21st c tech n learners_unisa_Edirisingha_11june2012

New technologies and 21st Century learners and their impact on

research in teaching and learning at Unisa

Palitha Edirisingha University of Leicester

Unisa ODL Research Workshop

11 June 2012, Unisa, South Africa

#unisa12

Terms and concepts

New technologies:

social and parIcipatory

media (web 2.0)

New technologies:

mobile and digital

technologies

21st Century learners: broadly defined

A ‘digital / net

generaIon’

Digital divide

Digital literacy

An assessment of

current pedagogies, technologies and research at Unisa, and where to next?

Learners’ access to, and the use of

technologies and learning resources.

What are the emerging

research topics and problems?

An assessment of learner

expectaIons, employer

expectaIons and

employability prospects

Conclusions – what can we take from the

session

1. AcIvity 1

•  An assessment of current pedagogies and technologies at Unisa, and where to next? [10 minutes]

•  Pedagogy –technology framework (Conole et al (2004)

•  Photocopies of the framework to be distributed to the parIcipants.

•  ParIcipants to work in pairs, 3s or small groups

Social

Individual

Informal Formal

Informa:on

Experience

Mapping pedagogies to technologies

(Conole et al. 2004)

AcIvity: Mapping e-‐pedagogies to technologies Pedagogies •  CollecIve group aggregaIon •  Dialogic Learning (Dial) •  DemonstraIon of assessment

•  DidacIc learning – reinforcement

•  Pick another example

Technologies •  Social bookmarking

•  Sykpe •  ePor\olio •  InteracIve mulImedia/

MCQs

•  Pick another example


Social

Individual

Informal Formal

Experience

Informa:on

Informal Formal


AcIvity 1

Working in your group, please consider:

-‐ What are the pedagogies and technologies that you

use in your current teaching?

-‐ What are the assumpIons and realiIes that underpin

your choices?

-‐ What changes in the next 5 years?

Report back to the whole

group. One key point from your group

Drawing a general picture

2. PresentaIon [30 minutes]

Learners’ access to, and use of technologies and learning resources – an overview

Applicability to Unisa and Southern Africa?

What are the emerging research topics and problems?

Access to, and competence with, technologies (web-‐based parIcipatory

media and mobile digital devices)

Access to non-‐insItuIonal learning

resources

AspiraIons, expectaIons;

employment; lifelong learning

“digital naIves”, “net generaIon”

OERs (‘small’, ‘big’)

Graduate skills Transferable skills

Age-‐related? Economic, other factors?

Implica:ons? Research?

Digital divide?

Skills: employees or employers?

Digital literacy?

21st century learners, learning and technologies?

Linked concepts

‘digital literacy’

‘digital divide’

‘digital / net generaIon’

QuesIons…?

•  Validity of ‘digital naIve’ claims? •  Can we ignore it altogether? •  Themes / topics for research?

– Digital divide – Digital literacy

A ‘digital / net generaIon’ ‘Digital naIves’ and ‘digital immigrants’

A generaIon?

•  ‘an age cohort that comes to have social significance by virtue of consItuIng itself as a cultural iden:ty’ (Edmunds and Turner, 2002, p. 7).

•  ‘a cohort of individuals born within a par:cular :me frame’ (Buckingham, 2008, p. 2)

•  a cohort having a relaIonship with a parIcular traumaIc event’ (Edmunds and Turner, 2002), for example a world war..., a defining moment in the history.

A digital generaIon

‘a genera:on defined in and through its experience of digital computer technology’ (Buckingham, 2006, p. 1).

GeneraIons

Genera:ons (according to Tapscoi, 1998) •  The Boomers -‐ born between 1946 -‐ 1964. The TV generaIon. conservaIve, hierarchical, inflexible, centralised (like the TV medium). ‘incompetent technophobes’.

•  The Bust -‐ born between 1965 -‐ 1976.

GeneraIons

The net genera:on / The Boom Echo -‐ born amer 1977. expressive, savvy, self-‐reliant, analyIcal, creaIve, inquisiIve, accept diversity, socially conscious. possess intuiIve, spontaneous relaIonship with digital technology. ‘using new technology is as natural as breathing’ (Tapscoi, 1998, p. 40). generaIonal differences are produced by the technology.

Claims about the digital generaIon

‘Although specific forms of technology uptake are highly diverse, a generaIon is growing up in an era where digital media are part of the taken-‐for-‐granted social and cultural fabric of learning, play, and social communicaIon’ (Ito et al, 2008, p. vii).

