# data[].attributes.body
Australian Government website on liveability statistics which would work really well with the mapping chart idea where students can integrate data into the online map.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The concept of 'livability' is a subjective and multifaceted concept without a standard definition. For the purposes of this chapter, it is defined as the life quality and satisfaction of people and communities. This includes health, living standards, community and social cohesion, security and safety, freedom, rights, recognition and self-determination, cultural and spiritual fulfilment of people, and their connection to Country and nature.

Consistent with this definition, the Australian Urban Observatory (AUO) identifies a livable community as one that is safe, socially cohesive, inclusive and environmentally sustainable. Highly livable areas provide affordable housing that is well serviced by public transport, walking and cycling infrastructure. They have good access to employment, education, shops and services, public open spaces, and social, cultural and recreational facilities.

The AUO applies 13 measures to assess the livability of Australia's 21 largest urban areas. Its most recent scorecard concluded that, although Australian cities are livable, the degree varies. It found that older, more established inner-city areas were generally more livable than the fringe areas of many urban areas because of their better access to public transport, employment opportunities and services.

Access to jobs, food, services and digital connectivity

Urban accessibility relates to the proximity of citizens to a variety of employment, food and community services, and the ability to travel to them in a safe and cost-effective way. As stated by Arundel et al. (2017) , a more-accessible urban environment provides a range of wellbeing and environmental benefits by:

reducing the need for and duration of commuting, which reduces stress levels and increases the amount of time that can be spent each day doing recreational activities

reducing the cost of private vehicle use and increasing the opportunities for incidental exercise such as walking

reducing the environmental implications of traffic congestion and vehicle emissions

improving health, education, early childhood community development, culture, sport and recreation services, all of which promote physical and mental wellbeing

improving social equity via digital connections, which support educational attainment, information availability and employment opportunities.

Improving access to these services can be achieved in our urban areas by urban densification, which increases the number of people who live close to existing work opportunities, food and services. Alternatively, work, food and services can be brought closer to people through the development of local neighbourhoods and community centres and through urban decentralisation (see Management approaches).

Jobs

The AUO measured access to employment as the percentage of employees living and working within the same statistical area (Table 7). This measure is often referred to as job containment. On this basis, the AUO found that smaller urban areas such as Mackay, Toowoomba and Townsville scored most favourably in terms of commute times and access to jobs.

Based on job containment measures alone, Australia's larger urban areas scored significantly lower than the smaller urban areas - the AUO ranked Perth and Sydney equal 14th, Melbourne 16th, Brisbane 17th and Adelaide 18th. It should also be recognised that these assessments do not factor in recent changes to how we work in response to the COVID-19 pandemic - that, is the increasing rates of working from home and the associated livability benefits and challenges (see COVID-19 pandemic).

Food

To calculate access to food, the AUO measured the average distance to any type of supermarket from individual dwellings using a pedestrian accessible road network (see Public transport; Table 7). It found that Launceston ranked the highest of the 21 largest urban areas in Australia, followed by Canberra and Sydney. However, similar to the jobs measure, this measure fails to consider the quality of the supermarket and its provision of a diversity of fresh foods.

Recent research suggests that food insecurity for many Indigenous communities in both urban and remote communities has been further challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic:

Services

The AUO measured access to 16 different social services and forms of community infrastructure in various urban areas (Table 7). It found that larger urban areas had the best access to services - Sydney and Melbourne were ranked highest, followed by Adelaide. This conclusion is likely to reflect the population size of these urban areas and their ability to support a greater number and range of social services than regional urban environments.

Digital connectivity

The reliability of digital connections is increasingly recognised to be a critical form of urban infrastructure, given the role it plays in providing information, and educational and employment opportunities. Digital connections are in turn influencing the shape of our urban environments by changing our need to travel.

Travel

Ease of travel and access to a variety of goods, services, employment and education opportunities is a key factor in urban livability and, in turn, wellbeing. As our population grows and urban environments expand, the number of kilometres (km) we travel each year similarly continues to grow (see Population).

In fact, the total passenger-kilometres travelled each year has at least doubled in each capital city since 1977, except for Adelaide (Table 8). For Darwin and Brisbane, the distance has near tripled (albeit coming off a lower base).

Public transport

Access to reliable and regular public transport is another key factor in the livability of our urban environments. It is a more sustainable form of travel for the environment and is important for various age groups and abilities, given that not all citizens are eligible for drivers licences. Proximity to public transport also encourages more active forms of travel, with associated health and wellbeing benefits.

The AUO assessed access to transport based on average distance to the closest public transport stop, the proportion of dwellings within 400 metres (m) of a bus stop, and frequency of services (Table 9). It found that, across Australia's 21 largest urban areas, access to regular public transport was best for residents living in Canberra, followed by Sydney and Adelaide.

In general, the AUO found that the larger the city or urban area, the more available and frequent the public transport. However, there was a notable difference between the quality of services in the inner-city areas and the outer city areas, with regional cities different again - they generally have reduced levels of access to regular public transport.

Despite the benefits of public transport, its use as a proportion of total travel across all Australian capital cities (excluding commercial vehicles) between 2015-16 and 2018-19 only changed modestly (+1%). This modest increase was largely driven by the proportional increase in public transport in Greater Sydney (+2%) and Hobart (+1%), with proportions in all other capital cities remaining constant.

The exception to this was 2019-20, when the use of public transport decreased significantly in many cities (-2% of all travel excluding commercial vehicles). The most significant declines occurred in Greater Sydney (-5% of total trips) and Darwin (-3%). These changes were driven by the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated rapid increase in working from home, combined with broader travel restrictions (see COVID-19 pandemic).

A survey of Australian households conducted during the first wave of the pandemic in Australia (March 2020) found that:

Walking

The structure and layout of our urban areas has a critical influence on their walkability and cyclability. Most of our urban councils are recognising the importance of these factors to our livability, with increasing public spending on improvements to support better outcomes. In a survey of councils across Australia for this report, it was found that of those councils actively working to improve the livability of the urban environment for their citizens, 96% were providing more cycling and walking paths and 65% were improving walkability to shops and services.

Measuring the walkability of an area is not an exact science - there are several variables. Walkability is defined by the as the 'ease of walking in an area', being the composite of 'local neighbourhood attributes, including street connectivity, dwelling density and the index of access to services of daily living'.

Walking Country

Walking Country is an essential part of Indigenous people's ability to connect to Country. This connection takes place on many levels, including physical, emotional and spiritual. Connecting to Country promotes the sense of belonging to their environment that Indigenous people have, whether this environment is urban or regional. Walking Country is also a reminder for Indigenous people of their need to maintain their cultural obligations, such as custodianship and care for Country (see the Indigenous chapter).

Walking Country encourages a place-based approach to planning and design that can better incorporate specific or unique aspects of places including identity and language. It can also enhance knowledge and awareness of the environment through observation, thus promoting custodianship.

Cycling

Safety and security

Part of an urban area's livability relates to its perceived safety and sense of community security.

Many cities around the world are actively changing how they design cities to enhance perceived and actual safety. For example, following London's lead with a Women's Night Safety Charter, the Greater Sydney Commission designed a Women's Safety Charter to support the development of a female-friendly city. This concept recognises that a city that is safe for women is safe for everyone. The charter has more than 100 government and industry partners who have committed to designing cities for women; collecting, sharing and reporting relevant data; and taking collective action.

The natural environment

Our urban spaces can be seen as purely artificial constructions, but every urban environment incorporates - and significantly benefits from - elements of the natural environment. Access to nature, green spaces and biodiversity has also been found to have important livability and wellbeing benefits to urban citizens. Also, urban spaces and the built environment do not erase Indigenous belonging and custodianship of the land, as Yuin man Jade Kennedy explains:

Green cover

While there is a positive trend towards increasing green cover in urban areas, many urban areas are still making up for long-term losses. The Greener Spaces Better Places consortia have been monitoring the extent of green cover (trees of more than 3 m and shrubs typically under 3 m) across 131 local government areas in Australia (Figure 5). It found that:

69% of council areas surveyed experienced an overall loss of green cover between 2013 to 2020

This result shows a positive shift towards increasing green cover in government policy, with most (88%) of the 131 councils surveyed developing or maintaining a strong management framework to address urban forest cover on public land, together with strong organisational and community support to implement this work. Most councils surveyed identified that these gains mostly relate to public land, with presently limited potential to drive positive outcomes on private land.

Aggregating these data to a state and territory level showed that, between 2016 and 2020, Tasmania and Queensland recorded the highest percentage of increase in the urban tree canopy cover (Figure 6). During the same period, all states (except for South Australia) experienced a decrease in the percentage of shrub cover and all (except for Northern Territory) experienced a decrease in the percentage of grass or bare groundcover.

The same study found that the top 5 areas for green cover were:

Cairns Regional Council, Queensland (82.9%)

Yarra Ranges Council, Victoria (78.6%)

Hornsby Shire Council, New South Wales (78.6%)

Kingborough Council, Tasmania (73.9%)

Sutherland Shore Council, New South Wales (+72.6%).

Wyndham City Council, Victoria, had Australia's lowest recorded level of green cover with 5.4%.

The top 5 local government areas that increased their green cover between 2016 and 2020 were:

Launceston, Tasmania (+9.5%)

the Sunshine Coast, Queensland (+8.4%)

Sutherland Shire Council, New South Wales (+8.2%)

Kwinana, Western Australia (+7.9%)

Glenorchy City Council, Tasmania (+7.1%).

