Normal view

There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.
Before yesterdayMain stream

The temptation to cheat in online exams: moving beyond the binary discourse of cheating and not cheating

This new paper from DER member Prof Michael Henderson reveals new insights into the factors that influence the tempation to cheat in large scale digital exams.

Discussions around assessment integrity often focus on the exam conditions and the motivations and values of those who cheated in comparison with those who did not. We argue that discourse needs to move away from a binary representation of cheating. Instead, we propose that the conversation may be more productive and more impactful by focusing on those who do not cheat, but who are tempted to do so. We conceptualise this group as being at risk of future cheating behaviour and potentially more receptive of targeted strategies to support their integrity decisions. In this paper we report on a large-scale survey of university students (n = 7,511) who had just completed one or more end of semester online exams. In doing so we explore students’ reported temptation to cheat. Analysis surrounding this “at risk” group reveals students who were Tempted (n = 1379) had significant differences from those who Cheated (n = 216) as well as those who were Not tempted (n = 5916). We focus on four research questions exploring whether there are specific online exam conditions, security settings, student attitudes or perceptions which are more strongly associated with the temptation to cheat. The paper offers insights to help institutions to minimise factors that might lead to breaches of assessment integrity, by focusing on the temptation to cheat during assessment.

Access the article here!

Citation: Henderson, M., Chung, J., Awdry, R. et al. The temptation to cheat in online exams: moving beyond the binary discourse of cheating and not cheating. International Journal of Educational Integrity 19, 21 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-023-00143-2

Enhancing feedback practices within PhD supervision

This new article by DER member Prof Michael Henderson reveals some of the productive as well as challenging practices surrounding PhD supervision feedback.

PhD candidates, like all students, learn through engaging with feedback. However, there is limited understanding of how feedback strategies support doctoral candidates. This qualitative framework synthesis of 86 papers analysed rich qualitative data about feedback within PhD supervision. Our synthesis, informed by sociomateriality and a dialogic, sense-making view of feedback, underscores the critical role that feedback plays in doctoral supervision. Supervisors, through their engagement or disengagement with feedback, controlled candidates’ access to tacit and explicit standards. The ephemeral and generative nature of verbal feedback dialogues contrasted with concrete textual comments. While many supervisors aimed for candidates to become less reliant on feedback over time, this did not necessarily translate to practice. Our findings suggest that balancing power dynamics might be achieved through focussing on feedback materials and practices rather than supervisor-candidate relationships.

Access the article here!

Citation: Bearman,M., Joanna, T., Henderson, M., Esterhazy, R., Mahoney, P., Molloy, E. (2024). Enhancing feedback practices within PhD supervision: a qualitative framework synthesis of the literature. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher EducationDOI: 10.1080/02602938.2024.2307332

Tracking technology: exploring student experiences of school datafication

New article in the Cambridge Journal of Education by DER members Luci Pangrazio, Neil Selwyn & Bronwyn Cumbo exploring student experiences of school datafication

ABSTRACT
The use of digital technologies within schools is leading to the increased generation, processing and circulation of data relating to students. To date, academic research around this ‘datafication’ of schools and schooling has tended to focus on institutional issues of governance and commercialisation, with relatively little consideration of students’ experiences. Drawing on focus group discussions with 62 students across three Australian secondary schools, the paper explores students’ experiences of school datafication in terms of power, surveillance and affect. It highlights students’ relatively constrained and distanced relations with school technology use, schools’ use of data to enforce student accountability and self-regulation of behaviour, as well students’ perceived powerlessness to engage agentically in digital practices. Drawing on notions of ‘digital resignation’ and ‘surveillance realism’, the paper concludes by considering the extent to which students might be supported to meaningfully engage with (and possibly resist) the constraining ‘atmospheres’ of datafication.
Luci Pangrazio, Neil Selwyn & Bronwyn Cumbo (2023) Tracking technology: exploring student experiences of school datafication, Cambridge Journal of Education, https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2023.2215194

Digital empowerment and refugee settlement symposium

Digital empowerment and refugee settlement symposium

This online research symposium brought together international and transdisciplinary scholars to better understand how people from refugee backgrounds navigate digital experiences across different aspects of settlement such as everyday life, learning and employment.

