# data[].attributes.headline
B.C.’s Post-Secondary Digital Learning Strategy

# data[].attributes.subject
B.C.’s Post-Secondary Digital Learning Strategy

# data[].attributes.body
The Digital Learning Strategy outlines strategic priorities, recommended actions, guidance and resources to support the post-secondary system with digital learning in B.C. The strategy was developed by the Digital Learning Advisory Committee, a collaborative effort between the Ministry of Post-Secondary Education and Future Skills and subject-matter experts from across B.C.’s post-secondary system.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Digital Learning Strategy - Province of British Columbia

# data[].attributes.body
Participants can vote at Slido.com with #2497459

[https://admin.sli.do/event/hiFiqKo1HwqQG4XTuQTsd3/polls]

# data[].attributes.body
Ideal: Learning outcomes for digital literacy for every course

Example
Developing Industry Technologies: Students will be able to interpret GPS data for a specific site, apply the data to their own work to check its accuracy and adherence to appropriate industry standards.

# data[].attributes.headline
An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy—Technology Dichotomy

# data[].attributes.subject
An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy—Technology Dichotomy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy-Technology Dichotomy

Abstract

'Pedagogy first' has become a mantra for educators, supported by the metaphor of the 'pedagogical horse' driving the 'technological cart'. Yet putting technology first or last separates it from pedagogy, making us susceptible to technological or pedagogical determinism (i.e. where technology is seen either as the driving force of change or as a set of neutral tools). In this paper, I present a model of entangled pedagogy that encapsulates the mutual shaping of technology, teaching methods, purposes, values and context. Entangled pedagogy is collective, and agency is negotiated between teachers, students and other stakeholders. Outcomes are contingent on complex relations and cannot be determined in advance. I then outline an aspirational view of how teachers, students and others can collaborate whilst embracing uncertainty, imperfection, openness and honesty, and developing pedagogical knowledge that is collective, responsive and ethical. Finally, I discuss implications for evaluation and research, arguing that we must look beyond isolated ideas of technologies or teaching methods, to the situated, entangled combinations of diverse elements involved in educational activity.

Introduction: Moving Past the Technology-Pedagogy Dichotomy

'Pedagogy first' has become a mantra against worries that technology might overly influence education (Cousin 2005; Tsui and Tavares 2021). In response to the hype and hyperbole of marketing and research discourse, where each new technology inevitably transforms or enhances learning (Kirkwood and Price 2012), many educators want the 'pedagogical horse' to drive the 'technological cart' (Sankey 2020). Being 'pedagogically driven' (Anderson and Dron 2011) offers reassurance that 'nothing is changing in a context in which rather a lot is changing' (Brett and Cousin 2010: 610). However, whilst it is certainly problematic to introduce technology without sufficient consideration of the aims or established practices of teachers and students (i.e. a 'technology first' approach), attempting to put technology last leaves educators susceptible to an inadequate appreciation of complexity relating to how it is entangled in educational activity.

Both technology-led and pedagogy-led positions decontextualise technology and make us vulnerable to different forms of determinism (see Oliver 2011 for a review). Most relevant to this paper are technological and pedagogical determinism. Technological determinism sees technology as driving social change (Kaplan 2009), where outcomes can be predicted by design and functionality. This view can be optimistic (e.g. technology inevitably leads to greater efficiency) or pessimistic (e.g. technology inevitably dehumanises or harms us) (Chandler 1995; Friesen 2008; Kanuka 2008). Moral disapproval often awaits those who oppose, or impose, technology, respectively (Chandler 1995). A 'pedagogy first' position could suggest pessimistic technological determinism, or it could suggest pedagogical determinism (see also use determinism, Kanuka 2008, and human determinism, Berg 1998) where people (e.g. teachers) drive change, using methods and technology to achieve their objectives (Anderson and Dron 2011). In pedagogical determinism, pedagogy is attributed with unassailable, decontextualised characteristics (Berg 1998) and technology's influence on thinking and practising is neglected (Chandler 1995; Kanuka 2008).

Avoiding determinism requires a holistic view of situated, purposeful uses of technology (Berg 1998; Oliver 2011). Sociomaterial approaches to the study of technology, including cultural historical activity theory (Engeström and Sannino 2010), practice theory (Nicolini 2013; Schatzki et al. 2001), actor network theory (Latour 2005) and posthumanism (Barad 2007), can help us navigate the territory between technology-led and pedagogy-led views through a strong commitment to focusing on relations rather than elements (e.g. for Barad 2007, individuals and objects do not exist at all except as things always already entangled in activity). Relatedly, postdigital views see all digital activity as social, material and embedded in rich and diverse contexts (Fawns 2019; Jandrić et al. 2018). Taking neither individual teachers nor technology, as the unit of analysis, but a holistic view of entangled elements, provides a stronger basis for taking complexity into account (Edwards 2010; Fenwick 2015). The entangled pedagogy model, presented next, draws from sociomaterial and postdigital perspectives to outline the key relations within educational practice.

A Model of an Entangled Pedagogy

Illusions Vs Actuality

Figure 1, below, shows three views of the relationship between technology and pedagogy. Column 1 represents a 'technology first' view, in which technology is seen as the driver of educational activity and outcomes. Column 2 represents a 'pedagogy first' (or 'technology last') view, in which educators are seen as the driving force, and technology is subservient to the teaching approach. Whilst it is possible to choose technologies before deciding what to do with them (or why), and whilst it is also possible to choose teaching approaches before thinking about technology, Columns 1 and 2 are labelled as illusions because they portray what follows these choices as independent of other factors. Each misinterprets educational situations and suggests an unrealistic level of control and predictability (Chandler 1995). Actual educational activity is always a complex entanglement of factors, iteratively and mutually shaping each other. Column 3 represents an entangled view, in which pedagogy is constituted not just by methods and technology, but also the purposes, contexts and values of teachers, students and other stakeholders. Whilst technology does have implications for practice, and teachers should aim to make good use of its educational possibilities (Bates 2019), these possibilities are socially and materially situated, and relate to the traditions, practices, culture, policy and infrastructure in which they are embedded (Fawns 2019).

An entangled pedagogy: views of the relationship between technology and pedagogy

Column 1's illusion is promoted by marketing and research discourse that conveys technological determinism as self-evident, natural or common sense (Chandler 1995; Feenberg 2001). Examples include claims about universal qualities or impacts of online learning (e.g. Zimmerman 2020), attributions of outcomes or student experiences to technological platforms (Aitken and Hayes 2021), descriptions of students as 'digital natives' (Jones 2015; Oliver 2011) or complaints about teachers unable to adapt to the 'digital age' (Clegg 2011). Column 2's illusion is promoted by educator networks, for example, through presentations and blog posts endorsing 'pedagogy first' as a common-sense, human-led approach (e.g. Ash-Brown 2020; Lukes 2019; Sheninger 2016). More subtle indicators of Column 2 include references to 'tools' (e.g. it's not the tool, it's how you use it) or 'technology-enhanced learning' (Cousin 2005). 'Enhancement' can reassure teachers that technology 'will only make better what is already good' (Cousin 2005: 121) but it implies control over a reified, linear idea of learning (Bayne 2015; Kirkwood and Price 2014).

Recognising that technology and pedagogy are, inevitably, entangled, opens up possibilities for more meaningful analyses of educational activity (Cousin 2005). Yet the examples in the previous paragraph show how the negotiation of essentialism, instrumentalism and determinism is nuanced and fraught (Feenberg 1999; Finnegan 1989). Columns 1 and 2 may indicate entrenched assumptions, or temporary and unintentional positions. Avoiding these illusions requires vigilance in attending to situated, emergent combinations of educational factors (Berg 1998). The entangled model is intended as a guide for educators to navigate the illusions of Columns 1 and 2 in their design and practice.

Pedagogy as Encapsulating Technology, Methods, Contexts, Values and Purposes

Anderson and Dron ( 2011) use the metaphor of a dance, in which 'technology sets the beat and creates the music, while the pedagogy defines the moves' (p. 81). In the entangled model, pedagogy is the dance. Methods and technology are just part of the constituent components of any situated enactment of education. Since technology is entangled within pedagogy, it is not possible to first choose a pedagogy and then a technology, nor can pedagogy be tacked onto an existing instantiation of technology. Placing pedagogy above technology does not imply pedagogical determinism because teachers and educational designers have only partial and relational agency. Neither they, nor their methods, can determine outcomes. Teachers may lead the choreography, but they have only limited control over how the dance plays out (Anderson and Dron 2011; Dron 2021; Gravett et al. 2021). Furthermore, teaching, in this model, is not just done by teachers but by a range of stakeholders in a combined, mutual effort (Dron 2021; Fawns et al. 2021a). Students co-configure and co-design as they reinterpret and complete teachers' plans (Dron 2021; Fawns et al. 2022; Goodyear 2015). Learning technologists and information technology staff procure and configure platforms that enable and constrain local teaching. Administrators influence processes and relationships between teachers and students. Policymakers shape culture and practice. Educational activity is emergent, and the roles of teachers and technologies are entangled within a broader conception of pedagogy, along with methods, purposes, values and context, as outlined below.

Technology

Technology is pervasive. Humans have always made and used technology, manipulating objects to achieve day-to-day functions (Chandler 1995; Nye 2006), shape experiences (Nardi 1996) and bring order to the world (Winner 1980). Education is always enacted through technology, and teachers cannot avoid learning to use it (Dron 2021). Some technologies are so embedded in educational systems that they are almost invisible. For example, Murphy and colleagues ( 2001) suggest that the physical classroom 'itself is a technology, or comprises a set of technologies which we mostly take for granted-physical materials such as desks and chairs, black, white and green boards, chalk, pens, projection devices, worksheets, textbooks, notebooks, lighting and sound regimes and so on'. (p. 2). Our distinctions between 'technology-enhanced' and general learning, or even digital education and general education, are somewhat artificial (Fawns 2019).

