# data[].attributes.headline
The Practice Profile of Inquiry: Connecting digital literacy and pedgagogy

# data[].attributes.subject
The Practice Profile of Inquiry: Connecting digital literacy and pedgagogy

# data[].attributes.body
Casey and Bruce (2011)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The practice profile of inquiry Connecting digital literacy and pedagogy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
DigEuLit Concepts and Tools for Digital Literacy Development

# data[].attributes.headline
Technology in the classroom: why we need to identify the areas of promise

# data[].attributes.subject
Technology in the classroom: why we need to identify the areas of promise

# data[].attributes.body
The other day a very talented and committed member of my team suddenly looked very worried...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The other day a very talented and committed member of my team suddenly looked very worried and asked me: "What if we're wrong?"

"What do you mean?" I replied.

"What if we're wrong about digital technology and education? What if it doesn't make any difference? There's no evidence from previous trials that technology makes any difference to attainment. What if we're wasting money?"

I wish I could say I made a rousing speech that convinced her and everyone around me that we were on a noble mission that could, and inevitably would, result in a profusion of digital education experiences that would achieve greater impact (at, of course, a lower cost) than the world has ever seen before.

Instead I chuckled nervously, said, "Yes, we ought to have a strong response to that", and rushed off to pick my daughter up from childcare.

But I've been thinking about it a lot. The first conclusion I came to on my way to the tube (call it l'esprit d'escalator) was that, right or wrong, we have a responsibility to look at digital technology in the context of education. Connection to the internet is the most powerful mass communication tool since the invention of the book (I'm willing to have that argument if anyone wants it). It has affected how we work, talk and think - not to explore education in this context seems wilfully short-sighted.

The lack of evidence for the success of technology in the classroom is, by and large, indicative of a lack of evidence, full stop. Instead, we have anecdotes, individual case studies, expensive and irreplicable islands of excellence and futurology (guesswork).

One thing we're pretty sure of is that unless technology and teaching change together, the impact is always going to be minimal. A digital replication of analogue practice is never going to change much for learners (I'm looking at you smartboards and ebooks). Technology and pedagogy must develop in partnership in order to, as Michael Fullan puts it, "lift the lid off learning".

This means there's a bit of a journey to go through before we can even get to rigorous evidence. First, we need promising technologies (more on that later) that suggest new models of teaching - to achieve this requires technologists and teachers to work together to define both the product and its use.

Once a replicable model of technology-enhanced pedagogy has been defined in the classroom, if it shows promise, it must be taken to a statistically relevant scale. This has all the usual problems of fighting firewalls, connection speeds, access to hardware, etc. in at least 30 schools.

Only at that point can we conduct an RCT or other rigorous evaluation.

And this isn't a once-off process. Digital technology moves so fast and has so many variants that this process will be required again and again as new products, that inspire thinking, come to market.

At Nesta, what we hope to do (and need partnerships to achieve) is create a system where academics, technologists and teachers can work together to identify areas of promise for technology, articulate learning challenges where digital technology might be useful, and then collaborate to create useful educational models where teaching and tech work together.

The first step we've taken is to commission a report that will be published later this month. It takes a very wide look at the existing landscape of educational technology. It maps these, not by product type or hardware required, but against learning acts that we know have an impact - for example, effective feedback or collaborative learning.

The results are intriguing, not least when it reveals that the narrow range of learning acts that commercial products support. A picture begins to emerge where there are big areas of promise for the development of really useful new digital technologies to support innovative and effective pedagogy.

The next step is to use the report to galvanise tech companies, teachers and academics to work together, and to create new models for tech-supported pedagogy that are ready for evaluation. Only then can we find out if we're right or wrong.

And what if we're wrong? What a wonderful piece of progress, to know for sure that an avenue is no longer worth exploring.

But what if we're right...?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Technology in the classroom: why we need to identify the areas of promise

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The other day a very talented and committed member of my team suddenly looked very worried and asked me: "What if we're wrong about digital technology and education? What if it doesn't make any difference? There's no evidence from previous trials that technology makes any difference to attainment.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 resources model of Critical Digital Literacy

# data[].attributes.subject
5 resources model of Critical Digital Literacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 resources model of Critical Digital Literacy

# data[].attributes.body
When was the article written?
Tuesday, 09 October 2012

When would this benefit society?
Now,
In the future,
When the report is published and acted upon, made into policy

When is the best time to take action?
As soon as possible,
Now

When will we know we've succeeded?
When evidence shows that technology makes a difference to attainment,

When the report is used to galvanise tech companies, teachers and academics to work together and create new models for tech supported pedagogy,

If we notice significant improvements in learning,

After teachers and academics work together to create new models,

Technology continues to develop so we will never reach our end-goal

When can we expect this to change?
When there's funding and commitment from educators and the government,

When there's commitment from teachers and parents,

When evidence is shown and proven

# data[].attributes.body
Who wrote the article?
blog author
Tom Kenyon
Nesta

Who makes decisions about this?
editors
government bodies

Who is most directly affected?
ed tech people
teachers
governing bodies
children

Who will be the key people in this? governing bodies
Teachers
Principals
technologists

Who is left out of the conversation? No references, no citations so other authors left out!
Students
Children

# data[].attributes.body
Why is this a problem/challenge?

Because a lot of time and money is being spent on something that may not be achieving what was expected,

We don't know the extent that technology effects our education, it's always growing,

Because technology is quickly changing and it is a broad platform,

Why is it relevant to teachers?
So that teachers are aware of the best ways to educate their students,

Teachers are using online resources,

Because technology is used every day in classrooms but we do not know how effective it is.

Why are people concerned about this?
Because there is no solid research on tech in education,

People are thinking about whether it's necessary or not, Have we been wasting money?

Why should people know about this?
As there is no evidence of the difference technology makes,

People should be aware of technology.

Why has it been this way for so long?
Technology is always evolving,

Because it is such a vast platform and in society tech in education is often seen as of great benefit.

# data[].attributes.body
What type of article is this?
Blog piece

Discursive

What would be a counter-argument?
The money that is being put into this could instead be used to fund more necessary things

What is the best-case scenario?
That the report concludes that dig lit helps children learn as soon as possible,

Creating a system where academics, technologists, and teachers can work together to identify areas of priority.

What can teachers do to make a positive change?
Go with what is being shown to them,

Have an open mind,

Not rely too much on technology and still use traditional effective methods of learning.

What is getting in the way of our action?
Money,
Time

# data[].attributes.body
How  is digital literacy different to ICT literacy?
interchangable

context dependent

How do we know the truth about this?

How will we approach this safely?
encourage critical thinking,

parental participation,

collaboration with colleagues.

How does this benefit us?/others?
Efficiency (time-saving)

Teaching children skills around internet safety,

Make students more employable.

How would you investigate this issue further?
more research,

library website,

Google scholar,

look at both sides of the argument.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tips & Resources from Common Sense Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Tips & Resources from Common Sense Education

# data[].attributes.body
Teaching with tech can be a breeze with the right instructional resources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Common Sense Education provides educators and students with the resources they need to harness the power of technology for learning and life. Find a free K-12 Digital Citizenship curriculum, reviews of popular EdTech apps, and resources for protecting student privacy.

# data[].attributes.body
Where is the article about?
The UK

Where is there the most need for action?

Where can we get more information?

Where do we go for help with this?

Where are the areas for improvement?