Using a strengths-based perspective, the symposium aimed to conceptualise and apply the notion of ‘digital empowerment’ in relation to refugee settlement from a range of perspectives and in a number of contexts in order to:

  • promote more focused research about this important area of successful settlement
  • build a knowledge base for strategic and practical implications for policy makers and educators

The symposium explored the following questions:

  • What are our understandings about “digital empowerment”?
  • What forms does digital empowerment take for people from migrant and refugee backgrounds? How can we recognise them?
  • How do people become digitally empowered in different contexts? What strategies do they use? What roles do different people play?
  • How do culture, language and past experiences with digital technologies shape the processes and outcomes of digital empowerment?
  • What are the implications of the concept of digital empowerment for learning programs?

This symposium was hosted by Monash University Faculty of Education, DER@Monash and HEDI.

Keynote presentation:

Digital empowerment: taking a strengths-based perspective on digital practices of people from migrant and refugee backgrounds

Dr Katrina Tour (Monash University)

Keynote presentation:

Building digital resilience in migrant and refugee communities

Margaret Corrigan (CEO Carringbush Adult Education, President VicTESOL,
Immediate Past President ACTA)

Online Early Childhood Education and Care experiences of refugee communities during COVID- 19

Dr Anne Keary (Monash University)
Professor Susanne Garvis (Griffith University)
Dr Haoran Zheng (Monash University)

Refugee voices from the Northern Territory: Tyranny of distance’ and disadvantage

Dr Devaki Monani (Charles Darwin University)
Dr Ben O’Mara (University of New South Wales)

Rethinking digital empowerment: Relationality and the experiences of older
Karen refugee-background adults in Australia

Associate Professor Raelene Wilding (La Trobe University), Dr Shane Worrell
(La Trobe University), Professor Loretta Baldassar (Edith Cowan University)

How digital spaces are helping ethnic Karen adapt and cope in the Southeastern US

Associate Professor Daniel Gilhooly (The University of Central Missouri)

Super jagged literacies: Superdiversity, jagged profiles, and digital literacies

Associate Professor Mark Pegrum (The University of Western Australia)

Digital literacy needs for education and labor market integration of recent
Arabic speaking immigrants in Sweden

Associate professor Linda Bradley (University of Gothenburg),
Associate Professor Fredrik Olsson (Østfold University College)

Exploring the teacher’s role in digital empowerment: a case study from a
community-based provider in Australia

Dr Peter Waterhouse (Monash University),
Dr Edwin Creely (Monash University),
Dr Katrina Tour (Monash University),
Professor Michael Henderson (Monash University)

This session offered a brief summary of some of the concepts discussed throuhj the day as well as an opportunity for the presenters to respond to questions from the discussant and audience.

Discussant: Professor Michael Henderson (Monash University)

I am raw html block.
Click edit button to change this html

Congratulations ASCILITE conference success

ASCILITE is the premier academic and practitioner conference in higher education digital technologies. This year was the first time DER members were able to attend for 3 years.

Prof Michael Henderson was awarded Life Member in 2021, but received it in person this year. Michael is the 16th awardee in the 37 years ofthe association. It is in recognition of sustained and outstanding service to the ASCILITE community, particularly in leadership around its scholarly direction and activities.

FloraDER also congratulates Hua (Flora) Jin for her Best Paper award. Flora is a research student with our colleagues in COLAM, including DER member Yi-Shan Tsai. The paper on learning analytics and feedback can be read here.

Congratulations as well to Josephine Hook and team (includng DER member Prof Michael Henderson) for second place for the Poster awards. The poster builds on their chapter and explores the themes and implications surrouding Educational Design creative risk taking. You can read more about the chapter and see the poster here.