Between 2016 and 2020, 73% of local government areas (LGAs) increased the extent of their hard surfaces. Of interest, many of the LGAs that gained hard surface cover did so at the same time as gaining urban forest cover. These areas also experienced the greatest population growth, indicating that urban greening was being successfully planned and delivered alongside urban development and intensification. Examples of such areas are:

Vincent (+2.3% urban forest cover, +2.1% hard surface)

Parramatta (+2.8% urban forest cover, +1.2% hard surface)

Adelaide (+3.6% urban forest cover, +1.2% hard surface)

Despite the positive improvements, the Greener Spaces Better Places research suggested that 67% of our urban places will face moderate to very high challenges to maintain or grow green cover over the next decade.

Access to natural places

mitigating the adverse effects of urbanisation noise and air pollution (WHO, 2017)

cooling the urban environment with green cover (see Urban heat)

enabling Indigenous people to connect on a regular basis to specific spiritual and cultural places for custodial, ceremonial or other cultural obligation reasons.

Despite these benefits, the extent and quality of green cover is declining in our urban areas (see Green cover). Furthermore, access to open spaces varies notably between and within urban areas. Research by Farahani et al. (2018) found that green spaces are often inequitably distributed across cities . Often, areas of socio-economic advantage have more tree canopy cover than areas of lower advantage . Also, as Saunders et al. (2020) highlighted from Dobbs et al. (2017) : 'cities with greater levels of inequality have been shown to exhibit more fragmented and lower quality urban vegetation overall'.

The AUO measured the proportion of the population of the largest 21 urban areas that had a public open space (urban park greater than or equal to 1.5 hectares) within 400 (or 5 minutes) from their homes. For the purposes of the analysis, public open space was defined as 'parks, open areas and places where people can congregate for active and passive recreation and enjoyment'. The analysis found the urban area with the greatest proportion of its residents with access to open space within 400 m was Canberra (72%), with most cities achieving between 40% and 50% (Table 11).

Access is one consideration; the quality and usability of the space is another. A case study of Stoney Creek in Sunshine North, Melbourne, by Farahani et al. (2018) found 'that wildlands and unmanicured greenspaces within cities can trigger negative experiences such as fear, disgust or an unpleasant feeling'. Similarly, this study showed that poor maintenance was associated with a sense of unsafety because of perceived natural hazards, such as the presence of snakes. One interviewee referred to the area not being safe for his dogs or himself.

Urban biodiversity

Far from being ecological deserts, our urban areas play an important role in supporting a diverse range of flora and fauna, including providing critical habitat for endangered species:

Urban habitat ranges from street trees, lawns, parks, urban forests, cultivated land, wetlands, lakes and streams and private yards, to less obvious locations such fill and transfer stations, tips, general rubbish and waste treatment plants.

Other threats to biodiversity in urban areas are:

fragmentation from urban sprawl, and logging and agricultural expansion

vehicle strikes and dog attacks

Threatened species

A report by the Nature Conservation Council 2020 found that 25% of all nationally listed threatened plants and 46% of nationally listed threatened animals can be found in 99 of Australia's largest towns and cities. The same report identified that Australian cities have a disproportionately high number of threatened species and are home to, on average, 3 times as many threatened species per hectare as rural environments.

More than 370 threatened species listed in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 are found in Australian cities and towns , and more than 30 of Australia's threatened species can only be found in urban areas (Table 12). This highlights the critical importance of our urban environments to biodiversity imperatives. National conservation policy should adapt to recognise the important role cities play in planning for and managing threatened species .

Threatened species in urban areas are under increasing threat, mainly because of habitat destruction. While the new approaches to urban sustainability and regeneration, supported by citizen science, are being trialled to address this (see Urban planning and collaboration), between 2000 and 2017, habitat loss continued to be significant in urban areas. The 5 urban areas that experienced the most significant habitat loss (urban forest and woodland) were Brisbane, Gold Coast - Tweed Heads, Townsville, Sunshine Coast and Sydney. In these 5 areas combined, at least 20,212 hectares (ha) of forested urban threatened species habitat was destroyed. More forested urban habitat was destroyed in Queensland (12,923 hectares) than in any other state or territory (Table 13).

The 5 species most affected by habitat destruction were the red goshawk (14,877 ha), the grey-headed flying fox (13,522 ha), the koala (13,053 ha), the Australasian bittern (12,274 ha) and the regent honeyeater (9,242 ha).

Empowering Indigenous perspectives and aspirations within urban environments, especially in terms of custodial responsibilities to Country, empowers actions to protect endangered and threatened plants and animals . Ranger projects and Working on Country projects that empower Indigenous communities are not just viable in remote areas, but can also bring great value to urban areas, especially when we consider the proven wellbeing outcomes of working on Country for Indigenous communities and the environment (see case study: Kaurna cultural burns).

Biodiversity benefits

While urban areas can threaten species, their communities can also play a key role in the solution (see Management approaches). A 2019 survey of 55,000 people by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation found that an 'appreciation of the natural environment' was the second-most important aspect of 'being Australian' . Because of this value, a growing number of Australians are actively working to protect and reintroduce wildlife into our urban areas.

Biodiverse urban areas are not only considered valuable for the ecology that lives within them, but the identity, health and wellbeing of urban citizens.

Air quality

The urban environment can significantly affect the quality of our air through emissions from human activities such as vehicle traffic, wood combustion heaters and industry. Air quality can in turn have a significant impact on the quality of our urban environments and our wellbeing, as well as urban and marine biodiversity wellbeing.

Comparatively, air quality in Australia's urban areas is considered good (see the Air Quality chapter). The air pollutants of most concern in Australia are particles suspended in the air that are less than 2.5 microns across (PM 2.5) and ozone. In Europe, concentrations of PM 2.5 vary from 8.5 to 29.3 milligrams per cubic metre (mg/m ³). By comparison, in Sydney they average 7.5 mg/m ³ and in Perth 4.4 mg/m 3 .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Australia is one of the most urbanised countries in the world - more than 96% of the Australian population (around 24.5 million) live in urban areas and 68% live within the greater metropolitan areas of Australia's 8 capital cities.

# data[].attributes.body
Curated Arterfact (Canva)

Canva is an interactive design tool which allows for an unlimited amount of creativity allowing students to create and choose the many different way in which the digital tool can be used. Canva allows students to draw, create documents, whiteboards, presentations, videos with hundreds of different templates for students to create, evaluate, analyse and present ideas and skills. The best thing about Canva is the ability for students to corroborate with one another and it is ideal for flexible lesson planning, team led work and allows students to create and explore their own learning which is crucial to higher order of thinking processes. The digital platform was created in Australia and has data encryption, security, in app permissions and account safety features which makes this artefact a great opportunity to be utilised in the classroom.

How does Canva Deepen and Enhance Learning Outcomes?

There are several ways in which Canva can enhance and deepen the knowledge of students. The first thing that I noticed is just how much collaboration and exchange of information can be conducted between students. Canva is suitable to group activity work by allowing students to read other discussions, evaluations and analysis of related classroom topics. This program allows students to communicate these ideas by sharing and collaborating and most importantly provide feedback with one another. The ability for students to inquire with others work and provide feedback can provide more learning enhancement over a teacher provide the classroom with instructions.

Canva has so many options for students it allows for not only creativeness but teachers can also differentiate learning and change lesson outcomes due to its unlimited amount of option and can be based in conjunction with other learning materials such as Geographic Maps, creating ideas to support liveability and place unit.

Students in a Geography classroom setting are able to create relevant work that displays their understanding of geographical content through an array of modification and redefinition works such as PowerPoints with voice overview, videos, whiteboards, presentations, statistical graphing, posters, websites and social media.

The visuals interaction of Canva is probably one of my favourite aspects as it allows students to modify and redefine their own learning with different colours, fonts, texts, layouts to support their knowledge, collaboration, evaluation, and analysis of classroom activities. Canva is not just another “digital tool” that merely creates interaction, it is a learning tool for the 21st Century Classroom and allows students to develop the skills and knowledge they need in a visual and authentic environment in line with today’s workforce.

How Would I Integrate Canva into a Lesson?

I would initially start the lesson with the overall content that students are expected to work on throughout the lesson. This could be supported by creating a lesson criteria which places the emphasis on the students at the start of the lesson. At the end of the lesson I like to inquire and reflect with students to test their knowledge and reflect whether the lesson criteria was met, questioning whether I can improve the lesson for next time.

As per my first lesson idea of ‘designing a neighbourhood in twenty minutes’ I would let students create this ideal neighbourhood by any of the drawing features available to them as the first part of the lesson adding visuals and creativity.

The second part of the lesson would be a researchable task of three critical services that their neighbourhood needs so that it would be a liveable place for persons to reside. Students would be able to complete this extensive creation and explaining, justifying, and evaluating their reasonings for adding those services to the neighbourhood. Students are then able to collaborate with one another’s ideas by marking other students work through the Canva platform.

How to Support ICT use?

There are several steps that I would achieve before fully integrating the Canva platform in the classroom. The first step would be to introduce the Canva platform to the class and its unlimited amounts of creativity. I would allow students to use the platform so that they can visualise which allows them time to getting use to the range of features available for use. I could allow students to create their own chats to talk about and reflect on the Canva platform particularly positive and negative things they like about the interface.

Why Canva?

Canva is fantastic for the geography classroom I believe that a large majority of tasks can be created by students on this platform obviously in collaboration with other lesson plans and digital tools. I would like to create a lesson plan with Canva being the base tool utilised for my mini unit. Its interface, visual appeal and ability to make an array of texts, numerical data, statistics and collaboration with endless other opportunities is why I believe this will make a great ICT platform for my mini unit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Draw, sketch, collaborate in real-time using the Draw app on any Canva design. Use our freehand drawing tool to mindmap & connect ideas, fast!

# data[].attributes.body
I found this resource when reading Nicholas Jobson's Padlet in relation to this unit. This is a really awesome learning resource that I could implement into my lesson ideas, integrate with other digital tools. The map is highly interactive, user friendly and allows the maps to be adjusted per the requirements of the task. The resource could be used in the following general capabilities of the General Curriculum including

Numeracy:

Students interpret maps, models, diagrams, and remotely sensed and satellite images.

