2010).

Learner creates its own Learning Network in the Personal Learning Environments. This person decides which virtual community will be useful for him/her learning and/or where to learn and gather daily updated information. However, this network to be created and to take advantage of its elements requires to invest time and effort by participants. Thus, all members of this learning community must be active and proactive, namely, they must share and not be mere observers (Utecht, 2010).

As Alvarez collected (2010):

The supply of ICT solutions that was designed to embrace learning management tasks is not enough to ensure a comprehensive answer of potential user demand, nor effectiveness in the performance of these tasks -transposed into objective achievements determined by teaching and learning processes -.(p. 321).

So Personal Learning Environments arise as an alternative approach to the heterogeneity of tools and training virtual environments (with different formats and modalities). This requires a digital scenario that brings together solutions that are currently underway.

Given this premise, in this paper it is presented the experiences, voices and statements of a virtual community of practice created within a Teaching Innovation Project in Higher Education. In this virtual community participants discuss and address issues of concern related to Education.

Method

Participants and design In this study 82 narrative interventions from participants where analysed. The statements provided by the participants at the virtual community of practice were also clustered according to the structure of the Blog in four content blocks: 1) Home; 2) Teacher proposals; 3) Student Proposals of and 4) Catch-all. Both second and third content block included three topics with the intention to express opinions and positive arguments, critics and improvement suggestions related to the discussion topics raised. The proposal could be a phrase, a text, a question, a real case, but always in the educational field. Through these content blocks, students addressed issues such as teacher training at the university, critical Capacity and training or educational Change. These posts were identified together with the pseudonym or signed of the person. At the same time, the contributions made in the discussion groups carried out with the same sample, where 20 people participated in four focus groups. The sample were composed by students of Elementary Education, Early Childhood Education and Psychopedagogy University Bachelor Degrees at a Spanish university, aged between 18 and 30 years. Procedure For the election of the topics included in the group blog PLEUEx, focus group sessions with students belonging to Teaching Innovation Project were conducted. A purposive sample from the whole population of the project was selected. This type of sampling was conducted because they were individuals whom it had easy access. At the end of the project, each intervention in the Blog were studied. The purpose was to find unique aspects that allow us to elaborate a new and more meaningful information.

Expected Outcomes

We have identified six categories from registered interventions. Then, these categories have been used in shaping different patterns of composition and elaboration of PLE by university students. These categories are: positive aspects of the teacher teaching, critical aspects of the teachers, teacher suggestions, positive aspects from students, critical aspects of students and proposals to improve the virtual community. The issue with a higher number of messages reported is “Critical aspects of students” within the Block “Proposals of students” and mainly “Positive aspects of teachers” included in the Block “Proposals of teachers”. The fragments extracted as a result of answers and contributions, both offered in the online community and in discussion groups are presented according to the categories identified from the data gathered. These are at the same time related to the basic axis of this research: collaborative work, digital competence and autonomy. 1. Teacher Training in our Faculty It is in force that the work with others enjoys and means less effort. This it has been identified as a personal development, rather than a job. It is reflected, therefore, with a more successful and comfortable learning. 2. Criticism and training capacity. They prefer short-term tasks, although several ones, instead of more arduous tasks. Obtaining short-term learning outcomes affect the continuity of further study. If students don’t see clearly the learning objectives, they do not have enough motivation to continue studying. However, they assess the need of training to become a well-trained person. 3. Educational change. It is crucial not only having some knowledge, but also it is necessary to know how to transmit it: from previous knowledge, to know how to convey ideas, to supervise given information and even getting feedback on how each lecture has been carried out.

References

Álvarez, S. (2010). En busca del “Auleph”. Aproximación a los entornos digitales de gestión del aprendizaje. Revista Icono14, A8/Especial, 303-327. Available in: http://www.icono14.net Coates, K. (2009). Knowledge overload. Inside Higher Ed. Available in: http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/03/23/coates Elliott, C. (2010). We are not alone: the power of Personal Learning Networks. Synergy, 7(1), 47-50. Green, H. & Hannon, C. (2007). Their Space: Education for a Digital Generation. Demos: London. Grunwald Associates LLC. (2007). Creating and Connecting: Research and Guidelines on Social-and Educational- Networking. National School Boards Association. Johnson, M. W., & Sherlock, D. (2014). Beyond the personal learning environment: Attachment and control in the classroom of the future. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(2), 146-164. doi:10.1080/10494820.2012.745434 McElvaney, J. (2009). Weaving a Personal Web: Using online technologies to create customized, connected, and dynamic learning environments. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology /La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 35(2), 1-12. Peña-López, I. (2010). Personal Learning Environments: blurring the edges of formal and informal learning. Working Paper. Torres-Kompen, R., Edirisingha, P. & Mobbs, R. (2008). Building web 2.0-based personal learning environments-a conceptual framework. Fifth EDEN Research Workshop: Paris. Available in: https://lra.le.ac.uk/bitstream/2381/4398/1/EDEN%20ResWksp%202008%20Torres%20Kompen%20et%20al%20Web%202.0%20PLE%20paper.pdf Utecht, J. (2010). Reach: Building communities for professional development. Jeff Utecht: USA. Wilson, S. (2008). Patterns of Personal Learning Environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 16(1), 17-34. doi: 10.1080/10494820701772660.

Author Information

María-Teresa Becerra-Traver (presenting / submitting)
University of Extremadura
Department of Educational Sciences
Badajoz
University of Extremadura, Spain

Update Modus of this Database

The current conference programme can be browsed in the conference management system (conftool) and, closer to the conference, in the conference app.
This database will be updated with the conference data after ECER. 

Search the ECER Programme

  • 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, please use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference and the conference agenda provided in conftool.
  • If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.