Column "Field experiences"

A module on Learning Technologies for teachers in Higher Education


Abstract


This paper describes a 10 European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS ) module in Learning Technologies which forms part of a Post Graduate Diploma in Academic Practice, part of a professional development framework for academic staff. The module, which is taught through seven themed workshops over one semester, is research-informed and practice-based. Assessment is on a pass/fail basis and includes three aspects supporting reflection, technical competency and the implementation of a technology-based project. Throughout the module, technology is used as a showcase for the module content itself. The intention is to integrate the use of technology to support the pedagogy, without over-using technology for its own sake. Through surveying past participants on the module there is evidence to suggest that good practice in the use of technology is being embedded in teaching and learning activities across the university.


Keywords

Professional Development; Educational Technology; Learning Technologies; Open Practices; European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS); Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL).

Full Text:

PDF


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/995

References


Brickner, D. (1995). The effects of first and second-order barriers to change on the degree and nature of computer usage of mathematics teachers: A case study. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.

Cronin, C. (2017). Openness and Praxis: Exploring the Use of Open Educational Practices in Higher Education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5), 15-34. doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v18i5.3096

Ertmer, P. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61. doi: 10.1007/BF02299597

Flynn, S. (2015). Learning Technologists: Changing the Culture or Preaching to the Converted? In D. Hopkins (Ed.), The Really Useful #EdTech Book (p. 199-217). David Hopkins.

Hamilton, E. R., Rosenberg, J. M., & Akcaoglu, M. (2016). The Substitution Augmentation Modification

Redefinition (SAMR) Model: a Critical Review and Suggestions for its Use. TechTrends, 60(5), 433-441. doi: 10.1007/s11528-016-0091-y

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge?. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/volume-9/issue-1-09/general/what-is-technological-pedagogicalcontent-knowledge/

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science: Building Pedagogical Patterns for Learning and Technology. London, UK: Routledge.

Reid, P. (2014). Categories for barriers to adoption of instructional technologies. Education and Information Technologies, 19(2), 383-407. doi: 10.1007/s10639-012-9222-z

Selwyn, N. (2017). Education and Technology: Key Issues and Debates (2nd ed.). London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic.

Wheeler, S. (2012, March 13). New ideas in a digital age.

Retrieved from http://www.steve-wheeler. co.uk/2012/03/new-ideas-in-digital-age.html

White, D., & Le Cornu, A. (2012). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). doi: 10.5210/fm.v16i9.3171


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2018 Sharon Flynn

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Italian Journal of Educational Technology (IJET) | ISSN (print) 2532-4632 | ISSN (online) 2532-7720