Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Digital Learning Framework – What Digital Learning can look like in Practice, An Irish Perspective
Deirdre ButlerInstitute of Education, Dublin City University
Michael HallissyH2 Learning
John HurleyH2 Learning
Abstract: This paper describes the evolution of a Digital Learning Framework (DLF), designed and developed to help Irish schools embed digital technologies more deeply into their practice. A census of digital technology usage in Irish schools (Cosgrove et al., 2014) had identified that teacher practices had undergone little change since the launch of the initial policy for schools, Schools IT2000 (DES, 1997). Building on this research and a consultative process the Department of Education and Skills developed a new Digital Strategy for Schools, 2015-2020. The new strategy decided to adapt the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers (UNESCO, 2011) so that schools would have greater clarity around the concept of embedding digital technologies. This paper will outline the process engaged in to review and adapt the UNESCO ICT-CFT, detailing the literature reviewed and how it was used to inform the design, development, evaluation and review of the Irish Digital Learning Framework.
Background and Context
This paper will present the evolving Irish Digital Learning Framework for Schools (DES, 2017a), referred to hereafter as DLF, which is designed to help schools embed digital technologies more deeply into their practice. A census of digital technology usage in schools (Cosgrove et al., 2014) identified that teacher practices had undergone little change since the launch of the initial policy for schools, Schools IT2000 (DES, 1997). Stemming from this research and a through consultative process the Irish Department of Education and Skills (DES) developed a new Digital Strategy for Schools, 2015-2020 (DES, 2015), to embed digital technologies into teaching, learning and assessment practices in schools, referred to subsequently as the Digital Strategy. Cognisant that the majority of teachers’ practice had been identified as being at the “technology literacy” stage (Cosgrove et al., 2014) the DES wanted to develop and implement a policy that would ensure practice moved beyond this basis level. Towards this end the strategy selected the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers (UNESCO, 2011) which outlines a developmental progression from Technology Literacy to Knowledge Deepening and on to Knowledge Creation, as a core resource to assist schools gain greater clarity around the concept of embedding digital technologies within their practices. However, the Digital Strategy noted there was a need “to review and adapt the ICT Competency Framework in its current form, to make it more directly relevant to the Irish context” (DES, 2015, p. 21) . This paper will detail the process engaged in to review and adapt the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework (UNESCO ICT-CFT) for the Irish school system. It will outline the literature reviewed and how it was used to design and develop the Irish Digital Learning (DLF) Framework. Finally, the next steps for piloting and reviewing the DLF will be discussed.
Literature review: First steps to adaptation
While there has been an influx of digital technologies into schools over the past twenty years, there has been for the most part only incremental, or first order, changes in teaching style (Ertmer, 2005). It is challenging for practising teachers to embed digital technologies into their teaching and learning practices (see Cosgrove et al., 2014). All too often the concept of embedding or integrating digital technologies into school practices is ill defined or not defined at all. The consultative paper for the Digital Strategy for Schools (Butler et al, 2013) recommended that the UNESCO ICT CFT (2008, 2008a and 2011) should be used to guide schools in the implementation and review of the Strategy at school level. The framework is comprised of six aspects of a learning system, and it “provides a lens to conceptualise what being digital in learning can look like” (Butler et al., 2013; p. 2), as depicted below in Figure 1.
However, there was a recognised need to localise the UNESCO ICT CF (2011) for the Irish context. By so doing it would allow the DES, their professional support services and others, to provide more targeted support to schools on embedding digital technologies into their practice. Consultations with principals and teachers during the development of the Digital Strategy highlighted that they wanted more explicit support on what embedding digital technologies could look like in a range of school settings.
Figure 1: UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers
The DES established a design team to review and adapt the ICT Competency Framework for Teachers. This group comprised of representatives from the DES ICT Policy Unit, schools’ inspectorate, National Council for Curriculum and Assessment, Professional Development Service for Teachers and the university teacher education sector (Author #1). This group immediately commissioned a review of the literature and practices worldwide in relation to competency frameworks, which informed the design process of the DLF that was subsequently developed. The literature review (Hallissy & Hurley, 2016) and the design phase was led by Author #2 & Author # 3.