Students learn to analyse numerical data to make meaning of the past, to test relationships in patterns and between variables

Digital Capabilities:

·       Students access and use digital literacy, including spatial technologies, as an investigative and creative tool

·       Students critically Analyse evidence and trends, and critique source reliability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Make your own custom map of the World, United States, Europe, and 50+ different maps. Color an editable map and download it for free to use in your project.

# data[].attributes.body
Located this source from another Jordan Desales Padlet. Thought this was a great idea for a lesson plan in relation to trench warfare of WW1. Minecraft is a digital game that many students will be able to be familiar with and supports the visual learner style. Really like this idea to be used in the classroom as a future digital lesson tool.

# data[].attributes.body
Classroom Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is the SAMR model?

The SAMR model is a framework that orders strategies for classroom technology implementation into four stages:

In each stage of the SAMR model, the use of educational technology (EdTech) becomes increasingly sophisticated.

Substitution and augmentation strategies use EdTech to enhance learning and add value, whereas modification and redefinition stages harness EdTech to transform learning and make new things possible.
The effectiveness of any of these four strategies depends on when and how it is used.
Here's how you can harness each stage for more powerful classroom learning:

Substitution

This is the simplest stage, where EdTech is used as a direct substitute for traditional practices.

Substitution strategies can save you time and space by cutting back on laborious pen and paper tasks. Instead of printing out twenty-plus paper resources that clog the cupboard, you can use technology to manage resources with just a few clicks.

Substitution also provides a much more accessible introduction to technological soft skills than modification and redefinition. It's the perfect opportunity for students to get comfortable with new technology before you start to transform their learning.

Examples of substitution

having students type their work instead of handwriting it

using online quizzes and programs instead of pen and paper

uploading a worksheet in PDF for student access, as opposed to photocopying

using a digital interactive whiteboard as opposed to a traditional whiteboard and saving the results as a document.

Remember: Substitution strategies do not change the learning process or outcome. Ask yourself what you and your students will gain from the technology before implementing it. If it adds nothing but hassle, stick to pen and paper.

Augmentation

At the augmentation stage, technology adds something to the learning process beyond just convenience. It might give your students a clearer understanding of a complex topic or making it engaging in a way that traditional methods can't.

It also allows for the introduction of more independent and student-centric learning. By using technology as a source of information, students can start actively learning without requiring constant teacher-led instruction.

Examples of augmentation

Students give more informative and engaging oral presentations accompanied by a PowerPoint or Prezi containing multimedia elements.

Students use the internet to independently research a topic, as opposed to relying on teacher input.

Students use an EdTech program that gamifies curriculum content for student engagement and allows students to track progress in an accessible way.

Teacher instruction is supplemented with a video that clarifies a particularly hard to explain concept.

Modification

At the modification stage, technology is used to design interactive and dynamic tasks that go beyond the limitations of a traditional classroom.

For example, students can collaborate on shared documents, or work in large groups, allowing for seamless collaboration and knowledge sharing. This peer-to-peer work nurtures a more cooperative and dynamic class culture.

Technologically modified tasks also allow students to generate inspired and innovative work that isn't confined to paper. Some students will jump at the opportunity to get in front of a camera, while others will do anything to make it onto the global Mathletics leaderboard.

Examples of modification

Students produce podcasts summarising a topic, which can then be accessed by other students as a revision resource.

Students create an informative video presentation in place of a standard oral presentation. They can use their voice alongside a broader variety of creative multimodal components.

Students use a technological tool that makes an abstract concept visible in a hands-on, responsive way (e.g. voyaging on Google Earth to better understand measurement and geography).

Redefinition

The most sophisticated stage of SAMR, redefinition sees you using technology to make entirely new learning opportunities possible.

Redefining learning has the potential to connect learning with the real world and produce authentic outcomes. It also gives students strong technological soft skills such as digital collaboration, communication, technological literacy, and the ability to adapt to new systems and processes.

Most importantly, using technology to redefine learning in your classroom translates to vibrant and engaged students who embrace a growth mindset.

Examples of redefinition

connecting your students with other people around the world as part of the learning journey

having students publish their work online where it can be viewed by peers and the broader community

recording students as they deliver a presentation or practice a physical skill, then using this recording to prompt student reflection

experimenting with tasks that use extensive multimodal elements (e.g. producing documentaries or short films, webpages, print documents with creative layouts).

Remember, redefinition isn't the same as 'high tech'. A learning experience is redefined when it integrates technology seamlessly and meaningfully to open new doors for student learning - regardless of how sophisticated that technology might be.

In an English classroom, this might involve learning how to critically assess online media during web-based research. In mathematics, students might look at data represented through amazing visuals and get inspired to create their own.

Find your purpose

Starting with a purpose avoids the 'technology for technology's sake' that sometimes infiltrates the classroom.

Ask yourself:

What am I hoping to achieve by using this technology?

How will it make a difference to my students' learning?

Why is it preferable to not using technology?

How equipped are my students and I to use this technology?

How much time do I have to invest in making it work?

These simple questions can make it simpler to determine which stage of the SAMR model suits your needs. Remember that you don't always have to redefine your students' learning. A few simple technological additions to an already effective teaching strategy might be all you need to make a difference.

Using technology in the classroom sends a clear message to students. It shows them that you're connecting learning to the rapidly changing world outside the classroom walls, and you aren't afraid to adapt to a new challenge. Get creative with technology and you'll inspire as well as teach.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The SAMR Model Explained (With 15 Practical Examples)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is the SAMR model and how does it apply to learning? Here's how you can harness each stage for more powerful classroom learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
F-10 Curriculum | V9 Australian Curriculum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ACARA acknowledges the Traditional Owners and Custodians of Country and Place throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters, sky and community.

# data[].attributes.body
Geogrpahy Year 7-10

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How to Apply the SAMR Model with Ruben Puentedura

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join a game of kahoot here. Kahoot! is a free game-based learning platform that makes it fun to learn – any subject, in any language, on any device, for all ages!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
​In 2016 Queensland state schools started fast tracking the implementation of the Australian Curriculum: Digital Technologies. Developing students' digital literacy will ensure they become effective users of digital systems, critical consumers of information conveyed by digital systems and innovative creators of digital solutions.

Fast-tracking the implementation of Digital Technologies is an initiative of #codingcounts​ that includes Robotics of the future and the Premier's coding competition.

Why study digital technologies?​

More than 90% of Australia's current workforce will need digital skills to perform their roles in the next 2-5 years and 60% of Australian students are studying or training for jobs that will be largely automated in the near future.

(Source: Foundation for Young Aus tralians, 2015, The new work order: ensuring young Australians have skills and experience for the jobs of the future, not the past , viewed 29 September 2015.)

What will students learn?

Prep - Students learn about how digital technologies work through exploration and problem-solving.

Years 1 and 2 - Students learn how digital and other technologies work and how to create solutions with technologies through exploration, design and problem-solving.

Years 3 and 4 - Students begin to create digital solutions such as animations and games through the use of visual programming.

Years 5 and 6 - Students use design processes to produce digital solutions. They further develop their knowledge and understanding of digital systems and data while learning to act to ensure their personal safety when engaging online.

Years 7 and 8 - Students develop their computational thinking to create a range of digital solutions, such as robotics, using programming. They learn to communicate and collaborate online with an understanding of cyber-safety as well as legal responsibilities.

Years 9 and 10 - Students learn how to solve complex problems through the creation of digital solutions. They create a range of sustainable digital solutions such as data driven websites and artificial intelligence.

More information about the Australian Curriculum can be found on the Parent information page.

Resources

The Australian Curriculum: Digital Technologies does not specify that students require any additional equipment to study this subject. Schools will advise parents of any specific requirements needed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
technology; information and communications technology; ict;

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Schools are educating students who are growing up in a digital world. As the use of Information and communications technology (ICT) continues to grow globally, students will increasingly demand an education that embraces ICT.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
CSER - The Computer Science Education Research Group

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Evaluating the evidence for educational technology - Part 2 - enabling learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Evaluating the evidence for educational technology - Part 2 - enabling learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research

Open access

Published:

Show authors

International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy 17, Article number: 5 (2023) Cite this article

12k Accesses

6 Citations

12 Altmetric

Metrics

Abstract

This national study explored the role of digital technologies in early childhood education and care settings and whether they could contribute to quality improvement as reported by educators and assessors of quality in Australia. In this paper, data from Stage 2 of the Quality Improvement Research Project were used, which comprised 60 Quality Improvement Plans from educators linked with 60 Assessment and Rating reports from the assessors who visited early childhood centres as part of the administration of the National Quality Standards by each of Australia's State and Territory jurisdictions. Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory ( Bronfenbrenner, U. ( 1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder, Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619-647). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018; Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, Bronfenbrenner and Ceci, Psychological Review 101:568-586, 1994) was adopted to facilitate a systemic and dynamic view on the use of digital technologies in these 60 ECEC settings. References (e.g. comments/ suggestions/ examples) made by the educators about the implementation of digital technologies were counted and thematically analysed. Results revealed the strong role new technologies (e.g. documentation and management platforms, tablets, apps, etc.) play in the majority of ECEC settings and especially in relation to three of the seven Quality Areas: Educational programme and practice (Quality Area 1); Collaborative partnerships with families and communities (Quality Area 6) and Governance and leadership (Quality Area 7). Future directions for research are suggested and implications for embracing a more holistic, integrated and broad view on the use of digital technologies are discussed.

