-
Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2022).
Professional digital competence in Norwegian teacher education .
-
Øgrim, Leikny; Johannesen, Monica & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2022).
Teachers´ professional digital competence, between policy, theory and practice.
Vis sammendrag
Public debates about the role of digital technology in schools and education are partly dominated by digital advocates asking for more computers in school and more digital pedagogy, and partly by sceptics warning against what they describe as a huge experiment. The debates have been seen both in the public and in the research community and influence political documents like white papers, frameworks and curricula. As a response to this, the framework for teacher professional digital competence (tDIGc) was developed in Norway (Kelenctric et al, 2017).
Smestad & Gillespie (2020) present an overview of international research discussing transdisciplinary competencies, including tDIGc, showing that discussions of tDIGc usually emphasize practical user skills and integration of digital tools in teaching, and less theoretical knowledge of the field.
The aim of the paper is to investigate the relation between political, theoretical, and practical aspects of digital technology in Norwegian schools and teacher education. Political aspects are materialized in white papers, frameworks, and curricula. Knowledge on theoretical perspectives may be knowledge on the role of technology in school and society and the digital influence on pedagogy and teaching methods. Practical aspects are how tDIGc is put into practice in schools and teacher education.
Theoretical framework
The concepts of coherence in teacher education (Hammerness, 2010) form the theoretical framework of this presentation and is extended to include coherence of visions, ideas, and goals, on and across the political, practical, and theoretical aspects of digital technology in schools and education.
Methodology
Data from two surveys on student teachers understanding of digital technology in schools form the basis for focus interviews with 10 groups of student teachers in 8 placement schools. In addition, 6 practice teachers and 3 teacher educators are interviewed to capture tensions between the three aspects of digital technology in schools and teacher education.
Expected findings
The theoretical understanding of the role of technology, seems to be absent among student teachers and teachers. This can be explained by digital competence not being a school subject, implicit stating that teachers know how to teach and discuss the field of digital technologies, based on their practical skills, rather than a broader and more scientific-based knowledge of the role of technologies in education. This is paradoxically illustrated after the introduction of the newest national curriculum, where all teachers are assumed to teach algorithmic thinking, usually understood as programming.
Relevance to Nordic educational research
The study is based on a case from Norway. However, we believe the findings are relevant for teacher education in the Nordic countries.
References
Hammerness, K.M. (2013). Examining features of teacher education in Norway. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57(4), 400–419
Kelentrić, M., Helland, K. & Arstorp, A.T. (2017). Professional Digital Competence Framework for Teachers in Norway. The Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education
Smestad, B., & Gillespie, A. (2020). Dimensions of teachers’ transdisciplinary competence based on a systematic review of three transdisciplinary areas. NJCIE, 4(3-4), 56–71.
-
Johannesen, Monica; Øgrim, Leikny & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2021).
The role of materiality in the conceptual understanding of professional knowledge.
-
Bjørnestad, Elisabeth; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Sandvik, Margareth; Hegna, Maren Meyer & Trouiller, Thomas finnøy
(2021).
Informasjonswebinar - GoBaN studien.
-
Øgrim, Leikny & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2021).
PfDK og klasseledelse - er TPACK og DeCompEdu svaret?
-
Øgrim, Leikny; Johannesen, Monica & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2021).
The Role of the University and the Placement Schools in the Development of Student Teachers' Professional Digital Competence.
Vis sammendrag
In initial teacher education, the student teachers encounter different learning arenas, whereas the two formal ones are university campus and workplace (i.e. placement schools). Studies on the relation between learning in campus and placement schools, often describe students as receptive and passive in the campus-based learning context, as opposed to be more active and involved in the placement schools (Finne, Mordal & Stene, 2014).
Although university campuses and workplaces are different contexts, students do not necessarily see this difference as a "gap" (Lohmander, 2015). Instead, they might see campus and placement schools as involving different modes of knowledge (Christensen, Eritsland & Havnes, 2014). Learning on campus is characterized by theoretical knowledge and requires analytical and critical reflection. On the other hand, workplace learning, for example carried out in placement schools, is characterized by practical knowledge which can be developed and implemented by the learner at the workplace (Gee, 2000). Raaen & Thorsen (2020) question the idea of a gap between theory and practice and advocate a form of coherence which requires cultural exchange between the learning arenas. This tension of understanding the different roles of learning, is to our knowledge, not discussed with regard to teacher students’ professional digital competence.