The term 'affordances' is frequently used to describe what can be done with a particular technology, but it can imply homogenous users and abstracted properties (Oliver 2005; 2011). Technologies are not fixed, homogenous things with generalisable characteristics or consequences (Chandler 1995). Two problematic understandings of technology, essentialism and instrumentalism, share an assumption that we can link predetermined functions with expected practices and outcomes (Hamilton and Friesen 2013). In essentialism, technology is imbued with 'ideological bias' (Postman 1993: 13), 'inalienable qualities' or intrinsic, abstract pedagogical principles (Hamilton and Friesen 2013) that are independent of human activity. In contrast, instrumentalism sees technology as a set of neutral tools, defined by technical properties, independent of social forces, and 'subservient to human choices' (Kaplan 2009: 4). Whilst pedagogical determinism is associated with instrumentalism, a technological determinist view can coincide with either essentialist or an instrumental views (Feenberg 2006). Instrumentalism's neutrality can mask values of efficiency (Feenberg 2006), where what matters is that a tool works, and what works can be 'determined objectively according to universally valid, scientifically established principles' (Kaplan 2009: 4).

In practice, technology is always an assembly of multiple other technologies (Dron 2021), and always more than the sum of its parts (Chandler 1995). It is always entangled in context, and understood differently by different people in different settings (Dron 2021). Rather than focusing on particular objects or devices, it is the combination of technologies in use, and its relations to the systems in which it is embedded, that matters (Kanuka 2008). Understanding a VLE, for example, depends on local culture and infrastructure (Enriquez 2009). VLEs reinforce certain institutional roles and practices, and make others more difficult (Oliver 2011). Meanwhile, traditional practices and methods (e.g. lectures or tutorials) are perpetuated by community take-up of other technologies (Oliver 2011), such as Zoom or other videoconferencing software during the COVID-19 pandemic (Fox et al. 2021; Rapanta et al. 2020). Yet individual educators still have some agency to configure different approaches with most technologies (e.g. virtual writing retreats use silence to encourage participation in parallel activity via Zoom, see Koulaxi and Kong 2022).

Methods

Methods are structured templates for how teachers and students should proceed in the facilitation of learning. Examples include lectures, tutorials, problem-based learning, simulation and self-directed learning. Methods require technologies (e.g. classrooms, VLEs, videoconferencing software), yet can also, themselves, be understood as technologies, where they are used to reify particular ideas about learning or about how people should act (Dron 2021). Teaching methods convey values to students, whether implicitly or explicitly (Biesta 2010). Methods can become normative, imagined right ways of doing things within a particular context. They do not directly determine activity but function as guides to 'acceptable kinds of action' (Oliver 2011: 379). More rigid methods are, in theory, less reliant on skilful orchestration and are, therefore, more reliable than flexible methods (Dron 2021). Dron gives the example of a 'rigid lesson plan' as a 'hard' technology that shuts down possibilities for student activity.

However, methods do not simply 'work' by following a script, they must be enacted in accordance with values, purpose and the learning and teaching context (Biesta 2015). Furthermore, formal methods are only ever part of any student's learning activity (Ellis and Goodyear 2009), and informal activities have a significant influence on learning during and after a course (Dron 2021). Situated teaching or learning activity, with its dynamic expressions of agency and discretion, often does not neatly fit strict criteria for what constitutes a method (Davis 2017).

Purposes

Making educational purposes explicit helps teachers and students to know not just what they will do but why (Kanuka 2008). However, teachers may hold only vague notions of purpose, and a clear articulation of purposes (particularly longer-term ones) is challenging (Priestley et al. 2015). As Priestly and colleagues note, superficial, short-term purposes (e.g. sessional outcomes) are problematic because they narrow possibilities for action and thus the agency of teachers and students. Learning outcomes are insufficient because much learning is emergent and, therefore, unpredictable (Fawns et al. 2021d), and there are always multiple purposes for any educational activity (Biesta 2009). Biesta argues that educational purposes can be located within three broad categories: qualification, socialisation and subjectification. Qualification involves the development of knowledge, skills and understandings that prepare students to contribute to economic growth, citizenship and forms of literacy necessary to function in society. Socialisation prepares students for 'existing ways of doing and being', to take on norms and values, and to become members of 'social, cultural and political "orders"' (p. 40). In contrast, subjectification prepares students to be autonomous and independent (e.g. through critical thinking or appreciation of diversity). Biesta argues that, whatever the intentions, education always contributes to all three, though these different purposes can be in tension.

Values

Educational values are beliefs about what matters within learning and teaching (Fawns et al. 2022), including ideals, standards, principles and qualities of intrinsic worth (Collinson 2012). Dron ( 2021), for example, argues that 'caring for the subject, for learning, and for the learner are non-negotiable'. Other examples include vulnerability (Lee 2021), collaboration (Fawns et al. 2021b) or critical thinking (Harland and Pickering 2010). Along with purpose, values underpin why educators do what they do (Biesta 2015). They influence what content, tasks, social groupings or forms of assessment are prioritised, and provide a basis for interpreting evidence about practice (Biesta 2010; House and Howe 1999). Values are inevitable in design, practice (Gudmundsdottir 1990) and evaluation (Biesta 2015), yet often remain implicit, especially where a discipline or culture emphasises objectivity and rationality (Harland and Pickering 2010). Apparently objective and standardised evaluation often involves default values of efficiency and effectiveness (Biesta 2009). Without clearly articulated values, educators are limited in their possibilities for action (Harland and Pickering 2010).

Values are also shaped through practice and context (Veugelers and Vedder 2003). How students learn is important (Biesta 2015; Feenberg 2006) because there is always collateral learning and side effects. Often, teachers must use their discretion to align educational practice with their values in shifting contexts (Fawns et al. 2021b), which can be difficult with inadequate materials, systems, teaching conditions or teaching expertise (Veugelers and Vedder 2003). As Priestley et al. ( 2015: 54) argue, values do not exist 'in a vacuum but are themselves the result of the range of influences, demands and pressures that structure the settings - the particular ecologies - within which teachers think and act'. Choices of technology and method can, intentionally or otherwise, convey and promote certain values (Harland and Pickering 2010). For instance, a teacher may value trusting educational relationships whilst still requiring students to submit assessments to plagiarism detection software. Thus, values can remain aspirational (Fawns et al. 2021b) where educators have insufficient knowledge or agency to put them into practice. Indeed, 'pedagogy first' is suggestive of an aspiration towards teacher agency as a democratic value (Feenburg 2001).

Context

An Aspirational View of Entangled Pedagogy

The entangled model (Fig. 1) encourages educators to consider the diverse ways in which teachers and students actually engage with technology whilst learning, and how these are influenced by a range of situated factors (Jones 2015). In Column 3, the entangled elements are presented as non-hierarchical, acknowledging their mutual shaping (Tsui and Tavares 2021) and the value of a holistic, non-directional, non-linear view of relations (Chandler 1995). Each factor is no more or less important than any other. Combinations matter more than individual elements.

Nonetheless, the relative emphasis placed on each element by teachers, students and other stakeholders is worth attending to. In Fig. 2, I have added Column 4: an aspirational view of how teachers, students and other stakeholders can engage with the emergent complexity of educational activity. This view recognises that methods and technology tend to become over-emphasised in educational discourse, design and practice (Dron 2021). It suggests a need to intentionally and regularly revisit purposes, values and contexts, to ensure that they meaningfully and iteratively inform choices around methods and technology, whilst also recognising the shaping role of technology and methods as part of the pedagogical mix.

An entangled pedagogy, including an aspirational view

Entangled Knowledge

Teaching with technology requires a non-trivial combination of different kinds of knowledge. Koehler et al. ( 2013) build on Shulman's ( 1986; 1987) pedagogical content knowledge to propose the TPACK framework. This involves technological knowledge (how to work with information technology), pedagogical knowledge (ways of teaching and learning) and content knowledge (the subject matter to be learned). Different kinds of knowledge are considered in combination rather than individually. For example, computer literacy (technological knowledge) is important, but must be combined with pedagogical knowledge to encompass ethics, philosophy or the relationship between technology and learning (all of which constitute technological pedagogical knowledge) (Koehler et al. 2013). Recognising the need for thoughtful, nuanced negotiation of how different factors, and their combinations, shape educational situations, TPACK prioritises some aspects (purposes, values, learner characteristics) over others (techniques and methods).

Entangled Ethics and Ethical Knowledge

Like pedagogy, ethics cannot be the sole responsibility of teachers. Working relationships between University IT staff and commercial providers shape not only broader institutional implementations of technology, but the distribution of pedagogical and ethical knowledge and decision-making. The higher-level configurations of VLEs, learning analytics interfaces, videoconferencing software, etc. should be understood by members across educational institutions, not just in terms of economics, legality, data security or technical support, but also in ethical and pedagogical terms (Williamson 2016). Just as teachers need more than pedagogical or technological knowledge in isolation but a combination of those forms of knowledge, so too do those with responsibilities in procurement, support, maintenance, implementation, policy-making and faculty development.

Implications for Evaluation and Research

Research based on views represented by Columns 1 or 2 of the entangled model is potentially misleading. For example, media comparison studies (e.g. Zoom vs physical classroom, or online vs on campus) are often underpinned by deterministic views. Outcomes are seen as products of technology, method or modality, yet variance within conditions is often greater than variance between them (Dron 2021; Saba 2000), and statistical tests are confounded by the complex interrelations shown in Column 3. Problematic simplifications are used to produce clear results (Shulman 1987), but researchers often find no significant differences (Dron 2021; Lockee et al. 2001; Saba 2000). As Saba ( 2000) argued, over 20 years ago, this stems from the lack of explanatory theoretical frameworks to make results relevant to other researchers and practitioners.

