We far to often understand higher education as a place where voice, images and emotions have been less than welcomed, and in particular, images have been regarded as dubious. We believe that emotions, voice and image deserve more attention and space in the curricula in higher education. Obviously, the education of arts and artistry, and to some degree professional studies have been more accepting of emotions and voice as expressions in various educational settings. Our topic is how we can argue that other studies than the obvious may improve their quality of teaching by means of engaging students using their voice, their images and express them in digital media. We find that Digital Storytelling is a way of expressing the unity of these elements in a profound way. Relating these elements to a model of the curriculum in HE derived from Ernest Boyer's model of the four scholarships, we will track the results from a pedagogical development programme with the aim of diffusing the method of Digital Storytelling" to the entire university. 

We have previously argued for the importance of a "visual bildung" in higher education, and intend to develop the arguments for a "visual turn" into the trivial disciplinary context of HE teaching and learning, which is very text-oriented. Our attention is how we may explore the potential "reading" images and "seeing" the verbal, and welcome the less obvious, the ambiguous and creative element of "mixed texts" in curricula of, management studies, economics, accounting as well as teacher education and doctoral education. This particular angle is inspired by the way W.J.T Mitchell regards images and visuality as “a specific point of irritation in contemporary theory, an unsolved problem or anomaly” (McNamara 1996). Our notion of Bildung as a concept and phenomenon, is however, located in a continental discourse, inspired by Hug (2011), Müller (2007, 2008) and Løvlie (2003).

The philosopher of higher education, Professor Ronald Barnett, has consistently argued that the textual and precisely accentuated knowledge in higher education needs to be contrasted with teaching that supports the student's ability to develop a maturity and resilience. This is needed to face up to the unpredictable, conflicting and uncertainty of a future that is filled with risks and severe challenges (2000). In the context of teaching in higher education most curriculum material is tied up in reading lists, strict timetables and examination regimes that leaves little attention to the broader goals of a BA-programme or similar.

Our paper will report from how local entrepreneurs in this regard meet obstacles and hindrances in their efforts to broaden the normal aspects of their taught subjects and programmes, and how a change in the direction of a visual turn is anything but easy.
.

The project group was setup in February 2018 and ends in work in June 2019. The members come from three different faculties: health, commerce and teacher education. The impressions of how the group has attended to its impact in respective faculties is gathered through a reflective interview inspired by Tom Andersen's notion of "reflective teams" (1994). The long and collective interview will be transcribed and analysed by the group, supervised by the authors. The second source of information is the analysis of produced digital stories through the three semesters the project has been running. The aim is to identify the topics selected by the students, and how they have responded to a training that aims to develop their ability to express themselves in voice, image and emotional ways. The match between the stated curricular goals and the broadly held assumptions about what those goals are on one hand, and the outcomes of digital storytelling-training will be focused. The match will be guided by a standard rubric of achieved goals for audiovisual teaching and learning (Fritze, Haugsbakk, & Nordkvelle, 2016)

Digital Storytelling is difficult to implement as a new curricular element. To successfully implement DS, central stakeholders need to be adamant and supportive of the method, it needs to be stated in the curriculum, and the significance of visual bildung as an idea needs to be widely accepted. Second, the level of familiarity with the teaching method of DS-workshops, of the software and hardware in use, of the use of Learning Management systems, of assessment criteria etc. is demanding and represents important obstacles for its use. The factor that supports the efforts is the occurrence of student interest, and the inspiration gained from the student experience, providing evidence that the method challenges them to think anew and more challenging about their understanding of the taught subject

Andersen, T. (1994).Reflekterende processer. Samtaler og samtaler om samtalerne. Dansk psykologisk Forlag. København [Reflective processes. Talks about talks. Danish Psychological Publisher] Fritze, Y., Haugsbakk, G., & Nordkvelle, Y. (2016) ”Visual Bildung between Iconoclasm and Idolatry” Nordicom Review 37(2), 1-16 Hug, T. (2011) Visual Competence, Media Literacy and "New Literacies" – Conceptual Considerations in a Plural Discursive Landscape. Seminar.net, 7(1). Løvlie, L. (2002) The Promise of Bildung. Journal of philosophy of education, 36(2): 467-487. Müller, M.G. (2007) What is Visual Communication? Past and Future of an Emerging Field of Communication Research. Studies in Communication Sciences, 7(2): 7-34. McNamara, A. (1996) Words and Pictures in the Age of the Image: An Interview with W.J.T. Mitchell. Eyline, no. 30: 16-21 Müller, M.G. (2008). Visual Competence: a New Paradigm for Studying Visuals in the Social Sciences? Visual Studies, 23(2): 101-112.