Moving beyond folk pedagogies towards hybrid and blended practices

This chapter follows on, and builds upon, our 2020 JTATE article in which we proposed using Bruner’s (1996) frame of folk pedagogies to consider pedagogical approaches suited to synchronous digital online learning in pre-service teacher education in COVID-19 times.

In this chapter we revisit and add to Bruner’s folk pedagogical frame, pointing to implications for practice, including the need to design for learning that considers the nature of delivery with and through technologies. Through an autoethnographic exploration of our use of pedagogies in emerging hybrid learning environments within teacher education programs in 2022, we emphasize the use of asynchronous resources with synchronous learning and the facilitation of student agency..

____________________

Citation:

Creely, E., Henriksen, D., & Henderson, M. (2022). Moving beyond folk pedagogies towards hybrid and blended practices: A reflection on teacher education post-pandemic. In E. Baumgartner, R. Kaplan-Rakowski, R.E. Ferdig, R. Hartshorne, & C. Mouza (Edits.), A Retrospective of teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic (pp. 31-38). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/221522/.

Digital literacies for refugees and migrants

Digital literacies for people from refugee backgrounds have been widely recognized as critically important for settlement and employment.

This project set out to generate new knowledge in the fields of digital literacies and TESOL by developing and piloting a much-needed conceptual framework for understanding the pedagogical principles for effective teaching of digital literacies to adult refugee and migrant English language learners.

Our project team worked with the Australian Department of Home Affairs, LWA, educators and adult learners to develop the AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide.

.

AMEP Digital Literacies Framework

Teaching digital literacies in adult EAL programs requires appropriate pedagogies.

The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework positions digital literacies as a crucial part of settlement and emphasises that learning digital literacies and English should sit together. The Framework further identifies the four key principles that inform the development of digital literacies pedagogies that connect to the world of adult learners.

Resources for AMEP providers and teachers

The research project resulted in a number of practical resources for AMEP sector and practitioners.

This video explains the framework and resources below

 


The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide

Link
https://doi.org/10.26180/20493207.v3

About
This resource explains the notion of digital literacies, introduces a pedagogical framework for teaching digital literacies in adult EAL settings and presents 15 teaching units with a range of teaching ideas and loosely sequenced scaffolding activities which allows educators to:

    • connect learning units both to The EAL Framework, syllabus and to learners’ lives to achieve multiple learning objectives
    • adapt learning units for specific teaching contexts by modifying the tasks
    • adjust the level of challenge through different levels of scaffolded support, depending on learners’ strengths and needs
    • innovate by organising learning activities in different ways
    • use The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide as a model for developing new learning units

How to cite
Tour, K., Creely, E., Waterhouse, P., & Henderson, M. (2022). AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide. Monash University. https://doi.org/10.26180/20493207.v3


The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide – Teaching resources

Link
https://doi.org/10.26180/20502417.v1

About
This booklet includes teaching resources which were designed and piloted by EAL teachers, with their learners participating in this research project. This booklet does not attempt to address all of the units in The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide; however, these resources do relate directly to five units. These teaching resources illustrate how The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide can be used in practice, and each of these lesson plans includes:

    • a link to The EAL Framework;
    • a sequence of lessons outlining procedures and activities;
    • relevant teaching materials, including worksheets, discussion questions and instructional videos created by teachers;
    • links to The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and its key principles.

How to cite
Tour, K., Creely, E., Waterhouse, P., & Henderson, M. (2022). AMEP Digital Literacies: Teaching Resources. Monash University. https://doi.org/10.26180/20502417.v1


Digital Literacies Diagnostic Tool

Link
https://doi.org/10.26180/20502435.v1 [PDF]

About
This diagnostic tool is a form of diagnostic assessment that enables teachers to gather important information about the current digital literacy practices of learners and assess their strengths, needs and aspirations related to digital literacies. This information can then be used to guide subsequent planning for the effective teaching of digital literacies. At the heart of the tool is a process of teachers knowing their learners to enable best practice planning for teaching.