Claims about the digital generaIon

‘…those immersed in new digital tools and networks are engaged in an unprecedented exploraIon of language, games, social interacIon, problem solving, and self-‐directed acIvity that leads to diverse forms of learning.’ (Ito et al, p. vii, 2008).

QuesIons for educators …

•  Can students entering HE be classified as belonging to a ‘net generaIon’?

•  Do young people who are growing up with digital media have a different orientaIon to the world, a different set of disposiIons or characterisIcs?

•  How do the net generaIon learn? What are the characterisIcs of their learning?

Evidence from UK research

Research on first year students born amer 1983, both campus and distant learners

‘The generaIon is not homogeneous in its use and appreciaIon of new technologies’ ‘… significant variaIons amongst students that lie within the Net generaIon age band’ (Jones et al., 2010, p. 722).

Evidence from South Africa

Brown & Czerniewicz, 2008: Students’ use of ICTs in higher educaIon in South Africa.

-‐ similar to the findings in the UK and US.

Other?

-‐

Digital naIve’s own claims

‘I don’t find it hard to use a computer because I got into it quickly. You learn quick because it’s a very fun thing to do.” (Amir, 15, from London). ‘My Dad hasn’t even got a clue. Can’t even work the mouse.... So i have to go on the Internet for him” (Lorna, 17, from Manchester). (Livingstone, 2008).

How true are these claims?

‘While these claims contain a sizeable grain of truth, we must also recognise their rhetorical value for the speakers. Only in rare circumstances in history have children gained greater experIse than parents in skills highly valued by society.’ (e.g., diasphoric children’s learning of the host language before their parents, youthful experIse in music, games, play).

(Livingstone, 2008).

Growing up ‘analogue’ Vs growing up digital

How far is this true as far as yourself and your students are concerned? Does a ‘digital generaIon’ exist in your context? What is their paierns of access to, and use of technologies?

Digital divide

Different concepIons of digital divide

Digital divide

‘the gap between the technology rich and the technology poor, both within and between socieIes’ (Buckingham, 2008, p. 10)

'the gap between those who do and those who do not have access to computers and the Internet’ ' (van Dijk, 2005, p. 1).

…access considered as 'physical access' -‐ 'having personal computer and Internet connecIon' (van Dijk, 2005, p. 1).

Digital divide

‘the gap between individuals, households, businesses and geographic areas at different socio-‐economic levels with regard both to their opportuniIes to access informaIon and communicaIon technologies (ICTs) and to their use of the Internet for a wide variety of acIviIes’ (OECD, 2001, p. 5)

Closing the digital divide

•  The ‘trickle-‐down’ principle •  What are the problems with the above view/ approach to solving the access problem?

Digital divide – quesIons?

a ‘social and poli:cal problem’ (van Dijk, 2005, p. 3), not a technical one.

Digital divide – quesIons?

•  What are the disadvantages of being in the ‘have not’ side of the digital divide? What are the consequences of digital divide for learners, for teachers, for educaIon as a whole?

•  Does digital divide intensify the exisIng social inequaliIes (of age, gender, ethnicity, social class, disabiliIes)?

Internet use – world regions

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Africa

Asia

Europe

Middle East

Noth America

LaIn America / Carib.

Ocenia/Australia

World total

Series1

Source: hip://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm [accessed on 4 June 2012]

South Africa

•  Literacy rate: 81.8% total (1995 est.)

•  6,800,000 Internet users (Dec 2010), 13.9% of the populaIon

•  4,822,820 Facebook users (Dec 2011), 9.8% penetraIon rate.


South Africa – internet growth

YEAR % Penetration of

internet access 2000 5.5 2001 6.2 2002 6.8 2003 7.1 2004 7.4 2005 7.4 2008 10.5 2009 10.8


Types of access

contribuIng to Digital divide

Material or physical access

MoIvaIonal access Skills access

Usage access

(van Dijk, 2005).

Digital divide – stories

“Nairobi's digital divide “

‘… with broadband internet access cosIng more than the average Kenyan annual wage, the digital divide appears set to remain’ (BBC, 2010).

hip://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/8259533.stm

“India unveils 'world's cheapest tablet computer”

“India's government unveiled its computer tablet which will sell at only $35US.

By offering the Aakash tablet at highly subsidised prices to millions of students and teachers, officials says they aim to revoluIonise educaIon.” (BBC, 2011)

hip://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-‐south-‐asia-‐15192624

Approaches to closing digital divide?

Sugata Mitra: Can kids teach themselves?