The starting point for the review was the UNESCO ICT-CFT and it focused on issues such as teacher competency, competency frameworks, ICT competency frameworks, and how the UNESCO ICT-CFT has been adapted in other jurisdictions.
Teacher Competency
There is a significant amount of work taking place at a European level around the subject of teacher competences (European Commission, 2013). The European Commission has noted that it is a complex issue that ranges from our assumptions about learning to the broader societal context and environment in which teaching and teacher education occur.
The Commission also notes that a distinction needs to be made between definitions of teacher competences and professional standards. A professional standard “endeavours to describe what teachers believe, know, understand and are able to do as specialist practitioners in their fields” (Ingvarson, 1998 in European Commission, 2013; p.15). It states that “professional standards for teachers focus on what teachers are expected to know and be able to do” and that professional standards can further be defined “as shared representations of visions of practice, i.e. means for describing a consensus model of what is most valued in teaching knowledge and practice” (Ibid, p. 15). Professional standards can be viewed as:
Measuring tools for professional judgement, i.e. tools for making judgements and decisions in the context of shared meanings and values (Sykes and Plastrik, 1993), and/or instruments for providing specifications of levels of achievement (Kleinhenz & Ingvarson, 2007).
Thus, professional standards can exemplify what practices teachers should ideally engage in when teaching and they have the potential to develop shared meanings and values among the teaching profession. In addition, they can also capture proficiency levels or levels of achievement in relation to teaching, so that professional practice is exemplified for the entire profession. Like all standards, professional standards can be used in a variety of ways. They can either support a bureaucratic, ‘technical’ approach for accountability purposes or a ‘developmental’ approach with loose definitions of competences indicative of performance, stressing principles and codes of practice (Ingvarson, 1998 in European Commission, 2013). In Ireland, such frameworks are used to support a developmental approach with loose definitions of performance and underpinned by a set of principles, a point we will return to later.
In considering the UNESCO ICT CF, teacher competence is described as “a complex combination of knowledge, skills, understanding, values, attitudes and desire which lead to effective, embodied human action in the world, in a particular domain” (Deakin Crick, 2008). In contrast, a skill is defined as the ability to perform complex acts with ease, precision and adaptability (European Commission, 2013; p.9). However, all too often it appears as if competences are overly equated with knowledge and skills, and issues such as values, attitudes and desire are not to the fore. Typically, the identification of competences, (University of Limerick, 2008) can:
• Provide staff with clear expectations about what is required to be successful in their jobs, • Provide a foundation for professional development planning.
Teaching competences are thus complex combinations of knowledge, skills, understanding, values and attitudes, leading to effective action in a situation. Like other professions teaching is complex and involves values and/or assumptions concerning education, learning and society, [and therefore] the concept of teacher competences may resonate differently in different national contexts. This is an important factor in adapting the UNESCO ICT-CFT, as it needs to reflect the national priorities in Ireland and the ways in which teachers are currently using digital technologies in their practice.
Competency Frameworks
Competences are typically contained with an overall framework, known as a competency framework. For example, the Consortium for Participatory Arts Learning’s, (2017) definition below states that:
A competency framework is a model that broadly defines the blueprint for ‘excellent’ performance within an organisation or sector. Generally, the framework will consist of a number of competencies, which can be generically applied to a broad number of roles within the organisation or sector. Each of these competencies is then defined in a way that makes them relevant to the organisation or sector, using language that is clear enough to ensure that everyone has a common understanding of what
‘excellent’ job behaviour looks like within the generic context. This common understanding then becomes the benchmark against which the performance of an individual, team, project, or even entire organisation, can be assessed.
A competency framework describes what excellent job behaviour should look like in a particular profession and this common understanding can be used to benchmark the performance of an individual or an organisation. In this way, the framework can articulate a range of behaviours that are seen as desirable within a profession.