Moreover, benefits of education are largely contingent on localised purposes and values (Kanuka 2008). Many recent studies describe digital learning environments (particularly in online or hybrid learning contexts) as independent of their social and material contexts (Fawns 2019; Gourlay 2021). The entangled pedagogy model is agnostic about modality (whether a course or programme is on campus, online or hybrid), because the relationship of technology to the situated combination of context, purposes, values and methods is more important. Whilst there are important differences between online, on campus and hybrid teaching, those labels are insufficient representations of the interplay of elements. Digital education is always also material, social and embodied (Fawns et al. 2019), and there is always some digital aspect of any educational activity in contemporary higher education, irrespective of modality. Looking past modality, and crude categories (e.g. 'Zoom' or 'lectures'), allows us to contextualise what is actually happening and respond to the diverse and situated needs in front of us. Technologies and methods are always emergent assemblages of material, social and digital activity (Fawns 2019; Fenwick 2015), albeit with features and patterns of commonality (Goodyear 2021).

Conclusions

Whilst calls to put pedagogy first are understandable, they misrepresent the ways in which technology inevitably shapes teaching and learning activity, and may lead to inadequate appreciation of the possibilities, constraints and risks of technology in education. Nor can technology be the sole driver of pedagogy. Proposals that technology can solve educational problems, or produce particular outcomes, oversimply the ways in which technology is embedded in context (Fawns 2019). Discussions of pedagogy driving technology, or vice versa, reinforce a false dichotomy. Pedagogy is not just method, and technology is not just a vehicle for implementing that method. Pedagogy involves the negotiation of methods and technologies, in relation to purposes and values, in a subjectively understood context.

In this paper, I have presented a model of entangled pedagogy, in which technology is one of a number of elements that are always interdependent within complex pedagogical activity. This model provides a stronger basis for making choices that align with educators' values, purposes and contexts, as well as with those of their students. It considers three different ways of understanding the relationship between pedagogy and technology (technology first, pedagogy first and entangled), before proposing an aspirational view of how educators can meaningfully take account of the complexity of these relationships in design and practice. Here, purpose values and contexts are emphasised by continually revisiting them during teaching design and orchestration. At the same time, teachers collaborate with students and others to collectively negotiate these factors, and pedagogical knowledge is distributed across stakeholders at different levels of the institution (Dron 2021). This is important not only for the effectiveness but also the ethics of any entangled educational activity.

References

Adams, C. (2020). TPACK's arc of technology transparency and teachers' ethical obligations: Understanding the digital as the new materia medica of pedagogy. In M. N. Ochoa & D. Gibson (Eds.), Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education (pp. 49-58). Fairmont: AACE.

Barad, K. M. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Book Google Scholar

Bates, A. W. (2019). Teaching in a Digital Age. ﻿2nd Edition. Vancouver: Tony Bates Associates.

Brett, P., & Cousin, G. (2010). Student led Network Learning design. ﻿In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, & T. Ryberg (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010 (pp. 610-616). Lancaster: University of Lancaster. https://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fss/organisations/netlc/past/nlc2010/abstracts/PDFs/Brett.pdf. Accessed 28 March 2022.

Chandler, D. (1995). Technological or media determinism. http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tecdet.html. Accessed 4 March 2022.

Cousin, G. (2005). Learning from cyberspace. In R. Land & S. Bayne (Eds.), Education in cyberspace (pp. ﻿117-129). London: Routledge.

Fenwick, T. (2015). Sociomateriality and Learning: A critical approach. In D. Scott & E. Hargreaves. (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Learning (pp. 83-93). London: SAGE.

Chapter Google Scholar

Goodyear, P. (2015). Teaching as design. ﻿ HERDSA Review of Higher Education, 2, 27-50.

Goodyear, P., & Carvalho, L. (2019). The Analysis of Complex Learning Environments. In H. Beetham & R. Sharpe (Eds.), Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Principles and Practices of Design (pp. 49-65). ﻿Abingdon: Routledge.

Harland, O., & Pickering, N. (2010). Values in higher education teaching. ﻿Abingdon: Routledge.

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. EDUCAUSE Review, 27 March. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning. Accessed 4 March 2022.

House, E. R., & Howe, K. R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. London: SAGE.

Book Google Scholar

Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118). ﻿Athabasca: Athabasca University Press.

Lukes, D. (2019). What do we mean by 'pedagogy' in 'pedagogy first'? Towards a Digital Pedagog. ALT Online Winter Conference 2019. https://altc.alt.ac.uk/online2019/sessions/359/. Accessed 6 March 2022.

Sheninger, E. (2016). Why Pedagogy First, Tech Second Stance is Key to the Future. Ed-Tech, 25 April. https://edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2016/04/why-pedagogy-first-tech-second-stance-key-future. Accessed 1 March 2022

Zimmerman, J. (2020). Coronavirus and the Great Online-Learning Experiment: Let's Determine what our Students Actually Learn Online. Chronicle of Higher Education, 10 March. https://www.chronicle.com/article/coronavirus-and-the-great-online-learning-experiment/. Accessed 1 March 2022.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The ideas in this paper were significantly informed by open and ongoing discussions with a wide network of educators in informal chats, via Twitter, at conference presentations, and more. An incomplete list of these collaborators includes: Gill Aitken, Derek Jones, Anne-Marie Scott, Maha Bali, Steph Moore, David Rubeli, Simon Horrocks, Simon Thomson, Jon Dron, Mario Veen, Virna Rossi, Leo Havemann, Dom Pates, Joyce Seitzinger, Mary Jacob, Hans Tilstra, Frances Bell, Esther de Groot, David Jones, Peter Goodyear, Davide Nicolini, Tim Drysdale, Thomas Ryberg. Apologies to anyone I have neglected to mention. Thanks to Lorna Campbell and the University of Edinburgh OER service for supporting the development of the entangled pedagogy diagrams as an open educational resource. (See https://open.ed.ac.uk/an-entangled-pedagogy-views-of-the-relationship-between-technology-and-pedagogy/. Accessed 31 March 2022.)

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Edinburgh Medical School, University of Edinburgh, 49 Little France Crescent, Edinburgh, EH16 4SB, UK

Tim Fawns

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Fawns.

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

Fawns, T. An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy-Technology Dichotomy. Postdigit Sci Educ 4, 711-728 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-022-00302-7
Download citation

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Get shareable link

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An Entangled Pedagogy: Looking Beyond the Pedagogy-Technology Dichotomy - Postdigital Science and Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
'Pedagogy first' has become a mantra for educators, supported by the metaphor of the 'pedagogical horse' driving the 'technological cart'. Yet putting technology first or last separates it from pedagogy, making us susceptible to technological or pedagogical determinism (i.e. where technology is seen either as the driving force of change or as a set of neutral tools).

# data[].attributes.body
Participants can vote at Slido.com with #2497459

[https://admin.sli.do/event/hiFiqKo1HwqQG4XTuQTsd3/polls]

# data[].attributes.body
Jessica Gemella
Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Specialist
Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning
jessica.gemella@viu.ca

Anwen Burk
Curriculum, Teaching and Learning Specialist
Centre for Innovation and Excellence in Learning
anwen.burk@viu.ca

# data[].attributes.headline
Fostering Informed Citizens in an Information Dumpster Fire: Strategies for Teaching Information Literacy (VIU Libraries)

# data[].attributes.subject
Fostering Informed Citizens in an Information Dumpster Fire: Strategies for Teaching Information Literacy (VIU Libraries)

# data[].attributes.body
“I worry higher education focuses too much on helping young people become students and too little on preparing students to be informed citizens. We spend lots of time helping undergraduates learn how to find, read, and evaluate scholarship, but little on how to keep up with events or understand how news is created, circulated, and acted upon…We need to rethink what we mean by “information literacy” and make developing informed and active citizenship a priority across our campuses.”
Barbara Fister, Academic Librarian and Professor (2018)

# data[].attributes.headline
FLO Panel: Artificial Intelligence in Post-Secondary Education, a BC Perspective

# data[].attributes.subject
FLO Panel: Artificial Intelligence in Post-Secondary Education, a BC Perspective

# data[].attributes.body
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wm5pAuDbrE3HCX-4SSuj9DHTd-JQ1Pczxzt6bLXhjOQ/edit#heading=h.1ldv5k3mf3wu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
FLO Panel: Artificial Intelligence in Post-Secondary Education, a B

# data[].attributes.body
We respectfully acknowledge that we gather today in a region that overlaps with the unceded traditional and ancestral First Nations territories of the Musqueam, Katzie, Semiahmoo, Tsawwassen, Qayqayt, and Kwikwetlem peoples.

# data[].attributes.body
Work with you team to explore one concept (discussion question)

Your team has 15 minutes to:

Introduce yourselves, and set 2-3 ground rules

Discuss the questions that are posted at the top of that concept

Prepare to report back a key/favourite idea.

Add your ideas to the Padlet (in the Question post as a comment)

# data[].attributes.body
How do you create a culture of trust in your learning spaces?

# data[].attributes.body
How does the incorporation of digital literacy into your courses shift your pedagogical approach?

What changes in the classroom when students are able to actively collaborate with one another digitally?

# data[].attributes.body
How are you currently using digital networks for learning?

Are digital networks you would like to use, but haven't? Why?

Note: These can apply to your own learning or what you do in your classes with students.