Introduction

Continuous quality improvement is a key policy expectation of early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings in Australia (Australian Early Development Census [AEDC], 2019) and worldwide (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2018). The Australian Government has been at the forefront of universal quality assessment and rating systems in the ECEC sector (Author et al., 2013; Tout et al., 2013). In Australia, ECEC caters for children birth to school entry and includes centre-based ECEC settings (e.g. preschool, kindergarten, long day care) and home-based family day care. The National Quality Framework (NQF) provides a national approach to quality assurance that integrates minimum quality standards as prescribed by law and aspirational quality standards to drive continuous quality improvement in education and care (ACECQA, 2021). To this effect, the NQF comprises a National Law and Regulations, a National Quality Standard (NQS), two Approved Learning Frameworks and a process for Assessment and Rating. Overseen by the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA), the day-to-day implementation of the NQF resides with State and Territory Regulatory Authorities. ACECQA "works with all governments to provide guidance, resources and services to support the sector to improve outcomes for children" (ACECQA, n.d.a, Table 6). The key responsibility here is the evaluation of ECEC setting quality against the seven quality areas of the NQS (ACECQA, HYPERLINK 2018, 2021). (Please note that the explanations of all acronyms are provided throughout this paper and in Table 6, Appendix B.)

The NQS evaluation process requires the ECEC setting to complete a self-assessment /evaluation of current practice and to submit a Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) (ACECQA, n.d.b) identifying perceived strengths and areas and strategies for continuous quality improvement. The QIP aims at helping "providers self-assess their performance in delivering quality education and care, and to plan future improvements" (ACECQA, n.d.b.).

A QIP must

include an assessment of the programmes and practices at the service against the National Quality Standard and National Regulations;

identify areas for improvement and

include a statement about the service's philosophy.

A QIP should also document and celebrate the service's strengths (ACECQA, n.d.b.). Subsequently, a trained assessor from the relevant State/Territory completes a visit to the ECEC setting, and using the A&R instrument (ACECQA, 2018) collects evidence to determine NQS scores against each of the seven Quality Areas (QA) (ACECQA, 2018; 2020):

QA1: Educational programme and practice

QA2: Children's health and safety

QA3: Physical environment

QA4: Staffing arrangements

QA5: Relationships with children

QA6: Collaborative partnerships with families and communities

QA7: Governance and leadership.

Following the visit, the assessor prepares a report for the Regulatory Authority, detailing evidence of practice and recommending ratings for each of these seven QAs (see ACECQA, n.d.c). Quality ratings are published and publicly available on a National Register. These ratings reflect the level of quality and are as follows:

1. (1)
Exceeding NQS: Service goes beyond the requirements of the National Quality Standard in at least four of the seven quality areas, with at least two of these being quality areas 1, 5, 6 or 7.

2. (2)
Meeting NQS: Service meets the National Quality Standard. Service provides quality education and care in all seven quality areas.

3. (3)
Working Towards NQS: Services provides a safe education and care programme. There are one or more areas identified for improvement.

4. (4)
Significant Improvement Required: Service does not meet one of the seven quality areas or a section of the legislation and there is a significant risk to the safety, health and wellbeing of children. The regulatory authority will take immediate action.

(For more details, see https://www.acecqa.gov.au/assessment/assessment-and-rating-process#quality%20ratings).

ECEC settings that achieve a rating of Exceeding NQS in all quality areas can apply, and offer evidence to be awarded an Excellent rating. For being awarded an Excellent rating by ACECQA (not the assessor) a service "promotes exceptional education and care, demonstrates sector leadership and is committed to continually improving" ( https://www.acecqa.gov.au/assessment/excellent-rating). In August 2022, there were 38 ECEC services across Australia that had achieved an Excellent rating.

While data collected by ACECQA since the introduction of the NQS (ACECQA, 2012) have demonstrated improvement in areas such as programme and staffing quality, there are no specific elements or standards in the seven QAs for the role and impact of digital technologies in ECEC settings. This gap has become even more apparent in times of crisis, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, where the key role of digital technologies in teaching and learning was required, but not guaranteed for everyone (e.g. digital divide became more evident for children, families and schools/centres with insufficient or no technological equipment, see studies by Chen, 2015; Dolan, 2016; Sosa Díaz, 2021).

This paper is based on data collected from 60 ECEC settings that participated in Stage 2 of a National Research project (the "Quality Improvement Research Project"), a sequential, three-phase investigation of ECEC settings that showed overall improvement in their NQS ratings over two consecutive A&R rounds (please see more details about the National Project in the Research Design section).

A visual representation of the main systems of the ecological theory and the alignment with the NQS Quality Areas and use of technology

According to the ecological theory, all systems (nested circles: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem and chronosystem) need to work harmoniously together so that they can contribute to optimise children's learning and development. As depicted in Fig. 1, technology may be present in all the systems facilitating multidirectional relationships and interactions between the systems. Starting from inner circle of the microsystem, the everyday use of technology is evident in children's homes and in early childhood settings (Donohue & Schomburg, 2017; Dorouka et al., 2020). The use of technology in the mesosystem for communication and collaboration purposes between parents, educators and other ECEC stakeholders is also widespread (McFadden & Thomas, 2016). In the outer systems of Exosystem and Macrosystem the presence of technology is again increasing rapidly though not sufficiently investigated (Murcia et al., 2018; Wright & Bales, 2014; Yost & Fan, 2014). Finally, the chronosystem refers to the current chronological period, the twenty-first century, a time of technological advancements. Therefore, technology can be seen as an organic, systemic element possibly present in all ECEC operations and processes and not as a standalone tool. If seen in such an organic, systemic way technology may contribute to the improvement of quality in ECEC by strengthening the relationships and balance between all systems. Approaching technology systemically has the potential to broaden our views around what technology entails. Seeing technology as a 'process' (Warschauer, 2002) or as "the underlying structure of our lives" (Castells, 2004, p. 224) will assist with understanding the role technology plays in our everyday lives, jobs and educational practices. This systemic approach will focus on a more dynamic, flexible, structural and organisational view of technology for ECEC sector (Keirl, 2015; Stevenson, 2008).

The following sections briefly review the research around the use of digital technologies in ECEC. The terms digital technology, digital or new technologies or technology are used interchangeably in this paper to include all kinds of digital devices, the internet, digital platforms, social media and any other technological resources (e.g. robotics, interactive whiteboards, etc.) which can be utilised for educational, communication, management, advertising or similar purposes in early childhood settings.

Digital technologies in early childhood education and care

There has been an increasing use of technology in the field of education across all levels accompanied by a shift towards understanding which technologies can be used for specific purposes and exploring how best they can be used and embedded across educational contexts (Higgins et al., 2012). In ECEC, digital technology has been primarily used for pedagogical purposes, as a tool to support and advance the quality of teaching and learning in areas, such as literacy (e.g. Beschorner & Hutchison, 2013; Burnett, 2010; Neumann, 2018), mathematics (Cicconi, 2014; Sinclair, 2018) and STEM (e.g. Dorouka et al., 2020; Kermani & Aldemir, 2015; Marsh et al., 2018). There has also been an increasing focus on the pedagogical importance of introducing digital technologies in early childhood environments and the various opportunities and demands facing early childhood educators aiming to integrate digital technologies to encourage problem solving and computational thinking in young children (e.g. Bers et al., 2013, 2014; Murcia et al., 2018). As a result, there is a plethora of research available around the use of digital technologies in relation to Quality Area 1: Educational programme and practice (Beschorner & Hutchison, 2013; Burnett, 2010; Dorouka et al., 2020; Murcia et al., 2018; Sinclair, 2018) but limited research in relation to other areas of the NQS, such as Quality Area 5 (relationships with children, for example, Hooker, 2019; Kaplan-Berkley, 2022) and Quality Area 6 (Collaborative partnerships with families and communities, see, for example, da Silva et al., 2018; Higgins & Cherrington, 2017).

Digital technologies and relationships with families and communities

A significant challenge faced by many early childhood educators is the lack of family involvement and the development of collaborative partnerships with families (Donahue & Schomburg, 2017; Willis & Exley, 2018). These partnerships are essential to develop strong relationships with children due to the vital role families play in their children's education and care (Fan & Yost, 2019; Stamopoulos, 2018). ECEC settings commonly use digital technology to facilitate communication between educators and families, encouraging family participation in their children's education (Beaumont-Bates, 2017; da Silva & da Silva, 2018; Dwyer et al., 2019). Commercial software provides a variety of ways to communicate with families, including learning story templates, conversations, video and audio (Beaumont-Bates, 2017). While social media integration in ECEC settings was not widely accepted in the past (Parette et al., 2010), its adoption has increased in recent years. There is now a greater use of short message settings, email and Facebook (Dwyer et al., 2019; Yost & Fan, 2014), as effective and efficient means for streamlining communication between staff and families (Yost & Fan, 2014).

The speed of communication via digital platforms provides staff and families with an efficient way to engage with each other, maintain connections and stay updated with information and events (Goodman & Cherrington, 2015; Yost & Fan, 2014). While some families prefer face-to-face communications due to issues of familiarity, layout, user friendliness and cultural barriers, including written and spoken English as a second language, parents and ECEC staff favour the immediacy of exchanging information in an online environment. Parents also favour the use of social media as it provides access to additional insights and details about their child's everyday routines (Donohue & Schomburg, 2017; Goodman & Cherrington, 2015; Stratigos & Fenech, 2021; Yost & Fan, 2014). However, there is limited research investigating the voices of early childhood educators on this issue, the impact on their workload and whether the various forms of communication facilitated by digital technologies has actually improved the quality of relationships, partnerships and parents' input (Parnell & Bartlett, 2012; Stratigos & Fenech, 2021).

The issue of equal access and opportunities to take advantage of digital resources has been widely discussed during the COVID-19 pandemic (Flack et al., 2020; United Nations Association of Australia, 2021). Researchers in the field of digital technologies and early childhood have for many years signalled the need to eliminate the digital divide and take necessary measures (e.g. increase funding for early childhood education; provide both hardcopy and digital copies of important information) in order for all children and families to be able to benefit from digital affordances and not feel excluded (Daugherty et al., 2014; Dolan, 2016; Stamopoulos, 2018).

