Digitizacija ali digitalizacija: različne prakse v obdobju izobraževanja na daljavo na Finskem

  • Tiina Korhonen Faculty of educational sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland
  • Leenu Juurola Faculty of educational sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland
  • Laura Salo Faculty of educational sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland
  • Johanna Airaksinen Faculty of educational Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland
Ključne besede: covid-19, digipedagoške kompetence, inovacija, digitalizacija, izobraževanje na daljavo

Povzetek

Študija primera preučuje, kako so finski osnovnošolski učitelji organizirali šolske dneve ter kako so učitelji in ravnatelji organizirali virtualno sodelovanje na delovnem mestu in sodelovali s starši v obdobju izobraževanja na daljavo, ki ga je spomladi leta 2020 vsilila kriza, ki jo je povzročil covid-19. Podatki so bili zbrani z intervjuji z osnovnošolskimi in s srednješolskimi učitelji (n = 15) iz osmih šol v različnih delih Finske. Izkušnje učiteljev so bile analizirane s kvalitativno analizo vsebine. V tej študiji je šola obravnavana kot kompleksen prilagodljiv sistem, kriza covida-19 pa kot motnja, ki učitelje sili v prilagajanje hitro spreminjajočemu se okolju. Učitelji so tu obravnavani kot inovatorji, ki se v nenormalnih okoliščinah spopadajo s pedagoškimi in z digitalnimi izzivi. Na različnih stopnjah digitalizacije v obdobju izobraževanja na daljavo prepoznavamo različne prakse na štirih področjih: 1) sestava šolskih dni; 2) oblike poučevanja; 3) dejavnosti sodelovanja učiteljev in ravnatelja; 4) oblike sodelovanja med domom in šolo. Opredelimo tudi tri skupine spodbujevalcev praks izobraževanja na daljavo: 1) uporaba digitalne tehnologije; 2) digipedagoška usposobljenost učiteljev; 3) sposobnost učiteljev, da delujejo kot prilagodljivi inovatorji. Ugotavljamo, da sposobnost učiteljev za inovacije ter prilagajanje pedagoškega in digipedagoškega strokovnega znanja postajata ključna dejavnika uspeha, ko se izobraževalnemu področju vsiljujejo spremembe. Predlagamo, da se rezultati te študije, prikazani kot dejavniki in področja izobraževanja na daljavo, uporabijo pri načrtovanju izobraževanja v pokovidnem obdobju. V načrtovanje in izvajanje prihodnjih praks v razredih v okviru inovativnih pokovidnih šol je treba vključiti vse deležnike, ki vplivajo na šole na različnih ravneh.

Prenosi

Podatki o prenosih še niso na voljo.

Literatura

Ahtiainen, R., Asikainen, M. S., Heikonen, L., Hienonen, N., Hotulainen, R., Lindfors, P., Lindgren, E. P., Lintuvuori, M., Oinas, S., Rimpelä, A., & Vainikainen, M-P. (2020). Koulunkäynti, opetus ja hyvinvointi kouluyhteisössä koronaepidemian aikana: Ensitulokset [Schooling, teaching and well-being in the school community during the pandemc: First results]. Helsingin yliopisto: Koulutuksen arviointikeskus. https://www.helsinki.fi/fi/uutiset/koulutus-kasvatus-ja-oppiminen/koronakevat-kuormitti-huoltajia-ja-opettajia-oppilaiden-kokemukset-etaopetuksesta-vaihtelivat

Arnesen, K. T., Hveem, J., Short, C. R., West, R. E., & Barbour, M. K. (2019). K-12 online learning journal articles: Trends from two decades of scholarship. Distance Education, 40(1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2018.1553566

Barras, R. (1986). Towards a theory of innovation in services. Research Policy, 15(4), 161–173.

Barras, R. (1990). Interactive innovation in financial and business services. The vanguard of the service revolution. Research Policy, 19(3), 215–237.

Cavanaugh, C. S., Barbour, M. K., & Clark, T. (2009). Research and practice in K-12 online learning: A review of open access literature. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v10i1.607

Cavanaugh, C., & Clark, T. (2007). The landscape of K-12 online learning. In C. Cavanaugh & B. Blomeyer (Eds.), What works in K-12 online learning (pp. 521–542). International Society for Technology in Education.

Donaldson, J. (2020). Building a digitally enhanced community of practice. Information and Learning Sciences. Ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0066

Elo, S., & Kyngäs, H. (2008) The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62(1), 107–115.

Ertmer, P. A., Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., & Tondeur, J. (2014). Teachers’ beliefs and uses of technology to support 21st-century teaching and learning. In H. Fives & Gill, M.G. (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 403–418). Routledge.

Flynn, P. (2020). DESIGN-ED: A pedagogical toolkit to support K-12 teachers’ emergency transition to remote online education. Information and Learning Sciences. Ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0103

Fullan, M. (2015). The new meaning of educational change (4th ed). Teachers College Press.