# data[].attributes.body
Which cognitive offloading tools do you allow students to use for learning activities and assessments?

Are there specific tools which are appropriate in your context to meet learning outcomes?

# data[].attributes.headline
Evolution of Digital Literacy: Anwen Burk

# data[].attributes.subject
Evolution of Digital Literacy: Anwen Burk

# data[].attributes.body
Link to Article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/wildfire-conspiracy-bc-1.6855332

# data[].attributes.headline
Activity: Co create a team use agreement

# data[].attributes.subject
Activity: Co create a team use agreement

# data[].attributes.body
Select one educational technology that you would like to integrate into your context to enhance teaching and learning

# data[].attributes.body
Access to Information

Interactive Learning

Personalized Learning

Collaboration and Communication

Delivery Mode Options

Assessment and Feedback

Professional Development

Data-Driven Decision Making

# data[].attributes.headline
Teaching with Technology Starts with Relationship Building

# data[].attributes.subject
Teaching with Technology Starts with Relationship Building

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
During my early days of teaching in graduate school, educational technology was sold more for its posh than performance. Every new version of Microsoft PowerPoint allowed instructors to embed more and more media and wow students with visually appealing graphics.

Looking back, the whole enterprise seemed like a fruitless attempt to keep up with the expectations of the smartphone generation. But there has been progress, both with the tools themselves and the teaching practices we employ to incorporate technology into the classroom. And improved access to devices and high-speed Wi-Fi means that traditional classrooms lectures need not be limited to the physical classroom space.

These advancements are worth celebrating, but it leaves me wondering: Why should students still show up to a physical classroom? And what is the role of a professor as technology continues to make its way into the classroom?

My answer to that is humans are crucial to inclusive teaching, and that using tech successfully in the classroom starts with relationships.

How do we do that? In addition to using technology in my own biology courses, I also work with faculty across the country on how to teach with technology through an inclusive lens. Including student voices as active and important features of course design is a key component of a classroom based on dialogue, and this is what it truly means to be an inclusive instructor. There are certainly ways in which technology can aid this process, but the mindset of inclusion must determine the ways in which that technology is used-not the other way around. I have watched the mixed results of instructors trying to adopt technology to their progressive teaching needs. The narrative I often hear centers on how students may resist active learning approaches, a teaching style that often (but not always) is predicated on some technology.

I have also seen instructors blindly adopt tools without adjusting their pedagogy or thought behind what the human interactions would look like afterwards. For example, moving from lecture to small group work is only as effective as the nature of the feedback, the respect between stakeholders, and the understanding students have in how the process helps them grow both intellectually and socially.

For STEM instruction, inclusive teaching and relationship-building is often new and potentially dangerous territory. Without appropriate experience, instructors attempting to engage the emotional aspect of the teaching process risk displaying the social biases that result from unawareness. In my experience, graduate training in STEM tends to lack any discussion of this.

Pivoting one's pedagogical focus to relationship-building thus demands a learning process about the self and the students, and there are practical steps an instructor can consider when embarking on this paradigm shift.

1. Provide opportunities for students to reflect.

Student reflection assignments have been shown to produce cathartic effects on academic performance and even health. But what if instead student reflections could be used to capture information about students' sense of meaning and purpose?

The popular NPR program titled "This I Believe," espouse this ethos on a weekly basis. On the show, individuals read aloud the beliefs and struggles that guide their daily lives.

This NPR program provides a framework for educators who want to better know their students in an increasingly digital classroom setting. When confidentiality is assured, students are often willing to deeply unpack the very unique ways in which they navigate their lives both generally, and in the context of the class that requested the assignment. This provides instructors a unique body of data from which they can learn interesting things about their students. The relationship with the students can be built on this uniqueness, and not generic assumptions of the student based on social stereotypes.

2. Prepare to learn about yourself and your students.

Asking students to reflect in deep and profoundly personal ways means that we need be prepared to listen and learn from it. This learning process is arguably the most difficult step.

STEM pedagogy has a historic culture that assumes problems in the classroom are mostly a function of student deficits, placing the blame on students' weaknesses or learning differences rather than other factors influencing their education. The idea that the social environment we create (or don't create) impacts the learning experience is sadly too new a concept in college teaching. In an inclusive classroom, the instructor must embrace their own history and privilege, as well as and students' histories. Doing so involves complex learning and unlearning, but that can lead to the development of a more authentic relationship between the instructor and students.

Some of these lessons may be difficult, since not all instructors have considered how their own pedagogies may perpetuate unequal outcomes. Several books, such as "Paying the Price: College Costs, Financial Aid, and the Betrayal of the American Dream" or "Savage Inequalities" are good starting points to better understand how the way we teach can lead to exclusive and unequal education experiences.

3. Leverage partners.

We need not be dwarfed by the enormity of the task of teaching for inclusion. There are many scholars, societies, campus partners, and other groups more broadly engaging and thinking about this work. Learning through the literature is an important first step, but seeking the assistance of organizations, like AAC&U or the John N. Gardner Institute, who have turned equity theory into praxis will be helpful to learn how to apply these things for one's own context.

4. Provide opportunities for yourself to reflect.

The social and intellectual development that both students and instructors undergo when we discuss and debate ideas is at the center of why we educate. Paradoxically, the abundance of technology in STEM classrooms, for me, has reprioritized the non-STEM disciplines that ask philosophical questions about human connection. There is something fundamentally unique about engaging a different crop of 150 students or so every Fall. Their stories teach me a lot about the human experience, and in turn, our role as instructors is to teach students how to leverage their personal histories toward becoming better thinkers and citizens of the world.

Technology and innovation in higher education matters, but only to the end that it supports the building of a respectful, open community of future scholars in the physical classroom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teaching With Technology in Higher Ed? Start With Relationship-Building. - EdSurge News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
During my early days of teaching in graduate school, educational technology was sold more for its posh than performance. Every new version of Microsoft PowerPoint allowed instructors to embed more and more media and wow students with visually appealing graphics. Looking back, the whole enterprise seemed like a fruitless attempt to keep up with the expectations of the smartphone generation.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.text
Cheating and plagiarism are pedagogical problems, not technological ones. They’re not inevitable. We can address issues of academic integrity by designing proactively and together with students, creating a culture of trust rather than suspicion.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.original_text
Cheating and plagiarism are pedagogical problems, not technological ones. They’re not inevitable. We can address issues of academic integrity by designing proactively and together with students, creating a culture of trust rather than suspicion. https://t.co/96GqQoQy82

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.referenced_tweets[].text
From an article by me and @mburtis: "Stock approaches to online learning can’t address the complexities of students and faculty experiencing acute trauma. Standardized course designs don’t adapt easily for moments we couldn’t possibly have planned for." https://t.co/X368xdAKD8 https://t.co/tUsHBgsHnV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.data.text
Cheating and plagiarism are pedagogical problems, not technological ones. They’re not inevitable. We can address issues of academic integrity by designing proactively and together with students, creating a culture of trust rather than suspicion. https://t.co/96GqQoQy82

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props_source.includes.tweets[].text
From an article by me and @mburtis: "Stock approaches to online learning can’t address the complexities of students and faculty experiencing acute trauma. Standardized course designs don’t adapt easily for moments we couldn’t possibly have planned for." https://t.co/X368xdAKD8 https://t.co/tUsHBgsHnV

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.original_text
Cheating and plagiarism are pedagogical problems, not technological ones. They’re not inevitable. We can address issues of academic integrity by designing proactively and together with students, creating a culture of trust rather than suspicion. https://t.co/96GqQoQy82

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.text
Cheating and plagiarism are pedagogical problems, not technological ones. They’re not inevitable. We can address issues of academic integrity by designing proactively and together with students, creating a culture of trust rather than suspicion.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.metadata.attachment_props.referenced_tweets[].text
From an article by me and @mburtis: "Stock approaches to online learning can’t address the complexities of students and faculty experiencing acute trauma. Standardized course designs don’t adapt easily for moments we couldn’t possibly have planned for." https://t.co/X368xdAKD8 https://t.co/tUsHBgsHnV

# data[].attributes.body
How does digital literacy change pedagogy?

# data[].attributes.body
This toolkit aims to support higher educators in facilitating conversations about the ethical use of digital technologies for meaningful collaborations within digital communities. Specifically, the toolkit aims to support faculty in facilitating the co-creation of class agreements that address the ethical use of digital technologies and media, netiquette, and digital citizenship to maintain well-being.

# data[].attributes.body
By the end of this activity, learners will be able to create a class agreement for the use of digital technology and media that outlines the guidelines and expectations for respectful and responsible online behavior

# data[].attributes.body
What are legitimate sources of information?

# data[].attributes.body
Using the web for tools or as spaces where we live out a portion of our lives and is linked to our identity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The importance of maintaining social presence and teacher presence in an online classroom -JGallant

# data[].attributes.body
In response to requests from faculty interested in how best to use emerging technologies in their classroom, I started to build a Digital Literacy toolkit. Anwen was subsequently invited to collaborate on expanding the toolkit.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
This Padlet was developed by Jessica Gemella, Curriculum Teaching and Learning Specialist, Vancouver Island University

# data[].attributes.body
This license lets others remix, adapt, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge the creator and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.

About Creative Commons
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/#:~:text=Attribution&text=This%20license%20lets%20others%20distribute,and%20use%20of%20licensed%20materials.

# data[].attributes.body
Hello Educators!
Please REMAKE (button on the right) to make a copy and adapt this Padlet for your use.