Ertmer (2005) suggests that teachers comparing and contrasting their digital learning practices in relatively simple ways, can be a more productive path to achieving teacher change than expecting teachers to use digital technologies, from the outset, to achieve high-end instructional goals. She suggests that the following approach can help teachers change their beliefs by:
Questioning one’s own practice and the practices of others, Making assumptions explicit, Using classrooms as sites for inquiry.
Bearing Ertmer’s suggestions in mind, when designing a competency framework for teachers, it would appear that for it be to an enabler for change it needs to be grounded in classroom practice and should be organsised so that teachers identify their existing practices and compare it to a range of other practices.
ICT Competency Frameworks in Education
There is limited research on the use of ICT competency frameworks in education. What research that exists primarily relates to pre-service teacher education and the need for teacher education providers to develop the ICT competences of future teachers (e.g. Foulger et al., 2016). The literature recognises that many teachers, both pre-service and in-service, struggle to embed ICT into their practice and there is a need to develop their ICT competency.
The literature notes that teachers’ beliefs and attitudes to what characterises meaningful learning are inextricably linked to an institution’s vision of how to use digital technology (Ertmer, 2005). In order to change teachers’, use of digital technologies, it requires changing their beliefs about digital technologies and this can be done by making our assumptions around the effective use of digital technologies explicit (Russell et al. 2003). Furthermore, research has found that many school leaders do not have a good sense of the many ways in which teachers are using digital technologies and how to evaluate these uses of digital technologies (Butler et al., 2013). Therefore, there is a need to articulate what effective practice looks like when using digital technologies, so that teachers and school leaders can enhance their existing practices. In an effort to understand how to articulate clearly what effective practice could look like at different proficiency levels a review of existing frameworks was undertaken.
Organisation of existing frameworks
The UNESCO ICT-CFT has three level proficiency levels, as noted above. It is arranged around three different approaches to teaching (mirroring three successive stages of a teacher’s development):
1. Technology Literacy enabling students to use ICT in order to learn more efficiently.
2. Knowledge Deepening enabling students to acquire in-depth knowledge of their school subjects and apply it to complex, real-
world problems.
3. Knowledge Creation enabling students, citizens and the workforce they become, to create the new knowledge required for
more harmonious, fulfilling and prosperous societies.
In addition, the review considered a number of other frameworks, such as ISTE (ISTE, 2017), DigComp 2.1 (Carretero et al., 2017), DigCompOrg (EU Science Hub, 2017a) and DigCompEdu (EU Science Hub, 2017b). DigCompEdu is the most recent framework and it has been developed by the Joint Research Centre on behalf of the European Commission. The DigCompEdu Framework is specifically designed for educators and is based on the DigComp Framework, which was developed originally in 2013 and updated in 2016 and again in 2017.
Design and Development of the Irish Digital Learning Framework
The review established that the UNESCO ICT CF is not, as currently developed, a competency framework in the true sense of the word. However, it is an extremely important document that lays out a set of guiding principles or standards on how digital technologies should be used in education. Furthermore, it captures the complexity of embedding digital technologies and it provides a set of principles that informed its localisation for the Irish context.
Figure 2: A section of the Looking at Our School 2016: A Quality Framework for Schools
The review also identified that the existing DES quality framework for schools, Looking at Our School 2016: A Quality Framework for Schools (The Inspectorate, 2016), met many of the characteristics of a competency framework. However, it is a generic document that covers all aspects of school life, but it does not explicitly mention digital technologies.
Thus, the review recommended that the DES create a new but complementary framework, the Digital Learning Framework for Schools, built around the existing two dimensions of the Quality Framework, that is Teaching and Learning and Leadership and Management. The Quality Framework contains 8 domains and 32 standard statements with each standard having at least one example of effective and highly effective practice (see Figure 2 above). The review established that the standards, as written, could accommodate statements in relation to the effective and highly effective use of digital technologies in schools.
The Design Team then began the process of developing a new set of effective and highly effective practice statements for each of the 32 standards that were focused specifically on the use of digital technology (see Figure 3 below). In defining and wording the practice statements, the Design Team drew from number of other frameworks, such as ISTE, DigComp 2.1, DigCompOrg and DigCompEdu while always considering the three different levels of the UNESCO ICT-CFT to ensure there was a movement towards Knowledge Deepening and Knowledge Creation as outlined in Figure 1.