“… Sugata Mitra talks about his Hole in the Wall project. Young kids in this project figured out how to use a PC on their own -‐-‐ and then taught other kids. He asks, what else can children teach themselves?”

hip://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRb7_ffl2D0 and hip://www.ted.com

Digital naIves, digital immigrants and digital divide

Applicability of this discourse to Unisa / Southern Africa.

Can you guess which country / world region!

7.25%

24.08%

42.08%

1.42%

25.08%

0.08%

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00%

Blogs

Wikis (e.g., Wikipedia)

Social Networking sites (e.g., Facebook)

Social Bookingmarking Sites (e.g., del.ici.ous)

MulImedia Sharing Sites (e.g., YouTube)

Missing

Percent

Percent

N = 1,200 parIcipants Age range = 16 – 35+ Levels of study = CerIficate to Postgraduate

Munguatosha, G. (2011) A Social Networked Learning Model for Higher Educa9on in Tanzania,

MSc Disserta:on, Makerere University.

7.25%

24.08%

42.08%

1.42%

25.08%

0.08%

0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00%

Blogs

Wikis (e.g., Wikipedia)

Social Networking sites (e.g., Facebook)

Social Bookingmarking Sites (e.g., del.ici.ous)

MulImedia Sharing Sites (e.g., YouTube)

Missing

Percent

Percent

N = 1,200 parIcipants Age range = 16 – 35+ Levels of study = CerIficate to Postgraduate

some fun …

•  Visualising the internet growth and use •  hip://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8552410.stm

Digital literacy

Digital literacy

UK Policy concerns: •  ‘Digital Britain Report’ (DCMS, 2009):

– sets out the strategy of the government in placing technology at the centre of the UK’s economic recovery

–  recognises the importance of people having the ‘… capabiliIes and skills to flourish in the digital economy’ (DCMS, 2009, p. 1).

Digital literacy

In Higher EducaIon •  Prof. Sir David Melville (2009) Commiiee of Inquiry into learners’ use of Web 2.0 in HE – students in HE may well be pervasive users of social networking sites, blogs, virtual environments and other mulI-‐media forms, but they lacked deep criIcal skills to analyse and validate informaIon on-‐line (Melville, 2009).

Digital literacy -‐ definiIons

Digital literacy

•  “the ability to access networked computer resources and use them….the ability to understand and use informaIon in mulIple formats from a wide range of sources when it is presented via computers” (Gilster, 1997, p. 1).

•  literacy means much more than just reading and requires “a set of core competencies” including, “the ability to make informed judgments” and others that derive from criIcal thinking (ibid, p. 1-‐2).

Digital literacy in HE CapabiliIes which equip an individual for living, learning and working in a digital society (JISC LLiDA, 2009).

examples of skills: •  the use of digital tools to undertake academic research, wriIng and criIcal

thinking •  digital professionalism •  the use of specialist digital tools and data sets •  communicaIng ideas effecIvely in a range of media •  producing, sharing and criIcally evaluaIng informaIon •  collaboraIng in virtual networks •  using digital technologies to support reflecIon and personal development

planning, and •  managing digital reputaIon and showcasing achievements (Knight, 2011,

p. 8).

Digital literacy in HE

JISC UK context. Funded research since 2001. -‐  ICT / computer literacy -‐  InformaIon literacy -‐  Media literacy -‐  CommunicaIon and collaboraIon -‐  Digital scholarship -‐  Learning skills -‐  Life-‐planning (JISC briefing paper)

Digital literacy is ‘… about mastering ides, not keystrokes’ (Gilster, 1997).

Digital literacy -‐ definiIons

‘… much more than a funcIonal maier of learning how to use a computer and keyboard, or how to do online searches. […] As with print, [students] also need to be ale to evaluate and use informaIon criIcally if they are to transform it into knowledge.

This means asking quesIons about the sources of that informaIon, the interests of its producers, and the ways in which it represents the world […]. (Buckingham, 2006: 267, in Ryberg and Dirckinck –Holmsfield, 2010, p. 173)

Findings from research

A Leicester research project on: Learners’ access to, and competence with, technologies and digital literacy

skills [PELICANS]

Aims

1.  To idenIfy HE students’ access to and the use of digital technologies and web 2.0 tools for their formal and informal learning in HE.