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

On June 8, 2022, the Digital Learning Advisory Committee (convened by the British Columbia Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Training) produced a consultation draft of their Digital Learning Strategy. The aim is to:
consult broadly with post-secondary institutions (PSIs) and organizations, learners, and Indigenous partners and organizations to collect feedback and solicit interest in participation in follow-up initiatives. Consultations are being initiated and will take place through September 2022.
Following this period of consultation, the goal is to
Refine recommendations and develop an implementation plan, including for pilots and further policy development.
What is the process?
In 2021, the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Training ('the Ministry' or AEST) engaged the post-secondary system to better understand and support the use of digital learning models in post- secondary education in British Columbia, both during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The Digital Learning Advisory Committee (DLAC) was initiated to lead a collaborative process to enhance digital post-secondary experiences across the province by:

Identifying the lessons learned from the widespread adoption of digital learning models in post- secondary education over the past two years,

Envisioning how human-centred digital learning environments can complement and enhance British Columbia's (BC) post-secondary system over the next 5-10 years.

The Associate Vice President of Teaching and Learning at the University of Fraser Valley and the Assistant Deputy Minister in the Post-Secondary Policy and Programs Division in the Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Training served as DLAC's Co-Chairs, exemplifying the collaboration between the post-secondary system and government. DLAC consisted of three Working Groups:
What is the outcome to date?
The collaborative efforts of the DLAC and Working Groups have resulted in:
I set out below the main recommendations. However, much more detail - such as specific recommendations for post-secondary institutions - is available and I strongly recommend you read the whole document if you are interested in a system- and institution-wide digital learning strategy.

Strategic priorities

Strategic Priority 1: Policies and Processes
The successful adaptation of BC's post-secondary system to the rapidly growing and evolving role of technology in post-secondary education will require institutions to update existing policies or develop new secondary operations and to foster innovation and excellence. policies to address the impact of digital technology on all facets of post-
Strategic Priority 2: System Collaboration
System-level coordination and collaboration is required across BC's post-secondary system to reduce the escalating costs related to digital technologies, and to improve the sustainability of BC's post-secondary institutions in response to increasing demands for digital infrastructure including hardware, software, and human resources.
Strategic Priority 3: Enhancing Digital Equity
The post-secondary system contributes to mitigating or eliminating digital inequities by developing BC's digital capabilities within the post- secondary institutions, across the post-secondary system, inclusive of adult higher education entities, and within BC more broadly.
Guidelines for technology-enhanced learning
The Guidelines are intended to assist post-secondary institutions (PSI) in navigating the expanding use of digital technologies supporting teaching and learning by complimenting and guiding PSI policies and processes.
Guidelines

Implementing institution-wide strategies to support an appropriate technology-enhanced environment

Digital literacy
Digital inclusion, or a person's access to adequate hardware and software, is a require[ment] for developing digital literacy....post-secondary institutions (PSIs) are encouraged to consider and address barriers learners might encounter when accessing digital learning spaces including connectivity, software, devices, and learning spaces.
Instructional resources
Three pathways or actions were identified to increase digital literacy across post-secondary communities.
Thematic competencies

Management issues (Technology, Finance, and Administration)

Appendix 3 describes how technological, financial, and administrative adjustments can improve technology-enhanced learning across BC, under different sectors:

My comments

As the document acknowledges, this initiative was driven by the realisation that the pivotal shift to online learning during the pandemic will have repercussions and implications for post-secondary institutions well beyond the pandemic. Online and digital learning will expand and play a more fundamental role in all post-secondary education.

I am very pleased then to see my home province take this initiative to develop a system-wide digital learning strategy that should influence the actions and strategies of individual institutions, programs and courses within the province. I am particularly pleased to see that it is a values- and ethics-driven strategy, with a focus on equity and indigeneity. This is a welcome change from the commercialisation and marketing of the ed tech industry.

However, I would like to see more focus in the strategy on pedagogy and the need for the upskilling of instructors, in order for them to teach effectively in a digital learning environment. A Digital Learning Strategy should include a recognition of the need for faculty training and support. This is an area where government can have a positive influence on institutional policies, through funding and perhaps more importantly, through subtle pressure or encouragement, without impinging on the autonomy of institutions.

Lastly, while I welcome the value- and ethics-driven approach, there are several risks. The first is that digital learning may be held to a higher standard than conventional teaching. Institutions and programs currently vary considerably in terms of embedding values and ethics within their teaching and admission policies. This is particularly important regarding accessibility on campus, and funding of disadvantaged potential students. Do such guidelines and strategies exist for conventional teaching and learning? If not, why not?

Secondly, the document, understandably, clearly reflects the priorities of the current BC (NDP, or left-of-centre) government. A different government may - indeed almost certainly will - have different values and priorities. For instance there is nothing in the current document that ties digital learning to the needs or priorities of the labour market.

The third risk is the potential impact of the strategy on innovation in digital learning. It should be remembered that most new technological developments are initially available only to a select few. A good example is virtual reality. It clearly will not become a 'standard' technology used across all courses or for all students. However would applications of VR to post-secondary teaching need to match the digital equity standard in this document?

Lastly, strategy should never be fixed and immovable. It needs to change as the environment around it changes (it would have been good to have a more extensive environmental scan than just the impact of Covid-19). The availability and use of different technologies can change rapidly in a short time.

In the meantime, this strategy is a very important step forward and the process should be replicated by other jurisdictions although the outcomes will almost certainly be different (if you know of similar digital learning strategies at a system-wide level, please let me know).

The BC Ministry of Advanced Education and Training welcomes feedback on an ongoing basis. If you have input you would like to make to the Digital Learning Strategy, contact the Post-Secondary Digital Policies and Programs Branch at . In addition, ETUG has a Slack forum # to discuss this document. I would also be interested in your views on this document. Please use the comment space below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
British Columbia drafts a digital learning strategy for its post-secondary education sector | Tony Bates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On June 8, 2022, the Digital Learning Advisory Committee (convened by the British Columbia Ministry of Advanced Education and Skills Training) produced a consultation draft of their Digital Learning Strategy. The aim is to: consult broadly with post-secondary institutions (PSIs) and organizations, learners, and Indigenous partners and organizations to collect feedback and solicit interest in participation in follow-up initiatives.

# data[].attributes.body
Please take a moment to share your feedback and any additional thoughts you may have by adding them here.

# data[].attributes.body
Cluster ideas and reveal insights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Affinity diagrams are a great method to help you make sense of all your information when you have a lot of mixed data, such as facts, ethnographic research, ideas from brainstorms, user opinions, user needs, insights, and design issues. Affinity diagrams or clustering exercises are all about bundling and grouping information, and this method can be one of the most valuable methods to employ. For this reason, it is used in many phases of Design Thinking, as well as outside of the design context.

Why?

The Affinity Diagram is a method which can help you gather large amounts of data and organise them into groups or themes based on their relationships. The affinity process is great for grouping data gathered during research or ideas generated during Brainstorms.

The method is also called "Space Saturate and Group". The term " saturate" relates to the method in which everyone covers or saturates the " space" with images and notes, in order to create a wall of information, to inform, and start " grouping" the following problem-defining process. You then draw connections between these individual elements to join the dots and develop new and deeper insights. They will help define the problem(s) and develop potential ideas for solutions. In other words, you go from analysis to synthesis.

Author/Copyright holder: Josh Evnin. Copyright terms and licence: CC BY-SA 2.0

Seeing the data coming to life and moving data on post-its around on the wall helps the design team to immerse themselves in not only their own findings from field work and research, but sharing and communicating the findings with other team members in order to get a broader scope of the problem space being investigated.

Best Practice

Put pieces of data, small documented facts, drawings, ideas, and observations onto post-it notes, cards, or pieces of paper and put them up on wall charts, white boards or chalk boards. This is where the associated imagery of walls filled with post-it notes comes from. The sticky notes allow the design team to easily stick up and move pieces of data around in order to create clusters of similar themes, groups and patterns.

Take one post-it and make it the first post-it in the first group.

Take the next post-it and ask, "Is this similar to the first one or is it different?". Then, you will place it in the first group or into its own group.

You continue post-it by post-it as you place similar ideas together and create new groups when ideas do not fit into an existing cluster.

You should now have 3-10 groups, so it's time to talk about the best elements of those clusters.

Name the clusters to help you create an information structure and discover themes.

Rank the most important clusters over less important clusters. Be aware which values, motives, and priorities you use as foundation ideas before you start ranking: Is this your user's priorities, your company's, the market's, the stakeholder's, or your own? Which ones should you put most emphasis on?

Sometimes it make sense to create connections with other clusters using lines or other devices between individual bits of data or clusters of data.

Describe what you have synthesised, for example, insights, user needs, pain points, or look for gaps you haven't addressed yet.

Focus on translating what you've organised and understood into practice, rather than just identifying similar ideas.

You can download and print the Affinity Diagram (i.e. Space Saturate and Group) template which you and your team can use as a guide.

Author/Copyright holder: Open.Michigan. Copyright terms and licence: CC BY-SA 2.0

Affinity Diagrams can help you go from complete chaos and no overview of your information to creating groups of information, which you have named and organised into hierarchies that make sense.

The Take Away

Affinity Diagrams can help you bundle and cluster large bodies of information, facts, ethnographic research, ideas from brainstorms, user opinions, user needs, insights, design issues, etc. This method will help you name, rank and understand relations between groups of information. For this reason, this method is also known as "Space Saturate and Group" by d.school. This is a great method which can, if you follow the step-by-step process which we've described, surprisingly and straightforwardly create an overview and synthesise your findings. It's important that you remember to sum up the major insights, user needs, pain points, gaps, etc. Once you've done that you can focus on translating what you've organised and understood and put it into practice.