How to Cite
Tour, K., Creely, E., Waterhouse, P., & Henderson, M. (2022). Digital Literacies Diagnostic (DLD) Tool. Monash University. https://doi.org/10.26180/20502435.v1

What are digital literacies?

The concept of digital literacies is defined and understood in many different ways, depending on theoretical orientations and educational purposes. The AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide is based on the proposition that there is no one universal form of digital literacy easily transferable from one context to another. Rather, different contexts, social purposes and technologies will require a range of skills, knowledge and understandings. From this perspective, digital literacies are defined as purposeful and critical practices involving multimodal reading, writing, creating, communicating and viewing with digital technologies.

Examples of digital literacy practices are numerous, and new ones continue to emerge as technologies develop and people go about their lives (Jones & Hafner, 2021). Thus, it is impossible to list all digital literacy practices that people engage in. A useful starting point may be thinking about digital literacies as language (and non-language) activities that people practise in different digital environments, for specific social purposes and across different social contexts (Tour, 2020).

Some examples of digital literacy practices include:

  • Accessing and viewing meaningfully a cooking tutorial on YouTube
  • Navigating to and reading sport news on The Age webpage
  • Completing an online form on HotDocs to book a medical appointment
  • Text messaging a real estate agent to organise a property inspection
  • Sending an email to a child’s teacher about absence
  • Planning a car trip to Ikea using Google Maps
  • Downloading personal immunisation history on the Medicare platform

Learning digital literacies is an ongoing and lifelong process. Therefore, the role of the formal learning settings is to prepare students for the evolving nature of digital literacies rather than just focus on skills development.

The more exposure to different digital literacy practices learners have, the more confident they become to independently engage in new practices that will be continuously emerging in their lives (Rowsell et al., 2017).

About the project

This project set out to generate new knowledge in the fields of digital literacies and TESOL by developing and piloting a much-needed conceptual framework for understanding the pedagogical principles for effective teaching of digital literacies to adult refugee and migrant English language learners.

The importance of digital literacies for settlement and employment of people from refugee and migrant backgrounds has been widely recognised. However, there is scarce research about the digital needs of this vulnerable group of learners as they settle in Australia. There is a need for a conceptually rigorous and research-informed approach to the teaching of digital literacies within adult EAL contexts.

Using multiple comparative case study, this three-phase research project has been designed to:

  1. contribute new understanding of the critical factors hindering and supporting digital literacy practices of these learners for settlement and employment; and
  2. develop a evidence based resource, the AMEP Digital Literacies Framework and Guide.

The aim is to support the work of AMEP institutions and teachers aspiring to equip their learners with a useful repertoire of digital literacies required for settlement and gaining employment in Australia.

AMEP project infographic

Project team

Dr Katrina Tour

Katrina’s research focuses on the digital literacies of children and adults from refugee and migrant backgrounds. She investigates the ways in which these groups use digital technologies in English as an Additional Language (EAL) for life, learning and employment, and explores how these experiences can be used to enhance educational policies and pedagogies for digital literacies in EAL/TESOL settings.

Dr Ed Creely

Ed has wide ranging experience in education from primary and secondary to tertiary and adult education. His current projects include academic wellbeing, digital literacies for adults from migrant and refugee backgrounds, creativity and literacy practices in the middle years.

Peter Waterhouse

Dr Peter Waterhouse

Peter is an experienced adult educator, lecturer, manager, consultant and researcher with an established track record in teaching and research relating to adult learning, adult literacy, work, skills, and workplace change.

Xuan Pham

Dr Xuan Pham

Dr Xuan Pham joined this project as a research assistant. Dr Pham has expertise in adult education, with a focus on educational identities and differences in relation to gender, ethnicity and migration. She is also interested in critical English language and literacy, with a particular attention to the dynamic power relations that have shaped the positioning of the language, literacy and experiences of those stakeholders involved.