2.  To idenIfy their level of digital literacy and to develop strategies for addressing gaps in levels of literacy.

3.  To make recommendaIons for supporIng students to further develop their digital literacy skills.

•  to idenIfy students’ ownership of and use of digital devices and web 2.0 tools

1. QuesIonnaire surveys of 100+

undergraduates and postgraduates

•  to gain a deeper insight into their use of web 2.0 tools in a learning context

2. Focus groups with students •  to develop and

validate appropriate online acIviIes and learning tools to improve their level of digital literacy skills

3. Workshops with students

Research design and methodology

Findings

Data from the 2010-‐2011 quesIonnaire survey at

hip://goo.gl/kraQF

The next three slides based on 2011 -‐ 2012 data

Ownership of computer and other digital devices (% reporIng) 2012 data

35

100

82.5

17.5

92.5

87.5

42.5

10

25

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Desktop

laptop

Smartphone

Phone

Camera

MP3Player

Tablet

eReader

GameDevice

[8% in 2011]

[4% in 2011]

2012 data set 1, n = 40

Devices used to access internet during term-‐Ime (% reporIng) 2012 data

85

100

77.5

7.5

10

25

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

UniComputer

OwnComputer

MobilePhone

iPodTouch

OtherDevices

Tablet

2012 data set 1, n = 40

[55% in 2011]

Freq

uency of using W

eb 2.0 to

ols and acIviIes – 2012 data

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Update SNS

Watch Television

Listen to radio

Write blog

Use SBMS

Contribute to wikis

Play video games

Download / share music

Use 3-‐D virtual worlds

Chat (e.g., MSN)

VOIP

Share digital photographs

Share videos

Record own music

Mix music

Make graphic art

Contribute to bulleIn boards

Microblogging

Subscribe to RSS feeds

Programming

Selling on ebay

Online shopping

Online banking

Use ‘Apps’

Missing

Rarely/never

SomeImes

Frequently

5 years ago at Leicester …

2006 data from Impala project (www.impala.ac.uk)

24

65

10

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

A desktop computer

A laptop computer

Both a desktop and a laptop computer

Not applicable

Series1

N = 243

2006 data from Impala project

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Play games

On-‐line shopping

Selling items (e.g. eBay)

Internet telephony (e.g. Skype)

Chat rooms

Blogging

ContribuIng to Wikis

Sharing photos (e.g. Flickr)

Sharing bookmarks (e.g. del.icio.us)

Sharing / broadcasIng video (e.g. YouTube)

Listening to podcasts

Studies

Other

Series1

N = 256

Findings …

•  Students use a range of digital devices to access and organise informaIon and plan their studies. Laptops, smart phones, MP3 players, and e-‐readers. Checking availability of library books, arranging to meet off-‐line for group work, and many more. seamlessly both in virtual and physical spaces, involving input from their teachers and non-‐formal study groups.

•  Students’ familiarity and preference for the use of web 2.0 tools and digital devices, and competencies are diverse reflecIng the internaIonal and other demographic profile of our students. No homogeneous net generaIon.

Findings …

•  Students maintain their established virtual structures and ‘affinity spaces’ (Frances, 2010) from their geographical area of origin (naIonal and overseas) that serve as informal sources of support for studies. University, teachers and library are no longer the ‘gate keepers’ of what is deemed ‘expert’ informaIon.

•  Students engage in a ‘parIcipatory culture’ (Jenkins et al, 2006), for example, reading and contribuIng to book recommendaIon sites.

RecommendaIons and thoughts

•  The cultural context of digital literacy needs to be focused on more closely.

•  ParIcipatory cultures vary -‐ Jenkins very much rooted in US and parIcular types of acIviIes online (gaming for example).

•  As learners and teachers we need to recognise this cultural context.

•  Provide direcIon and intervenIon (where there is scant access to physical books, the web is seen as a soluIon). Not all students have the ability to determine good quality sources online.

•  SupporIng students to create their own PLE?

Finally…

•  VerIcal and horizontal space of the new media environment raises a number of challenges

•  Expert and ‘non-‐expert’ informaIon •  Moving across ‘expert’ or ‘academic’ informaIon that flows downwards: reading lists, Library e-‐link, alongside peer to peer (horizontal) informaIon.

•  Seamless spaces on-‐line QQ, off-‐line: group study rooms in the library.

•  Students have useful mobile technology an iPhone provides mulIple uses: mini photocopier, access web material, arrange group meeIngs etc.

More about Pelicans research project

Please contact either: – Pal at [email protected] or

– Tracy at [email protected]

Similar / comparable research at Unisa?

3. AcIvity 2

An assessment of learner expectaIons, employer expectaIons and employability prospects [10 minutes]

Digital literacy skills in the context of employability in South Africa. How important are digital literacy skills? What are the expectaIons from employers? Professional organisaIons? [5 minutes]

QuesIons for consideraIon

•  How can universiIes / formal educaIon system help learners growing in a digital age?

•  How might we deploy new digital technologies to improve learning and studying at our universiIes?