Author/Copyright holder: Teo Yu Siang and Interaction Design Foundation. Copyright terms and licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

References & Where to Learn More

IDEO.org, Bundle Ideas:
http://www.designkit.org/methods/30

Chris Gielow, Affinity Mapping Timelapse: This video by Chris Gielow gives a good sense of how the process plays itself out:
https://vimeo.com/47189546

AFFINITY CLUSTERING, The Catalyst Program provides the following Affinity Clustering Video Guide which gives a good overview:
http://www.wearecatalysts.org/toolkit/5

Hero Image: Author/Copyright holder: star5112. Copyright terms and licence: CC BY-SA 2.0

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Affinity Diagrams - Learn How to Cluster and Bundle Ideas and Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Affinity diagrams are a great method to help you make sense of all your information when you have a lot of mixed data, such as facts, ethnographic research, ideas from brainstorms, user opinions, user needs, insights, and design issues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Affinity Diagram Tutorial: How to Create an Affinity Diagram

# data[].attributes.body
Co-creating Rubrics with Students [Video: 5:35]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When students design their own rubrics, they engage in higher order thinking such as critical thinking, analysis, and evaluation. They take ownership for their learning and define their own standards. Creating rubrics with students clarifies the expectations for the assignment and checks for their understanding of the components of the assignment. Co-creating rubrics is an inclusive teaching practice when you create transparency for grading, encourage full participation in the creation of the rubrics, and allow students to express their own perspectives.

Slides from this video presentation (PDF)

[Stephanie Foster]: In this session, we'll talk about co-creating rubrics with students. Why should we co-create rubrics with students? Doing such an activity encourages the development of higher-order thinking, such as critical thinking, analysis, and evaluation. Critical thinking is the ability to think, reason, and make judgments. By applying it to this kind of activity, it promotes self-assessment and metacognitive skills, or encourages us to think about our own thinking and learning. Students take ownership for their learning by defining their own standards. Co-creating rubrics with students clarifies the expectation for the assignment and helps to check for their understanding. And it is also an inclusive teaching practice when you create transparency for grading, encourage full participation, and allow students to express their own perspectives. In my experience, it also helps to identify the blind spots that everyone has as an instructor and helps you to address those blind spots before moving forward.

This approach encourages you to use co-creative rubrics and peer review for formative assessment, rather than summative assessment. Formative assessment is an in-process assessment to check with students and see how things are going. Are they learning what you want them to learn? Do they understand what is expected? Formative assessment helps to improve learning and performance by allowing students the metacognitive activities we discussed earlier. Formative assessment clearly communicates learning goals and the criteria for success, it provides clear and detailed feedback, and prepares students to use that feedback for improvement.

Formative assessment also allows you as the instructor to be able to make changes or provide additional instruction. So how should we approach co-creating rubrics with students? Five approaches listed here, some of which come from a book that is included in your show notes, titled Instruction to Rubrics. The first is to start with a complete draft. In this case, you as the instructor would provide a complete draft of a rubric but leave room for changes and clarifications. This may be helpful for students who have not had much experience with rubrics but still allows them to engage with the ideas and offer some options for improving the rubric and improving their own understanding. This probably takes the least amount of time overall; this can be done individually with students or perhaps better done in- as group work. The second option is to start with a partial draft. This may be good for students who have some experience with rubrics or who have some experience with your instruction. In this case, you as the instructor would define the dimensions of the and the performance levels and students would complete the cells. Another option is for you as the instructor to complete some of the cells and ask students to complete the rest of the rubric. This also could be done very well in groups. The third option is to try a progressive model. I describe this like a progressive dinner in which appetizers are served at one house, entree at the next, and dessert at the third, in which case you divide the work of the rubric among several groups so that students are not overwhelmed with creating the entire rubric but instead can work on maybe one dimension of the rubric. You could put this in a Google doc, for example, and students could then come together and discuss the rubric as a whole before moving forward. A fourth approach is to start with learning outcomes. This is particularly useful for upper-level students or graduate students who have had significant experience with rubrics or students who are submitting a multiple-stage project or revisions for projects, in which case you communicate with the students what the learning outcomes are for the assignment and then the students then define all the dimensions and the- and complete the rest of the rubric. Finally you could build the rubric as the instruction progresses. So this works well for ongoing projects for which students will produce multiple drafts at different stages. I've used this very often with courses in which students have a term research paper for instance that they work on for most of the semester. So in this model you would build the rubric as students learn each piece so if you're working on introductions and conclusions that might be a good time to build out those pieces of the rubric, or if you're working on data collection, for instance, sampling techniques, you would create that portion of the rubric that focuses on sampling techniques, for example.

Some approaches to constructing the rubric1

Start with a complete draft. Instructor provides the structure, organization, and standards and leaves room for changes and clarifications. This is helpful for students who have not had much experience with rubrics. This approach probably takes the least amount of time overall.

Start with a partial draft. Instructor defines the dimensions and performance levels and students complete the cells. An option is to complete the cells for the highest or lowest levels of performance and ask students to complete the rest of the rubric.

Try a progressive model. Like a progressive dinner in which appetizers are served at one house, entrée at the next, and dessert at the third, the labor of constructing the rubric could be shared by groups working on different pieces.

Start with learning outcomes. Instructor provides the learning outcomes for the project, and students develop the rubric in its entirety. This approach works best with upper-level or graduate students who have had experience with rubrics or with submitting multiple stages or revisions for projects.

Build the rubric as instruction progresses. This works for ongoing projects for which students will produce drafts at different stages, such as research papers and term projects. This might also be useful for assignments that are repeated with the expectation that students improve their performance with each submission. Using lab reports as an example: When you are working on sampling techniques, have students create the portion of the rubric that focuses on sampling (e.g. chooses correct tool, measures accurately, uses safety protocols).

1Some of these approaches come from Stevens & Levi (2013)
Applications from CU Boulder instructors

Participants in a workshop were asked to suggest ways in which these ideas could be used in their own classrooms.

For a writing assignment that requires students to integrate concepts learned throughout the semester, both formative assessment and co-creation of rubrics can be beneficial. For a large classroom setting, co-creation can be done by recitation sections. A recitation section can be divided into 3-4 students per group, and then students can be asked to break down the expectations in the assignment guideline. We can then regroup to brainstorm about the expectations/criteria. During the process, we can encourage students to think about the reasons we have the assignment (focusing on learning outcomes), how the assignment helps them to achieve the goals of the course, and what the final product will look like in order to achieve those goals.

For lower-level Spanish courses, it is probably best to at least have a detailed discussion about the rubrics with students (for oral exams and writing assessments). But for a course like AP Spanish (high school), it would be extremely useful to identify the learning objectives that the College Board establishes and then have students work on defining what each of those learning objectives would actually look like as rubric criteria. Many students would benefit from seeing writing samples and understanding why each writing sample earned the score it did.

An instructor might work with students to build the rubric section by section, at the end of each class, over the course of a semester or instructional unit. So for instance, a class on selecting and evaluating sources of information might finish by co-creating the relevant section of the rubric: i.e. the part that requires X number of sources, or X different types of source, and so on. A class on the revision process might finish with a group discussion of how this should be reflected in the rubric. This would keep students returning to the rubric, rather than allowing them to forget about it and move on.

To engage students, the instructor could run polls on different parts of the rubric, or get students to debate the benefits and drawbacks of different options.

In a chemistry course, most rubric-based assignments involve some sort of experiment lab report or a presentation. The most effective method for students to co-create the rubric for a lab report is to give them a starting point of what is expected. Using a "partial draft" method would provide the dimensions that the instructor thinks are important and necessary, and leaves room for students to decide how they should be evaluated and judged. A good approach might be to allow students to define dimensions based on experiences they've had in previous courses, then work together to define the assessment scale.

Selected Resources

Fraile, J., Panadero, E., & Pardo, R. (2017). Co-creating rubrics: The effects on self-regulated learning, self-efficacy and performance of establishing assessment criteria with students. Studies In Educational Evaluation. DOI: 10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.03.003

Selke, M. J. G. (2013). Rubric assessment goes to college: Objective, comprehensive evaluation of student work. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

Stevens, D. D., & Levi, A. J. (2013). Introduction to rubrics: An assessment tool to save grading time, convey effective feedback, and promote student learning (second edition). Sterling, VA: Stylus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When students design their own rubrics, they engag

# data[].attributes.body
Padlet For Teachers: The Best Tips, Tricks, and Ideas For Your Classroom

An online bulletin board tool that makes collaboration a breeze.

Example - Blog with Padlet
https://myfest.equityunbound.org/month/may/padlets-for-myfest22/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Meaningful ways for teachers and students to collaborate online are more important than ever. That's why so many educators love Padlet, a digital bulletin board tool. It gives teachers, students, and even parents an easy way to share ideas, review work, and a whole lot more. Wondering what it's all about? Here's our guide to Padlet for teachers, including plenty of clever ways to use it with your students.

What is Padlet?

Think of Padlet as an online bulletin board, but with a lot of things a regular bulletin board could never do. Users can post text, images, videos, files, links ... basically anything digital. Others can see the postings, as well as comment or vote on them if the board owner allows. You can customize each Padlet by changing the background, layout, font, and color scheme.

One of the best things about Padlet for teachers is how very easy it is to use, even for young students. It works on computers and laptops, plus devices like Chromebooks, iPads, or smartphones. Perhaps most importantly, teachers can control whether contributions have students' names on them or are made anonymously. This empowers students who might otherwise feel too timid to share. You can also decide whether or not to allow comments or ratings and even require approval before posting or filter out profanity.

Is Padlet free?

Padlet's free version for all users allows you to create up to three Padlet boards at a time. You can erase and create new ones to stay under the limit. This is a good option for teachers who only plan to use it occasionally or who want to give it a try to see if it works for them.