Figure 3: A section from the Digital Learning Framework for Schools
Two versions of the DLF were developed (DES, 2017b), one for primary and one post-primary schools. In addition, the DES developed a set of guidelines, Digital Learning Planning Guidelines (DES, 2017c)to assist schools in using the DLF to review their current digital practices. The guidelines state that “The Digital Learning Planning Guidelines (DL Planning Guidelines) provide guidance on how the DL Framework can support the creation of a Digital Learning Plan (DL Plan) for each school”. They provide schools with a process and a set of questions that can assist them in reflecting on their current use of digital technology and identifying areas for improvement. Though the guidelines refer to schools they note that they can also be used by individual teachers or groups of teachers to review their practices also.
The DL Planning Guidelines encourage schools to consider the following questions:• How well are we doing?• How do we know how we are doing?• What evidence do we have in support of our view?• How can we find out more about our practices in relation to learning, teaching and assessment?• What are our strengths?• What are our areas for improvement?• How can we improve?
Schools are encouraged to use the DL Planning Guidelines to engage in a process of refection that culminates in action, the creation of a Digital Learning (DL) Plan that outlines how they will enhance their existing digital learning practices. There are six steps in the planning process as indicated in Figure 4 below. To begin they must identify a focus for their DL review. Though the DLF consists of 32 standards it is not envisaged that schools will focus on all standards, but instead they will select a number of key standards and focus on these. Once they have selected their focus they are then expected to gather evidence on their existing practices before they analyse these and make judgements. Having conducted their analysis they are to create a written report that includes an action plan, which they will implement and subsequently evaluate.
Figure 4: Digital Learning Framework Planning Process
In summary, schools will use the DLF to review their digital learning practices and create a DL Plan that articulates how they will embed digital technologies across their school over a defined period of time. The plan will articulate a vision for the use of digital learning technologies and will capture the current situation with regard to their use. Furthermore, it will describe how DL practices will be improved over a specified time-period. In this way schools can embed their use of digital technologies across all aspects of school life using a co-ordinated developmental evidence-based approach.
Towards Evaluating and Reviewing Irish Digital Learning Framework
The DES is currently in the process of piloting the DLF and the associated guidelines with 50 schools (https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Information-Communications-Technology-ICT-in-Schools/trial-of-the-digital-learning-framework-%E2%80%9Cthe-framework%E2%80%9D-.pdf) over the coming months (October 2017 – June 2018). These schools will be helped with a series of professional learning supports to assist them identify an area of digital learning they wish to enhance. The Professional Development Support Team (PDST) from the DES will make between two and five visits to schools as well as providing support online and by phone. A formal evaluator has been appointed to document the process and the DES will hold a Cross-Sectoral Forum to share experiences and consolidate learning. This evaluation process will then be used to inform the revised DLF which is planned to be circulated to all Irish schools in September 2018.
Early indications suggest that schools are finding the DLF useful in reviewing their practices and in helping them to better understand what embedding digital technologies looks like in a range of school settings. In addition, the DL Planning Guidelines appear to be a key resource in assisting schools apply the DLF in their varying school contexts. This is just the beginning of this process and undoubtedly the DLF and the guidelines will evolve in light of the feedback garnered during the evaluation period. However, what is of critical significance is that the DLF, together with the planning guidelines, is providing teachers and schools with a planning tool and a process that is designed to assist them transform their digital learning practices by giving them a blueprint for ‘how to developmentally progress towards knowledge deepening and knowledge creation within their organisation. They also have a common language of what “effective” and “highly effective” embedding of digital technologies is within
a learning eco-system.In addition the DLF can act as a benchmark against which the performance of an individual, team, or even entire organisation, can be assessed. This is to be welcomed and it is the first step in attempting to transform how digital technologies are embedded in schools so that in future schools are characterised as learning organisations that are more reflective of Knowledge Deepening and Knowledge Creation learning eco-systems, rather than in Technology Literacy activities, as has been the case to date in Ireland.
.