Halinen, I., & Jarvinen, R. (2008). Towards inclusive education: The case of FINLAND. Prospects, 38(1), 77–97. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s11125-008-9061-2

Iivari, N., & Sharma, S., & Ventä-Olkkonen, L. (2020). Digital transformation of everyday life – How COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care? International Journal of Information Management, 55(2), 102183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102183

Ilomäki, L., & Lakkala, M. (2020). Finnish upper secondary school students’ experiences with online courses. Education in the North, 27(2), 73–91. https://doi.org/10.26203/jsaz-8714

Jayathirtha, G., Fields, D., Kafai, Y. B., & Chipps, J. (2020). Supporting making online: The role of artifact, teacher and peer interactions in crafting electronic textiles. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5/6), 381–390. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-04-2020-0111

Karvi [FEEC]. (2020). Korona-aika on haastanut kouluja ja oppilaitoksia kehittämään uusia hyviä käytänteitä [The Corona era has challenged schools and colleges to develop new good practices]. Kansallinen arviointikeskus, Karvi https://karvi.fi/2020/11/17/korona-aika-on-haastanut-kouluja-ja-oppilaitoksia-kehittamaan-uusia-hyvia-kaytanteita

Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1109–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.014

Korhonen, T., & Lavonen, J. (2017). A New Wave of Learning in Finland: Get Started with Innovation! In S. Choo, D. Sawch, A. Villanueva, & R. Vinz (Eds.), Educating for the 21st Century: Perspectives, Policies and Practicies from Around the World (pp. 447–467). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1673-8_24

Korhonen, T., Salo,L., Seitamaa, A., Sormunen, M., Kukkonen, M,. & Forsström, H. (2021). 21st century curriculum reform in Finland: Teachers adopting programming into teaching. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Kotilainen, M-R. (2015). Itseohjautuvuuden tukeminen vieraan kielen etäopetuksessa: design-perustainen oppimisympäristön kehittämistutkimus perusasteen 5.-6. luokilla [Supporting self-guided learning in distance learning of foreign languages. Development study of design-based learning environment in elementary school grades 5 and 6]. Lapin yliopisto. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-484-808-4

Lapada, A., Miguel, F., Robledo, D. A., & Alam, Z. (2020). Teachers’ covid-19 awareness, distance learning education experiences and perceptions towards institutional readiness and challenges. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(6), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.6.8

Lavonen, J. (2020). Curriculum and teacher education reforms in Finland that support the development of competences for the twenty-first century. In F. M. Reimers (Ed.), Audacious education purposes: How governments transform the goals of education systems (pp. 65–80). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41882-3_3

Messmann, G., & Mulder, R.H. (2014). Exploring the role of target specificity in the facilitation of vocational teachers’ innovative work behaviour. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(1), 80–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12035

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x

Mitleton-Kelly, E. (2003). Complex systems and evolutionary perspectives on organisations (1st ed.). Pergamon Press.

Mäkelä, T., Mehtälä, S., Clements, K., & Seppä, J. (2020). Schools went online over one weekend: Opportunities and challenges for online education related to the covid-19 crisis. In Proceedings of EdMedia + Innovate Learning 2020 (pp. 77–85). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Niemi, H. M., & Kousa, P. (2020). A case study of students’ and teachers’ perceptions in a Finnish high school during the covid pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 4(4), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.v4i4.167

OECD (2019). TALIS 2018 Results (Volume I): Teachers and school leaders as lifelong learners. TALIS, OECD Publishing. https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/1d0bc92a-en

Palvia, S., Aeron, P., Gupta, P., Mahapatra, D., Parida, R., Rosner, R., & Sindhi, S. (2018). Online education: Worldwide status, challenges, trends, and implications. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(4), 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262

Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.

Saari A., & Säntti J. (2018) The rhetoric of the ‘digital leap’ in Finnish educational policy documents. European Educational Research Journal, 17(3), 442–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117721373

Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage.

Schleicher, A. (2020). The impact of covid-19 on education: insights from education at a glance 2020. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/education/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-education-insights-education-at-a-glance-2020.pdf

Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004

Tanhua-Piiroinen, E. Kaarakainen, S.-S. Kaarakainen, M.-T., & Viteli, J. (2020). Digiajan peruskoulu II [Primary and secondary level school in the digital era]. Valtioneuvoston selvitys- ja tutkimustoiminnan julkaisusarja 17/2020. https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/162236/OKM_2020_17.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Tanhua-Piiroinen, E., Kaarakainen, S.-S. Kaarakainen, M.-T.,Viteli, J., Syvänen, A., & Kivinen, A. (2019). Digiajan peruskoulu [Primary and secondary level school in the digital era]. Valtioneuvoston selvitys- ja tutkimustoiminnan julkaisusarja 6/2019. http://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/161383/6-2019-Digiajan%20peruskoulu_.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

Thurlings, M., Evers, A. T., & Vermeulen, M. (2015) Toward a model of explaining teachers’ innovative behavior: A literature review. Review of Educational Research, 85(3), 430–471. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314557949

Tilson, D., Lyytinen, K., & Sørensen, C. (2010). Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 748–759.

Tirri, K (2018). The purposeful teacher. In R. Monyai (Ed.), Teacher education in the 21st century. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.83437

Vivitsou, M. (2019). Digitalisation in education, allusions and references. CEPS Journal, 9(3), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.706

Vähäsantanen, K. (2015). Professional agency in the stream of change: Understanding educational change and teachers’ professional identities. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.11.006

White, D. G., & Levin, J. A. (2016). Navigating the turbulent waters of school reform. Guided by complexity theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 13(1), 43–80. https://doi.org/10.29173/cmplct24566

Objavljeno
2021-10-15
Kako citirati
Korhonen, T., Juurola, L., Salo, L., & Airaksinen, J. (2021). Digitizacija ali digitalizacija: različne prakse v obdobju izobraževanja na daljavo na Finskem. Revija Centra Za študij Edukacijskih Strategij , 11(Sp.Issue), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.1125