If you decide you're willing to pay for an upgrade, there are two options. You can sign up for a Pro account, which offers unlimited Padlets and removes upload limits. Individual Pro accounts currently cost $8/month.

Padlet also offers Backpack for Schools, a bulk pricing plan that gives schools more privacy options, extra security, student portfolios, and more. Learn more about Backpack here.

15 Cool Ways to Use Padlet for Teachers

Ready to give it a try? There are so many ways to use Padlet for teachers and students. Here are some of the best ideas we've found to inspire you.

1. Remake existing Padlets as templates

If you come across a Padlet made by someone else that you really like, you can copy it to your own account and use it as a template. You can choose to copy the posts too, or just grab the layout to get you started. It's as simple as clicking the Remake button, then choosing what you want to copy over. The new Padlet will appear on your account, and you're ready to go! Want to make your own templates? Visit Guiding on the Side for a walk-through.

2. Collaborate and organize

Imagine you've asked your class to research a topic, with each student contributing several facts. In a hands-on classroom, you might have each student write their fact on a sticky note and add it to a whiteboard. Then, together with your class, you could organize those facts by moving the notes into columns. You can do the same with Padlet, but your "sticky notes" can contain photos, graphs, videos and audio, article links, and anything else that might be useful.

On the board above, students have contributed facts about E.T.A. Hoffman, author of The Nutcracker story, as well as information about the ballet. Here's the same board organized into columns, with posts sorted by subject. Learn how to change Padlet layouts here.

You can organize information in other ways, too, like timelines and flowcharts. The Techie Teacher has free graphic organizer Padlet templates you can re-make for your students here.

3. Get to know each other

Padlet is perfect for icebreaker activities. Ask students to share what they have in common or share an image of their favorite study space. You could even ask each student to create their own Padlet, sharing some of their favorite things. Learn how one teacher uses Padlet for a Selfie Icebreaker at Dr. Catlin Tucker.

4. Create a timeline

Padlet has a timeline feature built right in as one of their organizational options. How cool is that? Use it for history class, tracing scientific eras or evolutions, or even to map out the order of events in a book for English class. Wherever a timeline comes in handy, Padlet has you covered. Learn more about timelines here.

5. Get feedback with exit tickets

Exit tickets are a fantastic way to find out what your students learned in class and where they may still need some help. Lots of teachers have kids write their answers to a reflection question on a sticky note and post it by the door on the way out. If you're teaching online, or want to incorporate some technology, use Padlet instead.

6. Display student work

Teachers are no longer limited to displaying student work on a classroom bulletin board or in the hallway nearby. Since Padlets are easy to share, parents can drop in and see what their kids have been working on. See how The Techie Playground does it here.

7. Keep track of who needs help

One teacher likes to use Padlet to see who needs help during independent work. Kids simply add their name to the list to indicate they need a minute of the teacher's time. They can see how many kids are ahead of them, and no one is forgotten in the shuffle. Learn more at Stefbub's Classroom.

8. Hold a debate

Classroom discussion and debate can be difficult when you're teaching online. Even in person, there's rarely enough time for everyone's opinion to be heard. Try taking the debate online instead, like this Padlet from Teach Every Day. Post a question, then have students choose a side and gather resources about it. As students review the information posted by others, they can share their own thoughts and ask further questions. This is also an excellent way to help kids learn to have civil conversations online, even when they don't agree on the subject.

9. Have a scavenger hunt

Everyone loves a scavenger hunt! Set up a Padlet with columns, titling each with something your students need to find. Use a scavenger hunt for team building, or create a hunt that helps students learn more about a class subject. Make a field trip more meaningful (even a virtual one!) by asking kids to post pictures that meet certain criteria. Learning the alphabet with your littles? Have them take photos of items around them that start with each letter. There's so much you can do with this smart Padlet for teachers idea!

10. Set up a bookshelf

Use Padlet to make book recommendations or keep track of what students are reading. Recommendations by teachers or other students will help parents and kids find new reads to love. Ask kids to rate and comment on the books they're reading for class and include their own personal choices too.

11. Make a map

Padlet's map feature makes it a breeze to create a collaborative map for your students to use. Choose from a variety of styles, including satellite views. Add points to the map, along with information like links, photos, and more. Learn more about the map function from Free Technology For Teachers.

12. Conduct a writers' workshop

Writers' workshops help students develop their own skills and learn from others. One teacher has taken her writing workshops online, using Padlet to help her young writers see strong examples from their classmates while improving their own efforts. See how it's done at Mud and Ink Teaching.

13. Use Padlet Backchannel for discussions

Padlet's Backchannel feature makes it easy to have a discussion during another activity, like watching a film or listening to a presentation. It works just like a regular Padlet, but a text box at the bottom simplifies the process, allowing users to quickly type and send, just like in other chat programs. You can still add other items like links, images, or videos, too. Learn more about Backchannel from Richard Byrne on YouTube.

14. Assign lessons or homework

Use Padlet to keep all of your homework assignments for the week in one place, or lay out the daily lessons for a virtual classroom. You can link to videos, online games, and other resources, or create assignments directly in Padlet, like responding to reading questions. Students or parents can post questions to the assignments as needed, too. Learn how one teacher does it at Elementary Grapevine.

15. Take a poll

By enabling the voting feature, you can easily take a poll or survey for just about anything. Choose your next class reward, find out which book your students loved the most, or ask them which problem was the most difficult on last night's math homework. There are so many possibilities!

How do you use Padlet? Share in the comments!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Padlet For Teachers: The Best Tips, Tricks, and Ideas For Your Classroom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meaningful ways for teachers and students to collaborate online are more important than ever. That's why so many educators love Padlet, a digital bulletin board tool. It gives teachers, students, and even parents an easy way to share ideas, review work, and a whole lot more. Wondering what it's all about?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is a community agreement?

A community agreement (also known as a group contract, a learning agreement, or a classroom agreement) is a shared agreement between learners about how we want to work together over the course of our time together. This can include guidelines for what it means to be respectful, expectations about turn-taking, or accessibility needs (e.g., please don't bring peanuts to class).

Why make community agreements?

Discussing and deciding on how the group will work together builds a collective responsibility to make the classroom a safer place and give students an opportunity to voice their needs in co-developing a productive and equitable learning environment. In building community agreements as a class, we have the chance to foster shared accountability and student buy-in to the learning process.

How to develop a community agreement?

During one of your first classes together, invite students to think about what they need in order to make the class environment safer, equitable, and productive for learning: What would help us work best together? You can do this through individual writing prompts, a think-pair-share, or another active learning strategy. After giving students time to reflect and discuss in small groups, collectively generate a list of agreements. You can also consider asking this question in advance through email or Quercus, and having students contribute digitally to the generation of ideas.

Make sure to clarify what each contribution means. For example, "being respectful" can mean different things in different contexts. Also check for active consent: are these the guidelines that people want to govern the group? Does anyone have concerns about them? Revise these guidelines until the class members are satisfied and feel ready to commit to the collective agreement.

You can also use group agreements for group project work. Allow each group time to develop their own agreements for how they will work together. This may help alleviate the stress of unclear expectations around group work, help students to advocate for themselves and resolve conflicts together.

Looking for suggestions on things to include in a community agreement?

Respect-Give undivided attention to the person who has the floor (permission to speak).

Openness-We will be as open and honest as possible without disclosing others' personal or private issues (e.g., family, roommates, friends). It is okay to discuss situations, but we won't use names or other identifiers. For example, we won't say, "My older brother...", instead we will say, "I know someone who...".

Right to pass-It is always okay to pass (meaning "I'd rather not" or "I don't want to answer").

Nonjudgmental approach-We can disagree with another person's point of view without putting that person down.

Taking care to claim our opinions-We will speak our opinions using the first person and avoid using 'you'. For example, "I think that kindness is important", instead of "You are just mean".

Sensitivity to diversity-We will remember that people in the group may differ in cultural background, sexual orientation, and/or gender identity or gender expression and will be careful about making insensitive or careless remarks.

Anonymity-It is okay to ask any question by using the suggestion box.

Acceptance-It is okay to feel uncomfortable; people feel uncomfortable when they talk about sensitive and personal topics, such as sexuality.

Have a good time-It is okay to have a good time. Creating a safe space is about coming together as a community, being mutually supportive, and enjoying each other's qualities.

Also consider adding:

Step up and step back: This is a tool for thinking about the ways that our participation in classes is often shaped by how we benefit from (or do not benefit from) social relations of power. This asks us to pay attention to how frequently, how long, and how quickly we participate, so that we can check our own (over participation) and step back, or we can notice how we don't take up space, and make an attempt to step up and make our voices heard, especially when we may not often do that.

Respect each other's personal space: Ask for consent before touching another person, ensure that you are giving people their desired space.

How can you enforce a community agreement?

Sometimes participants do not abide by the community agreements they lay out for themselves and others. When that happens, having the agreements that everyone has actively consented to makes it easier to address a particular behaviour. As the tutorial leader or instructor, you can point out the lack of adherence and ask the class collectively how they would like to address it. Or you can point to the agreement and ask the person to change their behaviour so that it aligns with the agreements. Both are useful, and what you do will depend on how much time you have available and how pervasive the problem is. The more you can democratize the enforcement, the more buy-in you are likely to have, so think of this as an exercise in building shared accountability rather than in exercizing your authority.

Interested in exploring further resources?

Guide to Implementing TAP: A Peer Education Program to Prevent HIV and STI (2nd edition), © 2002, Advocates for Youth, Washington, DC.

Seeds for Change Guide to Group Agreements: https://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/groupagree

For more information about group work contracts:

Hesterman, S. (2016). The digital handshake: A group contract for authentic elearning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 13(3), 1-24.

Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhaji, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9-34.

Making Group Contracts, Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo: https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/teaching-resources/teaching-tips/developing-assignments/group-work/making-group-contracts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Community Agreements - Teaching Assistants' Training Program

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is a community agreement? A community agreement (also known as a group contract, a learning agreement, or a classroom agreement) is a shared agreement between learners about how we want to work together over the course of our time together. This can include guidelines for what it means to be respectful, expectations about turn-taking, [...]

# data[].attributes.body
Here's an example of a netiquette agreement for higher education:

As a member of this academic community, I agree to abide by the following principles of netiquette:

Respectful Communication: I will use respectful language and tone in all communications, including online discussions, email, and chats, and I will not engage in personal attacks, threats, or harassment.

Proper Grammar and Spelling: I will use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation in all online communications.

Appropriate Use of Emoticons and Acronyms: I will use emoticons and acronyms appropriately, and only when they enhance, rather than detract from, the clarity of my message.

Posting and Sharing Materials: I will respect the intellectual property rights of others, and only post or share materials that I have the right to share or that are properly cited.

Respect for Diversity: I will respect the diversity of perspectives, opinions, and backgrounds of my fellow students and instructors.

Timely and Responsive Communication: I will communicate in a timely and responsive manner, and will acknowledge receipt of messages promptly.

Privacy: I will respect the privacy of others and will not share personal information or sensitive material without their explicit consent.

By agreeing to these principles of netiquette, I recognize that I am contributing to an online community of learning that values respect, integrity, and responsible communication.

(OpenAI, personal communication, March 01, 2023)

# data[].attributes.body
Example
I will:

Use digital devices, networks, and software in school for educational purposes and activities

Keep my personal information (including home/mobile phone number, mailing address, and user password) and that of others private

Show respect for myself and others when using technology including social media

Give acknowledgement to others for their ideas and work

Report inappropriate use of technology immediately.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Turning a forbidding acceptable use policy into a friendlier digital empowerment guideline can shift your school culture into a more tech-friendly place.

Photo credit: Institute of Play

An acceptable use policy is a document that is present in every school district around the country. The purpose of this policy is to provide safe parameters for exploring digital resources and using school-issued devices properly. It also ensures that schools do their very best to block out the darkest corners of the web. And while these policies are effective and required, they have not evolved in their semantics.

From Acceptable to Empowered

Within the development of these school-wide policies, several shifts need to happen. My observation about the need for a semantic shift, probably one of the biggest shifts requited, reflects how acceptable use policies are interpreted by students. Essentially, these policies read more like a legal document rather than a document that students can understand and carry out. Additionally, we need to shift the focus from "you shouldn't do that" to a sense of empowerment around technology. In short, schools should place a positive connotation around technology use.

Some districts have started implementing responsible digital use guidelines or empowered digital use policies. Regardless of the title you choose, it should provide a sense of purpose for using technology beyond the idea that "said devices may get me in trouble." Similarly, this policy should be something that all students can understand and interpret. It should be simple and direct without creating an air of fear when signing on the dotted line.

Here is an example that I've used to begin simplifying my district's Empowered Digital Use Policy:

I understand that using digital devices (whether personal or school owned) and the GDRSD network is a privilege, and when I use them according to the Responsible Use Guidelines I will keep that privilege.

I will:

Use digital devices, networks, and software in school for educational purposes and activities

Keep my personal information (including home/mobile phone number, mailing address, and user password) and that of others private

Show respect for myself and others when using technology including social media

Give acknowledgement to others for their ideas and work

Report inappropriate use of technology immediately.

This novel policy fits within the parameters of the Child Online Protection Act (COPA) and the Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) and doesn't cloud the tasks with lofty, legal verbiage. Another great resource for developing a school-wide policy for digital use is the wiki Unmasking the Digital Truth created by Dr. Wesley Fryer. Dr. Fryer breaks down the legal verbiage for each policy enacted by the federal government and shares what schools must comply with and what they can allow.

Health, Wellness, and Information

Once you've developed a policy, it's time to introduce the concept of digital health and wellness to students. This term may sound like I'm talking about calorie-counting apps, but it actually refers to making good choices online much like you would for your body's health. One of the best places to start is Common Sense Media. They offer iBooks and printable digital citizenship curriculum for grades K-12. These resources look great on an iPad, but they also offer a printable scope and sequence curriculum that allow teachers to prepare students for engaging in a digital space.

Beyond creating policy and teaching digital citizenship concepts, schools must include parents in these conversations around digital health and wellness. One of the biggest challenges for parents and schools is to develop policies and practice for a subject matter that is constantly in motion. As soon as you feel like you've gotten a handle on Instagram and Snapchat, something else comes along -- like Yik Yak -- that throws a curveball into every policy and practice you've created.

In my roles as both an instructional technology specialist and a director of technology, I used a variety of resources to make every attempt at staying ahead of the curve so that I could help the district, teachers, and parents understand what applications were out there and which of them posed an issue. Additionally, to inform parents on these new apps, I would offer community tech nights in our district. These events had a focused topic and took place in the evening. I targeted them toward parents but invited all community members to participate. The purpose was to share information about what apps students were using in class and what apps they might be using outside of school. In addition to the informative pieces, we would segue into a workshop setting where attendees could actually use the app itself to better understand how it works.

Whether your district employs technology or is just beginning to plan, it's never too late to start integrating lessons on digital citizenship. The two key elements in developing a healthy digital culture in your school are leading with transparency and establishing trust. Administrators and teachers need to place their trust in students and empower them to use the technology provided. This includes technology directors who may occasionally find it easier to block the entire internet rather than allow access to digital information. School administrators and teachers should also be upfront and open with the parents about what applications or digital resources they are incorporating into the classroom. If trust and transparency are leading your technology initiatives, schools will begin to see great successes in teaching and learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Digital Citizenship: Developing a Culture of Trust and Transparency

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Turning a forbidding acceptable use policy into a friendlier digital empowerment guideline can shift your school culture into a more tech-friendly place. Photo credit: Institute of Play An acceptable use policy is a document that is present in every school district around the country.

# data[].attributes.body
Netiquette is a made-up word from the words net and etiquette. Netiquette thus describes the rules of conduct for respectful and appropriate communication on the internet.

A netiquette agreement is a set of guidelines or rules that establish proper online behavior and etiquette within your learning community. It outlines the expected conduct for individuals who are communicating or interacting online, such as in learning management systems (VIULearn), chats, or social media platforms.

Netiquette agreements typically cover a variety of topics, such as respectful communication, appropriate language and tone, privacy and security, online safety, intellectual property rights, and responsible use of technology. These guidelines aim to promote a positive and productive online environment, prevent misunderstandings or conflicts, and encourage responsible and ethical behavior.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Netiquette? 20 Internet Etiquette Rules

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is netiquette? ✓ With these 20 rules, you and your children will learn the right behavior on the internet and in online communication. ✓

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Mapping motivation to use digital networks 

# data[].attributes.body
Research suggests that many students and instructors are nervous about discussing their engagement with non-traditional sources of information and technology because institutions have not legitimized these unconventional strategies for learning. However, many of these strategies are efficient, so people will continue to use them - but often won't talk about it. This is what David White calls the "learning black market," where a massive amount of learning activities happen in networked spaces, but are not represented in educational settings. How can we open up the conversation digital literacy for learning?

Watch the video, then facilitate a mapping process with pen and paper or digital platform of your choice (for example
https://jamboard.google.com/d/1YIciql5_Mf35m2CUMOFK8bZ3OXWlHVeMirzXU_GA0CE/edit?usp=sharing).

How are you using the internet for learning? How do you aspire to use it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The mapping process is a Visitors and Residents based group activity which is designed to explore individuals engagement with the Web. It's a good starting point for discovering how staff, students or clients are using the Web. A neat explanation of the activity can be found here.
An openly licensed version of the facilitators guide and workshop slides can be downloaded here.
The second section (the activity on day two) in the workshop is designed to help participants consider the digital identity and presence of their institution or group. The workshop was written for the Jisc Digital Leaders Programme but can be modified for different audiences, including students. There is a closely designed structure and extensive notes - plus example V&R maps to help you run the session and links to further resources.

The document is published under a Creative Commons Attribution licence so you can edit, modify and reproduce it to fit your context/needs. The workshop plan provides useful facilitation notes on what is likely to emerge via discussion informed by the mapping process and advice on how to nurture thinking and reflection. Crucially the workshop plan also outlines possible 'next-steps' after the mapping activity so that participants make the most of what they have learnt.

'Vanilla' version of the slides with detailed notes - designed to be edited and adapted.
The activity has been used by various people in a range of institutions including Cambridge University, The Open University, University College London (in which it forms part of their doctoral training programme), Carnegie Mellon, The New School and the American University of Paris. In a Higher Education Academy funded project I helped 18 institutions across the UK to gain a picture of how their students were engaging online by using the process.

Let me know if you are interested in me running a mapping session for you or have a go yourself. If you run a session please tag any Tweets with #VandR.

This video of me creating my own map is a useful guide for running mapping sessions:

There is also a useful video in which I introduce the Visitors and Residents idea:

Here are some example Visitor and Resident maps:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The mapping process is a Visitors and Residents based group activity which is designed to explore individuals engagement with the Web. It's a good starting point for discovering how staff, students or clients are using the Web. A neat explanation of the activity can be found here.

# data[].attributes.body
Digital citizenship refers to the responsible use of technology and the internet. It encompasses a range of behaviors and attitudes related to online communication, information sharing, and digital identity. Digital citizenship involves using technology in a way that is respectful, safe, ethical, and legal.