Professor Michael Henderson

Michael is a senior leader and scholar in the field of digital education. Unique to his profile is that his research spans early childhood, schools, universities, professional and informal learning contexts. His current research projects are generally aligned with the three broad fields: assessment and feedback, risk (wellbeing and creativity), and effective teaching and learning with online technologies.

Educational design and productive failure: stories of creative risk taking

This chapter focuses on the creative risk taking involved in educational design and is an exciting collaboration between DER member Prof Michael Henderson and 12 senior Educational Designers embedded centrally and within 9 Faculties.

Educational designers regularly engage in a process of creative risk taking. Inevitably, some designs result in degrees of failure, which need to be productively managed. Surprisingly, creative risk taking and productive failures are rarely discussed or studied in the field of educational design or educational technology.

Through the analysis of educational designer narratives we identified that there is a broad aversion to openly acknowledging the risks and failures. This was partly due to a drive for narratives of success by institutions and education in general, combined with the often precarious positions of the designers themselves who work in a “third space” beside and between educators and students and who therefore have to establish and sustain the trust of those who they work with.

In this chapter and our subsequent work we have identified seven strategies for educational designers and institutional leaders to promote changes in practice:

  1. Normalize failure: acknowledge failures in every creative success; actively create time to reflect on practice as a habit; leaders at all levels to role model productive framing of failure.
  2. Recognize the emotional labour of failure and vulnerability in engaging with it: acknowledge that it is hard to talk about failure; leaders need to show vulnerability and role model this too; embed emotional intelligence in reflective practice; recognize that educators are often in vulnerable positions as well, feeling at risk in revealing themselves to educational designers.
  3. Involve others and resist internalising failure: include educators, students and other diverse perspectives in the design and reflection cycles; adopt or build a supportive community that engenders the sharing of vulnerability and candour.
  4. Position failure as part of a process: adopt a designerly mindset – finding solutions is an ongoing cycle of design and redesign; define the role of educational design as a creative endeavour, in which failure is explicitly framed as a possibility.
  5. Purposefully build trusting and candid relationships over time: encourage candour through adopting a welcoming and accepting approach to problems, needs and concerns.
  6. Question the validity of success criteria: leaders at all levels need to be critical of measures of successful educational design such as grade outcomes and student satisfaction which are usually confounded with competing factors.
  7. Revise the language surrounding the work of educational design: leaders need to frame the position descriptions, strategic directions and outcome expectations to include concepts of iteration, experimentation, trialling, prototyping and productive failure.

This study reveals that failure is both an inherent risk in creative educational design work, but failure can also be productive.

Below is a poster presentation of our research – offering the seven strategies themtically organised into three themes of strategic action: shaping expectations, redefining processes, and supporting people..

Citation:

Henderson, M., Abramson, P., Bangerter, M., Chen, M., D’Souza, I., Fulcher, J., Halupka, V., Hook, J., Horton, C., Macfarlan, B., Mackay, R., Nagy, K., Schliephake, K., Trebilco, J. & Vu, T. (2022). Educational design and productive failure: the need for a culture of creative risk taking. In Handbook of Digital Higher Education (pp. 14-25). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800888494.00011

Improving instructional video design: A systematic review

New systematic literature review on instructional video design principles.

Authors: Matt Fyfield, with DER members Michael Henderson and Michael Phillips

The most common theoretical lens used to design and evaluate instructional videos has been to apply principles emerging from the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. However, these principles have been largely developed from research using instructional media other than videos. In addition, there is no comprehensive list of principles that have been shown to improve learning from instructional videos. Therefore, this paper seeks to identify principles of video design that are empirically supported in the literature.

This article provides useful guidance for instructional designers creating educational video content.

In addition to describing the breadth of research in the field, this paper also found that the development of the research field suffers from a lack of coherence and is in urgent need of clear nomenclature and improved reporting of media and research design.

Fyfield, M., Henderson, M., & Phillips, M. (2022). Improving instructional video design: A systematic review. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3), 150–178. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7296

Cover image: Photo by George Milton

❌
❌