Digital technologies and leadership in early childhood education and care

With the exception of professional development for educators, we found no empirical studies on leadership or types of leadership in association with digital technology in ECEC. Ongoing professional development is essential for early childhood professionals and digital technology has the potential to reduce associated costs and improve access to professional development resources (Ackerman, 2017; Donahue & Fox, 2012; Wright & Bales, 2014). Early childhood educators build their own professional knowledge through formal and informal online resources and have reported using a range of digital devices, with desktop computers being the most popular, followed by laptops, tablets and smartphones (Dwyer et al., 2019; Hatzigianni, 2018). For example, early childhood educators search for practical information, including ideas for activities and networking with other professionals through events, such as webinars and conferences or the use of a digital professional space to facilitate sharing of information, ideas and advice, and staying informed of industry updates (Dwyer et al., 2019). This highlights their professional learning needs can be met by the use of digital tools and the potential value of online learning (Donahue & Fox, 2012; Stone-MacDonald & Douglass, 2015; Wright & Bales, 2014).

Although the research around programme planning and learning with digital technologies has been steadily growing over the years, no research to our knowledge has examined the association of technology with the improvement of Governance and Leadership (QA7) in ECEC. More needs to be known about where and how digital technology is integrated in other areas of the ECEC context to understand how it can be used in supporting quality improvement.

Overall, as explained in the introduction section, this study is part of a larger National project and focused on answering two research questions:

1. (1)
How digital technologies are referred to the QIPs and A&R reports of ECEC services that demonstrated quality improvement to Meeting NQS and to Exceeding NQS?

2. (2)
How are digital technologies used and for what purposes in relation to the NQS Quality Areas?

Research design

This study was part of a national study (2018) of quality improvement commissioned by ACECQA to identify the characteristics and drivers of quality improvement in centre-based long day care (LDC) settings (Harrison, 2019) that had improved their rating from Working Towards NQS at assessment Time 1 to Meeting NQS or Exceeding NQS at assessment Time 2 (please see explanation of the ratings in introduction). Three Australian universities were involved and a team of experts in this field worked collaboratively after gaining approval from their university human research ethics committees. This study consisted of three phases and followed a mixed methodology approach including quantitative analysis of a large dataset on 1338 LDC services accessed through the National Quality Agenda IT System 1 (Stage 1), qualitative analysis of a sub-sample of 60 LDC services' QIPs and A&R reports (Stage 2) and in-depth examination 15 LDCs/case study centres (Stage 3).

This paper focuses on Stage 2, which applied proportional stratified random sampling to select 60 ECEC settings from the Stage 1 sample. Of these, 43 (72%) had improved from Working Towards NQS at Time 1 to Meeting NQS at Time 2, and 17 (28%) had improved from Working Towards NQS at Time 1 to Exceeding NQS at Time 2. As a group, the selected ECEC settings were representative of Australia's eight States and Territories and five broad characteristics: Accessibility/Remoteness Index of Australia (ARIA +) categories (metropolitan, inner regional, outer regional, remote and very remote); community advantage/disadvantage (Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas [SEIFA] quintiles); management type (for-profit, not-for-profit); size of approved provider (small/standalone, medium, large); service size/number of approved places (< 60, ≥ 60) and no/transfer vs transfer of ownership.

The dataset comprised de-identified QIPs and A&R reports that were provided for these 60 LDC services by the Regulatory Authorities for each State and Territory. The sample distribution by jurisdiction is summarised in Table 1.

Descriptive analysis and results

The data analysis began with a careful reading of all 120 documents (60 QIPs and 60 A7Rs). A list of technology related keywords, including technology, digital (dig*), electronic, computers, tablet/s, laptop/s, website/s and many others (see Table 2), was created after scanning the documents. A computer search was performed in all 120 documents to locate any relevant keywords from the list. A comprehensive Excel spreadsheet was created for each State/Territory with the seven Quality Areas. The researchers explored each document separately and added the references to technology verbatim.

The second step of the analysis involved careful reading and calculation of the references found under each Quality Area/jurisdiction/service. This resulted in the creation of a large table with the total number of references for each State/Territory per Quality Area (Appendix A) and two summary tables related to the centre's overall quality rating (Tables 3 and 4). Out of all centres examined only two centres (from NSW) had zero references to digital technology (one Exceeding NQS and one Meeting NQS).

To examine possible differences between the ECEC settings that improved their rating from Working Towards NQS to Meeting NQS or Exceeding NQS, a descriptive analysis was conducted based on each centre's quality rating (research question 1). The Exceeding NQS and Meeting NQS centres with the highest number of references to technology in each State/Territory jurisdiction were selected to facilitate comparisons and examine differences/similarities (8 Exceeding NQS + 8 Meeting NQS). Table 3 shows that Meeting NQS settings had more references to technology than the ones Exceeding NQS, in both the QIPs and the A&R reports. This finding is interesting but difficult to interpret as we do not have access to the QIP and A&R documents from the centres' previous assessments or any knowledge of references to technology when these centres were rated at Working Towards NQS. In addition, the number of references might be smaller but the explanations provided by Exceeding centres were more extensive, as will be discussed later in this section.

Examining the reports more thoroughly and deeply (Table 4) indicated that overall, most of the ECEC settings (47 out of 60 or 78%) used a form of digital technology (e.g. digital platforms/social media/websites/online portals, etc.) in their everyday operations. Table 4 shows the types of technology located in the documents (after the keyword search) under four categories (e.g. Facebook is under social media). The first category "digital platforms" includes all the substantive tools which help educators with a large range of operations such as administrative (e.g. payrolls) and/or educational (e.g. programme planning, communicating with families, e-portfolios, etc.). Tools that do not provide a large range of choices are grouped under the category "apps /software". Differences were apparent for Exceeding NQS compared to Meeting NQS centre. A higher proportion of Exceeding NQS centres (52%) reported the use of a digital platform compared to the centres that had improved to Meeting NQS (23%).

The Exceeding NQS centres used popular digital platforms (paid tools) more often (52%) than Meeting NQS centres (23%) and offered rich explanations on the use of digital technologies and the affordances they offered (e.g. outcomes from the Early Years Learning Framework ready to be inserted in their everyday planning, secure data sharing, teacher portfolios, enhancing professional learning and others) demonstrating their confidence and constructive capabilities with the integration of new technologies in their service. Social media (free tools) was more likely to be used by centres that improved to Meeting NQS (25%) compared to Exceeding NQS centres (11%).

Thematic analysis and results

The keywords found (Table 2) in the 120 documents were separately reviewed following a thematic analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2012). The first phase was about familiarising oneself with the data. Our data were very rich and required careful reading and reviewing. After reading is complete, coding, segmenting and searching for themes began. The final phase was about reviewing, defining and organising themes. After analysis was complete, findings were substantiated with relevant quotations. Coding was first completed by two researchers. Each jurisdiction was examined separately at the start. A final list of themes was comprised after the examination of all jurisdictions. Themes were then presented, discussed and finalised with the whole team of 10 researchers.

The highest number of references to digital technology made by educators, educational leaders, directors or assessors emerged in three Quality Areas (Appendix A): QA1 ( n = 74), QA6 ( n = 111) and QA7 ( n  = 107). The themes for these three Quality Areas, including direct quotes derived from the QIPs, are presented next. Assessors' comments are included where necessary.

Validity

This study is based only on secondary, descriptive, qualitative data collected by a highly credible source, ACECQA, and not by individuals. ACECQA double checked the provision, anonymity and credibility of documents before sending them to researchers. Validity of this study is examined according to Maxwell's ( 1992) five kinds of validity for qualitative research. Descriptive validity was ensured as documents (QIPs and A&R reports) were completed by ECEC settings or trained Assessors directly and not by the researchers. To further warrant accuracy, keywords around technology were explored electronically with the word search tool and not manually. Interpretive validity is high as the exact quotes and examples provided in the documents were counted and were not changed in any way. The present study did not suggest any theory or explanation of theory, so theoretical validity is not applicable to this study. Generalizability cannot be assumed for ECEC settings in Australia or elsewhere as the number of documents was small. Evaluative validity is also not applicable to this study as the researchers attempted to explore, describe and explain the data under investigation and not to make evaluations.

Reliability

Two researchers examined the data and discussed coding, themes and findings to enhance reliability. Final findings were then scrutinised by a team of 10 researchers. As this was an exploratory study, frequencies were used to facilitate descriptive comparisons (e.g. between ECEC settings with different ratings; between the seven quality areas) and to help identify which digital tools are the most common in ECEC settings. However, frequencies were not enough to answer the research questions and thematic analysis was also utilised.

QA1: Educational programme and practice

Quality Area 1 is focused on teaching, planning and assessing. Four main themes were generated in relation to technology, as presented below.

Digital documentation

Participating centres used new technologies such as commercial digital platforms in their planning; observations/assessments of learning and in developing children's portfolios. Critical reflections completed by educators were also added in these platforms.

Communication with families and sharing of information

Technology was used to encourage feedback from families and incorporate their views in curriculum plans. In many centres, policies/philosophies were displayed in the foyer via screens/tablets, etc. As reported by a centre in the ACT, "Families have the opportunity to review and comment on policies that affect them. This process can be completed via email, displays at the centre or a conversation and later documented". Another example is provided by a QLD setting: "Information about the service's operation, activities and experiences, upcoming events, and the kindergarten programme is provided to families on the service face book page, in notices at the office, through electronic correspondence and through brochures and information displayed at the service".

Educators' training and collaboration

Educators attended various webinars depending on their needs and interests and collaborated to form a holistic view on children's development. Educators also used technology to document: 'spontaneous learning and reflections on their teaching...mind maps to show their progression of projects and learning for children of all age groups'.