There is little research on the role of practice placement in developing student teachers´ professional digital competence. An exception is Galanouli & McNair (2001) who conclude their research that schools must be supported and resourced properly and that placement teachers must be trained in the use of technology, for student teachers to improve their professional digital competence during practice placement. The same authors state that higher education institutions emphasize the development of the student teachers’ ability to reflect on the pedagogical use of technology in their teaching practice.
For more than two decades, Norwegian teacher education institutions have integrated professional digital competence training into subject areas (Engen, Giæver& Mifsud, 2015; Johannesen & Øgrim 2020). In evaluations from training in university campuses and placements schools both, teacher educators and student teachers report that they do not have sufficient professional digital competence (Engen et al., 2009; Gudmundsdottir & Hatlevik, 2018).
In this paper, we investigate the roles of learning arenas for the development of student teachers’ professional digital competence. As part of the picture, the concept of professional digital competence is used for analyzing the role of the learning arenas
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Johannesen, Monica & Øgrim, Leikny
(2020).
Student teachers’ perspectives on teachers’ professional digital competence, ethical issues and their ICT self-efficacy.
-
Johannesen, Monica; Øgrim, Leikny & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2020).
Teachers´ professional digital competence – management of technology-rich classrooms.
-
Mifsud, Louise; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Giæver, Tonje Hilde & Engen, Bård Ketil
(2019).
The Cyber Ethics Divide: Addressing Cyber Ethics in Initial Teacher Education.
-
Johannesen, Monica; Øgrim, Leikny & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2019).
Perspectives on teachers´ professional digital competence.
-
Engen, Bård Ketil; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Giæver, Tonje Hilde & Mifsud, Louise
(2018).
Student teachers’ attitude towards ICT: An analysis of perceived usefulness.
-
Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2018).
Conference paper: Student teachers, ICT and cyber ethics across four European countries.
-
Hatlevik, Ida Katrine R & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2017).
Antecedents of teachers’ self-efficacy for using ICT in their teaching practice
.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard & Throndsen, Inger
(2016).
Digital responsibility - a required literacy for citizenship: How to understand and measure the concept?
-
Flo, Jill; Landmark, Bjørg; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Tønnessen, Siri & Fagerström, Lisbeth
(2016).
Pleieintensitet i hjemmesykepleien –det modifiserte OPCqinstrumentets validitet og reliabilitet.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Loi, Massimo; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk & Throndsen, Inger
(2015).
Computer and information literacy and self-efficacy: The cases of Denmark, Norway and Poland.
-
Engen, Bård Ketil; Giæver, Tonje Hilde; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Mifsud, Louise & Tømte, Karoline
(2015).
Conference paper: Student teachers’ attitudes towards ICT use in teaching and learning.
-
Engen, Bård Ketil; Giæver, Tonje Hilde; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Mifsud, Louise & Tømte, Karoline
(2014).
Pre-Service Student Teachers’ Awareness of their Digital Responsibility.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Throndsen, Inger & Ottestad, Geir
(2012).
Goal orientation, family background and school leadership predicting students' digital literacy.
-
Tømte, Cathrine Edelhard & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2011).
Selvtillit, IKT og kjønn.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Pettersen, Geir Olaf & Berg, Monica
(2011).
På hvilken måte påvirker programdesignet matematikkundervisningen?
-
Arnseth, Hans Christian & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2008).
Om bruk av resultater fra prøve i digital kompetanse.
-
Arnseth, Hans Christian & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2008).
Prøve i digital kompetanse.
-
Beck, Eevi Elisabeth; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard & Stokke, Mona Helene
(2006).
Experience-Based Faculty Development Seminars.
Vis sammendrag
As part of a 5-year effort to stimulate members of faculty to develop flexible learning through special funding, seminars were held with participating faculty. The paper presents the seminars and outlines the underlying theoretical perspectives.
Faculty came to the seminar having answered four questions to stimulate their prior reflection. At the seminar they were organised in groups based on similarity of project topics. Each group was provided with an online, portable pc. Group members presented to each other their project and their answers to the four questions. Then the group developed responses to two of these questions. These were to provide advice to other faculty considering starting with flexible learning initiatives, and what the consequences of their own experiences were for their further teaching. The responses were published on the flexible learning web site.