•  How might we prepare learners work and for lifelong learning?

References and further resources Buckingham, D. & Willei, R. (eds) (2006) Digital Genera,on: Children, Young People, and New Media. Mahwah (New Jersey): Lawrence Erlbaum.

Conole, G., Dyke, M., Oliver, M. and Seale, J. (2004). Mapping pedagogy and tools for effecIve learning design, Computers and Educa,on, 43 (1-‐2): 17-‐33.

Cuban, L. (1986) Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology Since 1920. New York: Teachers College Press.

Cuban, L. (2001) Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom. London: Harvard University Press.

DCMS (2009) Digital Britain: Final Report hip://interacIve.bis.gov.uk/digitalbritain/report/being-‐digital/ge�ng-‐britain-‐online/. accessed 3 Sept 2009.

Edmunds, J. & Turner, B. (2002) Genera,ons, Culture and Society. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Facer, K. (2011) Learning Futures: Educa,on, technology and social change. London: Routledge.

Facer, K., Furlong, J., Furlon, R. & Sutherland, R. (2003) ScreenPlay: Children and Compu,ng in the Home. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Frances, R.J. (2010) The decentring of tradi,onal university: the future of (self) educa,on in virtually figured worlds, Oxford, UK: Routledge.

References and further resources Gill, T. (ed) (1996) Electronic children: How children are responding to the informa,on revolu,on. London: NaIonal children's Bureau.

Gilster, P. (1997) Digital Literacy. New York: Wiley.

Hellawell, S. (2001) Beyond Access: ICT and social inclusion. London: Fabian Society.

Heverly, R. A. (2008) Growing Up Digital: Control and the Pieces of a Digital Life. In McPherson, T. (ed) Digital Youth, Innova,on, and the Unexpected, pp.199-‐218. Cambridge (Massachuseis): The MIT Press.

Holloway, S. L. & ValenIne, G. (2003) Cyberkids: children in the informa,on age. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Ito, M., et al. (2008) Foreword. In McPherson, T. (ed) Digital Youth, Innova,on, and the Unexpected. Cambridge (Massachuseis): The MIT Press.

Jenkins, H., Purushotma, R., Clinton, K., Weigel, M., & Robison, A. J. (2006) Confron,ng the Challenges of Par,cipatory Culture: Media Educa,on for the 21st Century. Cambridge, MA: ComparaIve Media Studies Programme at the Massachuseis InsItute of Technology. hip://www.projectnml.org/files/working/NMLWhitePaper.pdf accessed 2 Nov 2010.

Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2010) Net generaIon or Digital NaIves: Is there a disInct new generaIon entering university? Computers & Educa,on, 54(3), 722 – 732.

References and further resources Livingstone, S. (2008) Internet Literacy: Young People’s NegoIaIon of New Online OpportuniIes. In McPherson, T. (ed) Digital Youth, Innova,on, and the Unexpected,pp. 3-‐36. Cambridge (Massachuseis): The MIT Press.

McPherson, T. (ed) (2008) Digital Youth, Innova,on, and the Unexpected. London: The MIT Press.

Melville, D. (2009) Higher Educa,on in a Web 2.0 World: Report of CommiYee of Enquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. hip://www.clex.org.uk/CLEX_Report_v1-‐final.pdf. accessed 29 May 2009.

Munguatosha, G. (2011) A Social Networked Learning Model for Higher Educa,on in Tanzania,MSc DissertaIon, Submiied to the School of CompuIng and InformaIcs Technology, Makerere University.

OECD (2001) Understanding the Digital Divide. Paris: OECD PublicaIons.

Ryberg, T., & Dirckinck–Holmsfield, L. (2010). Analysing Digital Literacy in AcIon: A Case Study of a Problem-‐oriented Learning Process, in Sharpe, R., Beethem, H., & De Freitas, S. (eds). Rethinking Learning for a Digital Age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. London: Routledge.

Sharpe, R., Beethem, H., & De Freitas, S. (eds) (2010) Rethinking Learning for a Digital Age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. London: Routledge.

Tapscoi, D. (1998) Growing Up Digital: Rise of the Net Genera,on. New York: McGrew-‐Hill.

van Dijk, J.A.G.M. (2005) The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Informa,on Society. London: Sage.

Wilhelm, A.G. (2004) Digital NaIon: Toward an Inclusive InformaIon Society. London: The MIT Press.

Thank you! [email protected]

21st c tech n learners_unisa_Edirisingha_11june2012

Education

Transcript of 21st c tech n learners_unisa_Edirisingha_11june2012