Children's learning

Examples of how to use technology for enhancing learning were provided in the QIPs, such as 'to implement STEM in EC', '...child appropriate websites are accessed under direct supervision by educators' and 'the educator provided an iPad to support the children to research about insects. One quote summarises educators' views on technology: 'The future requires innovative thinkers and as early childhood educators it is our duty to assist the development of children's innovative thinking. We do this through embedding problem solving, technology and scaffolding children's ideas and supporting them into fruition'.

Overall, in this QA1, sharing information with families and on the assessment and planning cycle was emphasised, with less emphasis on educators' critical reflection. The assessors most often summarised what was already described by the educators, positively commented on the use of digital tools for planning, learning and assessments (e.g. online platforms found in the setting or social media used). For example, "documentation within individual child portfolios, communication books, photos and digital photo screens, displays of children engaged in activities and experiences, and the service's Facebook page were available and easily accessed by families"; or "educators record individual and group observations to analyse learning and development". The service's digital programme allows for individual files to be set up for each child. Photographs are saved in individual files and work samples are collected to support observations'.

QA6: Collaborative partnerships with families and communities

This Quality Area is focused on partnerships and relationships with families and communities. The main themes arising from the analysis included the following:

Communication

A variety of digital media (e.g. social media, online tools/platforms, emails, websites, etc.) were employed to enhance and strengthen relationships and collaborations between the ECEC settings and families.

Access and sharing of information

Digital media were used for distributing enriching information (e.g. around Indigenous practices; cultural awareness; etc.) and ECEC setting events (e.g. excursions, incursions, open day). Technology was also used to facilitate the induction of new families (e.g. "Our orientation process is adapted to suit the individual needs of all families as some families simply want to begin care and in which case the child has their orientation and first day combined. In the case of this happening we ensure that we are supporting them through this transition as well as reporting to their families during their first day through our first day Kindy Hub report").

Constructive feedback and input

Different digital media offered opportunities to families to provide their feedback on children's learning (e.g. contributing to their e-portfolios) or on the ECEC setting's decision making/policies/QIPs.

Improvement of the ECEC setting's advertising of events and strengthening of community relationships

A number of settings ( n  = 11) commented on how they used new technologies to enhance their presence within the community and also enable community involvement.

Overall, it was evident in the analysis that the majority of these LDC centres (78%) used some form of digital tools, with emails, websites and social media being among their top preferences. LDC centres underlined the importance of embracing a range of digital and face-to-face strategies to efficiently communicate with parents and to "not alienate any families". These 60 settings had invested in digital technologies, and educators provided strong evidence of their familiarity with the use of new forms of communication. They have also recognised its supplementary role and that the physical, more traditional way of communicating with families is irreplaceable. In line with these views, the assessors' comments also supported the use of technology, e.g. "Current information about the service was provided to families in a variety of accessible formats through the parent handbook, service newsletters, displays at the service and through informal discussions with families at arrival and departure times. Correspondence was relayed via email or hard copy to suit the needs of individual families".

QA7: Governance and leadership

In this Quality Area, the focus was on effective leadership and management to improve the quality of the ECEC setting. References to QA7 were 107 in all documents (third most frequent references). The five themes emerging in this area were as follows:

Governance and management systems

ECEC settings provided ample information on how they displayed information; protected privacy; stored and secured documents and data. A range of technologies were available to support service operations including computers, printers, copiers and telephones, for example, "The service stored confidential information in locked filing cabinets located at the service, and information stored on computers was password protected". A subtheme here was the 'Information technology (IT) support' provided by Exceeding ECEC settings and commented on very positively by the assessors (no negative comments were reported). Educators and/or directors viewed the existence of technical IT support helpful and reassuring for their everyday practice.

Communication with families and educators

Documents described which technological media and processes were adopted to facilitate the sharing of information with families, updating them on changes in policies/regulations and processes. Services also explained the way families provide feedback (e.g. through online surveys; USBs; digital platforms; tablets; etc.). Technology also helped educators communicate with each other and collaborate.

Online professional development for educators

The LDC staff used technology (e.g. digital platforms/ learning portals) to attend professional development ( n  = 40). With the help of technology, LDC services also organised successful online inductions for newly appointed educators (for example, a centre in SA reported: "The induction is for one day and includes online training in areas such as child protection and health and safety topics. All educators have their own email account and access to the intranet where relevant information is provided as well as online training and policy updates").

This provision was also positively commented on by assessors. Assessors commented on the usefulness of digital tools for induction and professional development, for example, 'The organisation has developed a comprehensive induction package, xxx, which is delivered across all services. This includes staff completing four hours of online training and a xxx workbook' (xxx = identification name or similar which was removed by ACECQA to ensure anonymity and confidentiality); or 'Management promote educators to stay up to date with current industry changes and educators regularly use ECA Learning hub and ECA blog posts and follow Multiverse Facebook page contributions by Dr ... as part of this process'.

Improvement and the role of the educational leader:

The LDC documents referred to how technology can assist the centre with improving their practices and philosophy. For example, two centres in the ACT and TAS explained how the educators used their iPads to contribute to the writing of the QIP. The role of technology in assisting the work of the educational leader was also underlined. For example, in a centre in NSW, the aim for the educational leader was to 'transfer the service to a paper free/digital programme'; other services offered suggestions on how technology was used by the educational leader to provide regular support and feedback to all educators (via emails/digital platforms/digital forums, etc.). Another service in QLD wrote: "The Educational Leader has developed a Professional Development room on Storypark, where professional development/training information is provided (to inspire and encourage attendance by the team), professional readings are provided. This can act as a provocation for professional conversation between colleagues and with the Ed[ucational] Leader. Storypark has also been adapted to include a First Australians".

Sustainability

A small number ( n  = 7) of LDC services also referred to the need for becoming "paper free" to enhance sustainable practices through the adoption of digital practices.

Discussion

This study explored the way educators and assessors referred to digital technologies and their use, implicitly through the completion of the Quality Improvement Plans (QIPs) and the Assessment and Rating (A&R) reports. Although these two documents do not explicitly address technology, the implementation and adjustment to the new digital era by ECEC settings were positively commented upon by the assessors in their reports (e.g. when the setting was using a digital platform for professional development or when a range of technologies was used for operational purposes). This study revealed a broad use of digital technologies with more frequent elaborations in the three Quality Areas: QA1: educational programme and practice; QA6: collaborative partnerships with family and community and QA7: Governance and leadership.

Within a systemic view, inspired by the Ecological theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1995; Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, 1994), the use of technology is embedded in all the systems-in the microsystem of designing and implementing programme planning and meaningful learning experiences for children; in the exosystem and mesosystem of communicating and collaborating with families and communities and in the mesosystem and macrosystem of updating policies, being informed about new laws and regulations and participating in professional development. This multidimensional view is consistent with the recommendations from the OECD (Slot, 2018) to explore the ECEC setting or organisational levels and the system or policy level of quality.

The strong role of digital technologies identified in the QIPs and A&R reports is in line with the key findings from the larger national project (Harrison, 2019) (see Fig. 2). Figure 2 presents the five key findings from the national study (on top) and how they are aligned with the references to the use of digital technologies examined in the present study. The first top key finding refers to "collaboration and shared responsibility" as a contributing factor to the improvement of quality for ECEC settings and is linked (dotted line) with 'digital tools increase communication and collaboration between educators and families/colleagues' (see thematic analysis section, themes 'b' and 'c' under QA1 and themes 'a' and 'b' under QA6).

Aligning findings between the main national study and present sub-study on digital technologies

The second key finding, leadership, was also found to be a decisive factor in enhancing quality and this study found that technology could support the work of the educational leader (see theme 'd' under QA7). However, there was no specific reference to how technology can support the roles and responsibilities of educators or educational leaders by the assessors. Assessors referred to the use of technology mostly for operational purposes, for example, "children were signed in and out of the service on a tablet computer using Kiosk and paper rolls (attendance) were also completed by educators in each room as children arrived and departed" and again there was not mention to whether technology could assist the work of educational leaders. Evidence of associations with educational leadership was not as frequent and was not sufficiently explained; this is worth the attention of future research. The challenge will be to uncover links between innovative technologies and strategic, empowering, collective leadership and decision making in the early years (James & Henry, 2017; Vanover & Hodges, 2015). More research in this field is imperative. For example, the advent and rapid growth of artificial intelligence has already impacted significantly the functioning and prospects of other sectors (e.g. in health care, science, engineering, etc.) (Bhatia et al., 2020; Chen et al., 2020; Roll & Wylie, 2016; Su & Yang, 2022). Questions of how artificial intelligence could support the quality of all levels of education will be of great interest and significance in the years to come (Su & Yang, 2022). A similar challenge would need to be addressed in relation to educational leadership. Research might need to re-examine the characteristics and skills of an effective, democratic and ethical leader in relation to their digital competences and decision making. The role of different forms of leadership (e.g. distributed leadership, transformational leadership, etc.) in encouraging or not the use of digital technologies would also be vital when investigating the barriers and enablers of integrating technology in everyday practice.

In addition, an area of fruitful research could also be whether digital tools could assist educational leaders' pedagogical work. As explained by (Stamopoulos, 2018) a critical element of early childhood teachers' professional practice is to ensure digital technologies are actually enhancing children's learning.