References
Butler, D., Leahy, M., Shiel, G. and Cosgrove, J. (2013) A Consultative Paper Building Towards a Learning Society: A National Digital Strategy for Schools. Dublin: St Patrick's College, Drumcondra and the Educational Research Centre. Available at: http://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Information-Communications-Technology-ICT-in-Schools/Digital-Strategy-for-Schools/Building-Towards-a-Learning-Society-A-National-Digital-Strategy-for-Schools-Consultative-Paper.pdf (Accessed: October 2017).
Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., & Punie, Y. (2017). The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens,. Available at: http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC106281/web-digcomp2.1pdf_(online).pdf pdf
Consortium for Participatory Arts Learning (C-PAL) (2017) 'What is a Competency Framework?', Excellence in Arts Practice. Available at: https://participatoryartslearning.wordpress.com/the-framework/what-is-a-competency-framework/ 2017
Cosgrove, J., Butler, D., Leahy, M., Shiel, G., Kavanagh, L. and Creaven, A.-M. (2013) The 2013 ICT Census in Schools Summary Report, Dublin: Educational Research Centre.
Deakin Crick, R. (2008) 'Key Competencies for Education in a European Context: narratives of accountability or care', European Educational Research Journal, 7(3).
Department of Education and Skills (DES). (1997). Schools IT2000. Available at: https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Policy-Reports/Schools-IT2000.pdf
The Department of Education and Skills (DES). (2015). The Digital Strategy for Schools, 2015-2020. Available at: https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Policy-Reports/Digital-Strategy-for-Schools-2015-2020.pdf
The Department of Education and Skills (DES). (2017a). The Digital Learning Framework. Available at: http://www.pdsttechnologyineducation.ie/en/Planning/Digital-Learning-Framework/Digital-Learning-Framework.html
Department of Education and Skills (DES). (2017b). Digital Learning Frameworks. Available at: http://www.pdsttechnologyineducation.ie/en/Planning/Digital-Learning-Planning-Guidelines.pdf
Department of Education and Skills (DES). (2017c). Information Notice, September 2017: Trial of the Digital Learning Framework (“The Framework”). Available at: https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Information-Communications-Technology-ICT-in-Schools/trial-of-the-digital-learning-framework-%E2%80%9Cthe-framework%E2%80%9D-.pdf
Ertmer, P. (2005) 'Teacher Pedagogical Beliefs: The Final Frontier in Our Quest for Technology Integration?', Educational Technology Research and Development (ETR&D), 53(4), pp. 25-39.
European Commission (2013) Supporting teacher competence development for better learning outcomes. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/repository/education/policy/school/doc/teachercomp_en.pdf
EU Science Hub. (2017a). DigCompOrg. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/digcomporg EU Science Hub. (2017b). Digital Competence Framework for Educators (DigCompEdu). Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/digcompedu European Commission. (2013). Supporting teacher competence development for better learning outcomes. Available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/repository/education/policy/school/doc/teachercomp_en.pdf Foulger, T. S., Graziano, K. J., Slykhuis, D., Schmidt-Crawford, D. and Trust, T. (2016) 'The Time is Now! Creating Technology Competencies
for Teacher Educators', Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 24(3), pp. 249-256.ISTE. (2017). ISTE standards. Available at: http://www.iste.org/standards Russell, M., Bebell, D., Dwyer, L. O. and O’Connor, K. (2003) 'Examining Teacher Technology Use Implications for PreService and Inservice
Teacher Preparation', Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4 September/October 2003), pp. 297-310.The Inspectorate, Department of Education and Skills (2016a) Looking at our School 2016: A Quality Framework for Primary Schools.
Marlborough Street, Dublin 1.UNESCO (2008) ICT Competency Standards for Teachers: Competency Standard Modules. Paris: UNESCO. Available at:
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001562/156207e.pdf UNESCO (2011) UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teachers, Paris: UNESCO. Available at:
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/resources/publications-and-communication-materials/publications/full-list/unesco-ict-competency-framework-for-teachers/
University of Limerick (2008) Behavioural Competency Framework Final Version 1. University of Limerick.