The seminars innovatively combined several purposes: Stimulating faculty to reflect on their experiences with developing their teaching; sharing among faculty; provide accountability of project activity; and engaging faculty in reflection and reporting within a limited time frame.
Experience based reflection seems to have succeeded in combining these purposes. The published experiences are now part of the resources on flexible learning which are openly available.
The paper discusses the theory-based thinking behind the design of the seminars, as well as presenting the design itself.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2006).
Kunnskapsutvikling gjennom erfaringsseminar? Et eksempel fra UiOs satsning på fleksibel læring.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2003).
Learning strategies and motivation among pilots.
-
Giæver, Tonje Hilde; Mifsud, Louise; Engen, Bård Ketil; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard & Camilleri, Patrick
[Vis alle 13 forfattere av denne artikkelen]
(2020).
DiCTE Questionnaire Report - Output 2.
OsloMet.
-
Bjarnø, Vibeke; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard & Standal, Øyvind Førland
(2018).
ILD - Integrerte læringsarenaer gjennom digitalisering.
OsloMet-UiO.
Vis sammendrag
I forbindelse med prosjektet ILD - Integrerte læringsarenaer gjennom digitalisering ble det etablert en følgegruppe for å dokumentere prosess og resultater. Følgegruppa har bestått av tre personer; førstelektor og studieleder Vibeke Bjarnø og professorene Ove Edvard Hatlevik og Øyvind Førland Standal. Følgegruppa har vært ledet av Vibeke Bjarnø.
I tillegg til følgegruppa har ILD bestått av to delprosjekter leda av henholdsvis dosent Bjørn Smestad og førsteamanuensis Bård Ketil Engen.
ILD-rapporten er skrevet av følgegruppa med tekstbidrag fra de to delprosjektlederne. Enkelte av de involverte lærerutdannerne i første studieår på den 5-årige grunnskolelærerutdanninga for 1.-7. trinn har også bidratt med korte eller lengre tekstelementer som har utgjort deler av grunnlaget følgegruppa har brukt for å skrive rapporten. Dette gjelder universitetslektorene Trine Gedde Dahl, Siri Krogh Nordby, Trude Sundtjønn og Mikkel Bertram Rustad, samt førsteamanuensis Olav Gravir Imenes.
-
Ottestad, Geir; Throndsen, Inger; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard & Rohatgi, Anubha
(2014).
Digitale ferdigheter for alle? Norske resultater fra ICILS 2013.
Senter for IKT i utdanningen/Institutt for lærerutdanning og skoleforskning.
ISSN 978-82-93378-09-9.
-
Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Egeberg, Gunstein; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk; Loftsgarden, Marit & Loi, Massimo
(2013).
Monitor skole 2013. Om digital kompetanse og erfaringer med bruk av IKT i skolen.
Senter for IKT i utdanningen.
ISSN 9788299869867.
-
Egeberg, Gunstein; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Ottestad, Geir; Skaug, Jørund Høie & Tømte, Karoline
(2012).
Monitor 2011. Skolens digitale tilstand.
Senter for IKT i utdanningen.
ISSN 9788299869812.
-
Dalaaker, Dina; Egeberg, Gunstein; Gudmundsdottir, Greta Björk; Guttormsgaard, Vibeke; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard & Ottestad, Geir
[Vis alle 7 forfattere av denne artikkelen]
(2012).
Monitor 2012. Elever skal synes. Hvordan kan IKT utvikle kompetansen i skolen?
Senter for IKT i utdanningen.
ISSN 9788299869843.
-
Berge, Ola; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Kløvstad, Vibeke; Ottestad, Geir & Skaug, Jørund Høie
(2009).
ITU Monitor 2009.
Forsknings- og kompetansenettverk for IT i utdanning.
-
Arnseth, Hans Christian & Hatlevik, Ove Edvard
(2008).
Osloprøven i digital kompetanse for elever på 5. trinn og i VG 1 Analyse og diskusjon av elevers besvarelser på flervalsoppgaver.
ITU.
-
Arnseth, Hans Christian; Hatlevik, Ove Edvard; Kløvstad, Vibeke; Kristiansen, Tove & Ottestad, Geir
(2007).
ITU Monitor.
Universitetsforlaget.
ISSN 978-82-15-01219-3.
-