A clear pedagogical philosophy (third key finding) was also considered to be an important quality factor in the national study. The findings of this study revealed that educators used a range of digital tools for pedagogical documentation and for making children's everyday learning visible to families (see themes 'a' and 'd' under QA1). Research in this area is emerging (Stratigos & Fenech, 2021), indicating benefits, such as fast, easy access from any location; efficiency; extending learning from home; pedagogical benefits; richer insights and links with curriculum, theory and research and actively engaging children in the documentation process. Challenges have also been reported, including data security and privacy concerns, equity, increased workloads for educators, as well as decreasing interactions with children and other stakeholders (Higgins & Cherrington, 2017; Hooker, 2019; McFadden & Thomas, 2016; Penman, 2014; Plumb & Kautz, 2014). This line of research will need to grow in the future to better inform educators, parents, communities and other stakeholders on how to best design, select and use digital tools, addressing concerns and ensuring not only children's learning but also a work-life balance and a sustainable and efficient role for early childhood professionals. A challenge for this line of research would be on one hand the rapidness of changing technology and on the other hand the lack of consistent, effective professional learning for early childhood educators (Donohue & Fox, 2012; Stone-MacDonald & Douglass, 2015).

The fourth key finding of the national study refers to 'stakeholder investment' and in this study the use of technology in governance and management was evident (see themes 'a', 'b', 'c', 'e' under QA7). E-governance practices, utilisation of management information systems and achieving inter-operability are new areas, and ongoing professional learning will be necessary for preservice and in-service educators (Bassok et al., 2019; Saitis & Saiti, 2018). Digital technologies can support the innovation and quality upgrade of the administrative and operational settings provided in ECEC settings.

Finally, the fifth key finding of the national study mentions "meaningful engagement with assessment and rating" as a way to increase quality for an ECEC setting. The role of digital tools to assist with this task can be very helpful. The use of online platforms, apps, software, social media and other tools could enhance flexibility and collaboration between educators of the same setting but also between educators of different settings to exchange views, exemplary practices and to support networking (see themes 'b', 'c', 'd' under QA7). However, more research is necessary in this field. Currently research has focused on digital tools and their impact on children's learning and development and not on how digital technologies can improve administration, management and leadership practices in early childhood education (Abdullahi et al., 2019; Lindeman et al., 2021).

The researchers also recognise that their findings are only based on documents and reports, secondary data. Views of educators, assessors, managers and families were not directly examined and they would be critical in future studies. The researchers consider important to clarify that solely the use of technology does not improve quality or ratings of an ECEC setting. Although the findings of this study are to an extent encouraging for the use of digital technologies in early childhood education, improving quality is a much more complex endeavour which cannot be achieved just with the use of innovative tools (Tout, 2013; Yazejian & Iruka, 2015).

In comparing the number of references to digital technology by centre's rating we found that the numbers were higher in Meeting NQS ECEC settings and that Exceeding NQS settings trusted commercial digital platforms more frequently. Although it is positive that settings from both ratings used technology, future research could examine specifically the type of digital affordances required or recommended for further improving quality and limiting concerns of both educators and parents.

Finally, this study also raises new directions for research, such as the provision of training, feedback and technological knowledge base of the NQS assessors. Offering advice, guidance and recommendations around the use of digital technologies in all Quality Areas could be helpful, together with the inclusion of relevant examples in the explanation of standards and elements in all Quality Areas. Additionally, the provisions around digital technologies in ECEC settings and educators' professional learning need to be thoroughly examined in order for more equity and enhanced quality to be ensured. In Europe, sponsored by the European Commission (n.d.), an effort to improve the way, schools use technologies for teaching and learning, started in 2017 with SELFIE (Self-reflection on Effective Learning by Fostering the use of Innovative Educational technologies). The same tool is now being prepared for early childhood education educators. Something similar could be created in Australia and in other countries. A free tool, customisable, easy to use and adapt to different social contexts could be helpful for improving teaching and learning, maximising the digital potential of ECEC settings, assist with monitoring digital growth and minimising digital divide where needed.

Conclusion

This study argues that this is the proper time to replace older, unidimensional views on technology with an organic, holistic view which is embedded in all areas of early childhood education. The role of technology is complex and dynamic, not static and passive. Realising the unquestionable role technology plays in many areas of everyday educational practice as a significant element of our pedagogical and educational philosophy will strengthen our understanding and enrich the ways technology is embedded in high-quality programmes.

Future research is essential in relation to communication, documentation and leadership. Although communication with parents and communities has already attracted research attention, more work needs to be completed in revealing the role, the availability and also possible limitations of digital tools for all involved. Similarly, digital documentation is an emerging field which requires more empirical evidence on whether or not it has a positive impact on children's learning. Finally, the different types of leadership and whether they promote the integration of technology are a new line of research which requires careful consideration.

Table 3 Number of references to technology by ECEC setting in each of the eight States/Territory (N = 16)

Availability of data and materials

References

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the State and Territory Government Regulatory Authorities who approved and provided access to Assessment and Rating documents for the 60 Long Day Care services that were selected for analysis in this study, and ACECQA for de-identifying these documents.

Funding

This work was supported by a research grant made available through a tender process initiated by the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA) https://www.acecqa.gov.au/.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. University of West Attica, Alsos Egaleo Campus, 28 St Spyridonos st., 11243, Athens, Greece

Maria Hatzigianni

2. Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

Tanya Stephenson, Linda J. Harrison, Manjula Waniganayake, Philip Li, Fay Hadley, Rebecca Andrews & Belinda Davis

3. Edith Cowan University, Perth, Australia

Lennie Barblett

4. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

Susan Irvine

Contributions

All the authors have contributed to this paper and in the completion of the relevant study. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Hatzigianni.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study is a part of a National Project approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the leading University (Macquarie University) and is based on secondary data. Anonymity has been ensured and no identification of data is possible.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix A

See Table 5.

Appendix B

See Table 6.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hatzigianni, M., Stephenson, T., Harrison, L.J. et al. The role of digital technologies in supporting quality improvement in Australian early childhood education and care settings. ICEP 17, 5 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-023-00107-6
Download citation

Received:

Accepted:

Published:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-023-00107-6

Keywords

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The role of digital technologies in supporting quality improvement in Australian early childhood education and care settings - International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This national study explored the role of digital technologies in early childhood education and care settings and whether they could contribute to quality improvement as reported by educators and assessors of quality in Australia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Perspective Chapter: The Impact of Digital Education on Modern Educational Institutions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the years, technology has become increasingly dominant in every sector of the world, and the impact of digital technology on educational institutions has not been left behind. The concept of “digital education,” which entails using technological tools for both learning and teaching in a classroom context, has changed the traditional classroom environment for both teachers and students. In the present era of technological advancements, digital education is essential because it makes learning efficient through individualized learning, open access to an unlimited amount of information, flexible teaching methods, etc. Digital learning makes it possible for students to communicate and study with a greater variety of materials without having to rely solely on the limited resources available in a traditional classroom setting. Students can study and explore information more easily with the aid of basic digital skills and technology. A student’s academic performance and engagement in active learning both improve with a positive attitude and motivation. Digital education has various pros and cons in the teaching environment and its impact on different beneficiaries. Through a literature search, materials from public, educational, and expert sources were obtained. In this chapter, each of these will be explored and conclusions drawn.

# data[].attributes.body
Australian Government Statistics on importance of Digital Literacies in the classroom

# data[].attributes.body
Hi all,

Apologies for the late blog post! I initially posted my first blog in another forum but thought I should post here as well.

Quick introduction about myself, I currently work in Townsville and have done so for several years now. I am in my 2nd year of secondary education and wish to specialize in English and History.

When I am not working or studying, I spend my time fishing, camping, or staying active at the gym.

I also enjoy watching the footy on the weekends, and occasionally a game of golf or cricket if I have some spare time.

Throughout my previous and current employments, I use and have used a range of technology systems and databases daily. I am quite interested to study and learn more about the importance and benefits of incorporating digital pedagogy within the classroom.

I am interested in how I can incorporate digital technologies into classrooms, especially English and History as I believe that these subjects may be more limited with the use of ICT in the classroom. I am looking forward with how this unit can support my understanding, knowledge and application of ICT in the classroom. I look forward to learning creative ways of applying ICT in the classroom.

I look forward to learning with you all this term,

Regards, Michael

# data[].attributes.headline
Place and Liveability Short Unit Introduction

# data[].attributes.subject
Place and Liveability Short Unit Introduction

# data[].attributes.body
‘Place and Liveability’

This mini unit of lessons is based off the Australian Curriculum Geography year 7 unit.

The unit focuses on the following;

·       Focuses on concepts of place through investigations of liveability

·       Factors that influence liveability and ideas of the places that provide services and facilities to support and enhance livelihoods

·       The unit focuses on developing a student’s ability to evaluate, and investigated whether liveability can be improved by conducting studies and planning

·       The unit has two strands consisting of geographical knowledge, understanding, geographical inquiry and skills

Source: Australian Curriculm and Assessment Authority

# data[].attributes.headline
Australian Curriculum ICT Standards Table

# data[].attributes.subject
Australian Curriculum ICT Standards Table

# data[].attributes.body
Quite an important table to consider ensuring that relevant capabilities are met throughout the designed lesson plans for year 7 students of consideration for creating the lesson plan and utilising resource ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
From cool.org students create their own bingo sheet with sustainable ideas that they complete and check with other students to mark off their bingo sheet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By finding other students who have participated in specific sustainability actions, students can check them off on their bingo sheet and aim for a full row to win. With a long list of prompts, this activity encourages students to recall and associate positive actions that lead to sustainability.

# data[].attributes.body
Literacy capabilities- Consideration with ICT capabilities and how literacy skills can be attained.

# data[].attributes.headline
Lesson idea-Design a 20-Minute Neighbourhood

# data[].attributes.subject
Lesson idea-Design a 20-Minute Neighbourhood

# data[].attributes.body
Throughout my search for possible lesson ideas for this mini unit i come across a resource which is aimed for year 7 students. It covers several aspects of the mini series and contributes to students understanding of place, livability and can demonstrates student understanding of requirements of place and liveability. Importantly the lessons can cover on the following Australian Curriculum links;

Australian Curriculum Links V8.4 and V9.0

ACHASSK188

·        Factors that influence the decisions people make about where to live and their perceptions of the liveability of places

ACHGK043

·        Factors that influence the decisions people make about where to live and their perceptions of the liveability of places

ACHGK045

·        The influence of environmental quality on the liveability of places

ACHASSK189

·        The influence of accessibility to services and facilities on the liveability of places

ACHGK044

·        The influence of accessibility to services and facilities on the liveability of places

ACHASSK192

·        Strategies used to enhance the liveability of places, especially for young people, including examples from Australia and Europe

ACHGK047

·        Strategies used to enhance the liveability of places, especially for young people, including examples from Australia and Europe

AC9HG7K05

·        Factors that influence the decisions people make about where to live, including perceptions of the liveability of places and the influence of environmental quality

AC9HG7K06

·        The location and distribution of services and facilities, and implications for liveability of places

AC9HG7K08

·        Strategies used to enhance the liveability of a place, including for young people, the aged or those with disability, drawing on studies such as those from Australia or Europe

I like the lesson idea where I may be able to change students from creating a map into digital tools. At first research to identify a possible digital platform it appears that Canvas may be a possibility which allows students to sketch, draw and allows collaboration between students to comment ideas together.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Australian Curriculum (v9.0) content description:
Year 7 Geography

Factors that influence the decisions people make about where to live, including perceptions of the liveability of places and the influence of environmental quality (AC9HG7K05)

The location and distribution of services and facilities, and implications for liveability of places (AC9HG7K06)

Strategies used to enhance the liveability of a place, including for young people, the aged or those with disability, drawing on studies such as those from Australia or Europe (AC9HG7K08)

Relevant parts of Year 7 achievement standards: Students can describe how the characteristics of places are perceived and valued differently by people. They describe the importance of environments to people. Students use geographical knowledge, concepts, terms and relevant findings from sources to create descriptions, explanations and responses.
NSW Syllabus outcomes:

GE4-2 describes processes and influences that form and transform places and environments

GE4-3 explains how interactions and connections between people, places and environments result in change

General capabilities: Critical and Creative Thinking, Literacy, Personal and Social Capability

Cross-curriculum priority: Sustainability

Level of teacher scaffolding: Medium - The teacher will need to facilitate activities and discussions to help students understand and apply knowledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By examining the features of a 20-minute neighbourhood, students will understand the factors that influence liveability, the location and distribution of services and facilities, and strategies used to enhance the liveability of an urban place.

# data[].attributes.body
I found this resource quite interesting and beneficial to the classroom. It could add an element of adding deeper knowledge to students in the classroom. The source is quite vast allows students to collaborate together about future liveability by using statistics collecting and discussing data, plotting current and future trends. This lesson covers off on the following Australian Curriculum links;

ACHGK043-Factors that influence the decisions people make about where to live and their perceptions of the liveability of places

ACHGK044-The influence of accessibility to services and facilities on the liveability of places

ACHGK045-The influence of environmental quality on the liveability of places

ACHGK046-The influence of social connectedness and community identity on the liveability of place

ACHGK047-Strategies used to enhance the liveability of places, especially for young people, including examples from Australia and Europe

ACHGK065-The perceptions people have of place, and how these influence their connections to different places

# data[].attributes.body
This website cool.org provides some really interesting lesson ideas in line with the Australian Curriculum requirements. In this lesson Students learn about the effects of how accessibility can impact liveability. Students are to complete an accessibility audit. Students explore and assess the strategies used to enhance the liveability of a place for young people, the elderly, and people with disabilities by conducting an accessibility audit to assess and improve liveability in their school’s community. Australian curriculum links;

AC9HG7K06

the location and distribution of services and facilities, and implications for liveability of places

AC9HG7K08

strategies used to enhance the liveability of a place, including for young people, the aged or those with disability, drawing on studies such as those from Australia or Europe

ACHASSK189

The influence of accessibility to services and facilities on the liveability of places

ACHGK044

The influence of accessibility to services and facilities on the liveability of places

ACHASSK192

Strategies used to enhance the liveability of places, especially for young people, including examples from Australia and Europe

ACHGK047

Strategies used to enhance the liveability of places, especially for young people, including examples from Australia and Europe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Australian Curriculum (v9.0) content description:
Year 7 Geography

The location and distribution of services and facilities, and implications for liveability of places (AC9HG7K06)

Strategies used to enhance the liveability of a place, including for young people, the aged or those with disability, drawing on studies such as those from Australia or Europe (AC9HG7K08)

Relevant parts of Year 7 achievement standards: Students can describe the features of a distribution and a response or strategy to address a geographical phenomenon or challenge. They draw conclusions about the impact of the geographical phenomenon or challenge on people, places, and environments, and develop a strategy for action.
NSW Syllabus outcomes:

GE4-2 describes processes and influences that form and transform places and environments

GE4-3 explains how interactions and connections between people, places and environments result in change

General capabilities: Critical and Creative Thinking, Ethical Understanding, Personal and Social Capability

Cross-curriculum priority: Sustainability

Level of teacher scaffolding: Medium - The teacher will need to scaffold theory, and facilitate discussions and activities to help students understand and apply knowledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students will learn about how accessibility affects the liveability of places, including access to, location, and the distribution of services and facilities. They will explore and assess the strategies used to enhance the liveability of a place for young people, the elderly, and people with disabilities by conducting an accessibility audit to assess and improve liveability in their school's community.

# data[].attributes.body
This digital tool would be a favorite of mine due to the large amount of collaboration that students can have. The teacher can manage the classroom and have oversight which enhances safety for the students. Google teams allow students to work on designated assignments, quizzes which can be assigned to them by teachers. The program covers privacy policy and legalities. One limitation of Google Classrooms is that the teacher still needs to have some input and instruction over the class for the Google Classroom to be used effectively. Could be used for some lesson activities but will not be used as a sole digital tool due to its limitations in allowing students to demonstrate a higher order of thinking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Login or sign up for free on Socrative - your assessment partner for real-time assessments and instant insights.

# data[].attributes.body
Geography based website with geography classroom resources attached with a large amount of geography-based resources which can be published on the website for teachers and students to share and collaborate findings.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Geography Teachers' Association of Victoria Inc. (GTAV)'s Avatar

The GTAV is the peak organisation in Victoria, Australia providing support for geographical educators. It offers high quality professional learning programs, produces award-winning resources and keeps its members aware of contemporary issues.

People sharing Geography Teachers' Association of Victoria Inc. (GTAV)'s Interests

Geography Teachers' Association of Victoria Inc. (GTAV)'s Interests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Geography Teachers' Association of Victoria Inc. (GTAV) | Scoop.it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scoop.it enables professionals and businesses to research and publish content through its content curation tool.

# data[].attributes.body
Lesson Idea. This lesson plan of water availability directly links to the place and liveability unit. It allows students to connect to the effects of water availability, and reasons for liveability in Australia. This would be a great activity to complete on a blog/sharing network where students could corroborate on creating graphs, analysing data. The lesson covers off on several general capabilities namely;

Geography:

AC9HG7K01 – classification of environmental resources and the way that water connects and changes places as it moves through environments

AC9HG7K02 – the location and distribution of water resources in Australia, their implications, and strategies to manage the sustainability of water

AC9HG7S03 – interpret and analyse geographical data and information to identify similarities and differences, explain patterns and trends and infer relationships

Years 7 and 8, Digital Technologies

AC9TDI8P02 – analyse and visualise data using a range of software, including spreadsheets and databases, to draw conclusions and make predictions by identifying trends

Year 7, Mathematics

AC9M7ST03 – plan and conduct statistical investigations involving data for discrete and continuous numerical variables; analyse and interpret distributions of data and report findings in terms of shape and summary statistics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Geography For Kids: 12 Creative Ways To Teach Geography Skills To Kids – Globally Taught

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Geography is more than just knowing your state capitals; it is how we conceptualize the world around us. Geography for kids goes beyond memorizing the names

# data[].attributes.headline
Lesson Plan Idea-Climate Change and Effect on Liveability

# data[].attributes.subject
Lesson Plan Idea-Climate Change and Effect on Liveability

# data[].attributes.body
This could form basis of a lesson for the mini unit. The resources focuses on the link between the effects of climate change on liveability.

The source focuses on focusing on data sets, using a range of spreadsheets, databased to draw conclusions and making predictions by identifyign trends (AC9TDI8P02).

(ACHGK047)-Strategies used to enhance the liveability of places, especially for young people, including examples from Australia and Europe.

(ACHGK065)-The preceptions people have of place, and how these influence their connections to different places.

(ACHGK043)- Factors that influence the decisions people make about where to live and their perceptions of the liveability of places.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change | Australia state of the environment 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Our global climate is changing (see the Clim

# data[].attributes.body
This resource would be a close favourite of mine in line with Canvas. The interactive map allows students to view the world through multiple different layers such as human footprint, seasonal temperature, cyclone tracks, population and annual rainfall around the world. This could be a really good lesson idea such as students analysing and making comparisons of world date such as human population, rainfall and climate change in line with the unit Place and Liveability. Other than Canva I found this resource to be really good. The map can be changed to suit different views such as maps, and street views. This is an awesome tool which could be a starting point of utilising technology in the classroom. Could certainly be used in line with the main digital tool Canva for this assessment item. The positives of this digital tool is that it is highly interactive, can be changed and adapted too and allows students to analyse, inquire, and evaluate as per the literacy capabilities. It also allows students to analyse and construct data.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sources: Esri, USGS | Esri, FAO, NOAA, USGS

# data[].attributes.body
This source from the Australian Curriculum highlights the General ICT capabilities of Year 7- Geography Students. This source is of important guidance when considering the design of the pedagogical framework.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
F-10 Curriculum | V9 Australian Curriculum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ACARA acknowledges the Traditional Owners and Custodians of Country and Place throughout Australia and their continuing connection to land, waters, sky and community.