The term 'Innovative Learning Environments' (ILEs) describes a body of work, associated with the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development (OECD), which has had substantial impact on many education systems. As with other 'learning environment' initiatives, a bundle of design suggestions, ideals and frameworks is put forward for the purpose of shaping educational change: in this case, in pursuit of '21st century learning'. Earlier scholarship on ILEs has investigated the achievement of outcomes, documented experiences in particular schools, and theorised issues viewed as particularly important for making ILEs 'work'. In the present chapter, by contrast, I trace how the overarching initiative has unfolded across an entire polity—Aotearoa New Zealand—where ILEs have had government support for a significant period of time. Treating the preceding chapters in this volume as expert submissions to a principled enquiry, I conceptualise 'ILEs in Aotearoa New Zealand' as a social project. I contrast points of commonality and difference between the official OECD 'international movement', the preceding history of learning environments in the country, the recruitment of existing schools by policy mandate, and how aspects of the ILE framework are subsequently institutionalised and localised. At each stage I consider the key predicaments being posed to stakeholders, the core concepts used to guide action, the ethos expressing how those concepts should be pursued 'correctly', the gradual sedimentation of artefacts and routines, how institutional engagement is framed and handled, and those aspects of stakeholders' lived experiences that propel ongoing development and change. I highlight, among other things, a significant conceptual fragmentation between changes in 'educational practice' and 'physical estate', the fraught development of a 'horizontally connected' ethos, and the increasing centrality of community relations and cultural values to the success of the project. I conclude by suggesting directions for further research on the topic.
Attempts to sustain economic growth and diversification within the Middle East have seen governments invested in various educational initiatives. In alignment with this ethos, the United Arab Emirates offers citizens, free education in government-funded higher educational institutes, and bursaries linked to grade point average scores.It is believed that incentivised learning environments provide a powerful motivation to stimulate academic excellence in summative assessments — linked to grade point average scores. An unfortunate outcome of these environments may, however, be that non-grade point reliant tasks are not prioritised by learners. Thus, identifying pedagogical tools which engage student agency towards such tasks, is of obvious interest to educators working within these settings. One such tool which may engage student agency towards formative assessments, is the digital game-based learning platform Kahoot. Kahoot is known to have permeated many educational domains due to its claimed ability to transform classrooms into fun, competitive environments, where students are engaged and motivated to learn. There is, however, a sparsity of literature evidencing the effects that contextual or demographic influences may have upon this and other digital game-based learning tools effectiveness. As such, an explanatory case-based study situated in the United Arab Emirates incentivised learning environment, was undertaken to evaluate female students' perceptions of Kahoot, as a formative assessment tool. To achieve this Mwanza's eight-step model for translating data into activity theory components was utilised to develop semi-structured interview questions (Mwanza, 2002). These questions permitted analyses of the social, the individual, and socio-economic structures influencing user engagement with this technology. Upon introduction of Kahoot as a formative assessment tool, into the incentivised learning context of the UAE, students described contradictions between classroom and institutional rules, community ...
Since the beginning of the COVID-19 outbreak in Spring 2020, universities around the world have quickly adopted online teaching as an emergency measure. Informed by activity theory, the present qualitative case study aims to better understand the nature of the rapid institutional transition and its impact on academics' pedagogical experiences during this period. A multiple set of qualitative data was collected in a national university in South Korea that rapidly made the online transition, following government directives in February 2020. This article provides useful accounts of the changes that occurred in interconnected teaching activity systems at the university while adopting online teaching, highlighting the complex factors underpinning individual academics' experiences. The sudden shift in institutional teaching activities and conditions created a range of contradictions that were experienced as dilemmas by academics, the main subject of the activity systems. The results demonstrate that two groups of university faculty, separately identified as novice online teachers and expert online teachers, faced different dilemmas and challenges. An essential lesson learned from this analysis is the need for a more holistic, realistic, and sensitive approach to emergency teaching scenarios that may enable educational institutions to better respond to such emergencies in the future.
Introduction (Networked Learning Editorial Collective): Since the turn of this century, much of the world has undergone a tectonic socio-technological change. Computers have left the isolated basements of research institutes and entered people's homes. Network connectivity has advanced from slow and unreliable modems to high-speed broadband. Devices have evolved: from stationary desktop computers to ever-present, always-connected smartphones. These developments have been accompanied by new digital practices, and changing expectations, not least in education, where enthusiasm for digital technologies has been kindled by quite contrasting sets of values. For example, some critical pedagogues working in the traditions of Freire and Illich have understood computers as novel tools for political and social emancipation, while opportunistic managers in cash-strapped universities have seen new opportunities for saving money and/or growing revenues. Irrespective of their ideological leanings, many of the early attempts at marrying technology and education had some features in common: instrumentalist understanding of human relationships with technologies, with a strong emphasis on practice and 'what works'. It is now clear that, in many countries, managerialist approaches have provided the framing, while local constraints and exigencies have shaped operational details, in fields such as e-learning, Technology Enhanced Learning, and others waving the 'Digital' banner. Too many emancipatory educational movements have ignored technology, burying their heads in the sand, or have wished it away, subscribing toa new form of Luddism, even as they sense themselves moving to the margins. But this situation is not set in stone. Our postdigital reality results from a complex interplay between centres and margins. Furthermore, the concepts of centres and margins 'have morphed into formations that we do not yet understand, and they have created (power) relationships which are still unsettled. The concepts … have not disappeared, but they have become somewhat marginal in their own right.' (Jandrić andHayes 2019) Social justice and emancipation are as important as ever, yet they require new theoretical reconfigurations and practices fit for our socio-technological moment. In the 1990s, networked learning (NL) emerged as a critical response to dominant discourses of the day. NL went against the grain in two main ways. First, it embarked on developing nuanced understandings of relationships between humans and technologies; understandings which reach beyond instrumentalism and various forms of determinism. Second, NL embraced the emancipatory agenda of the critical pedagogy movement and has, in various ways, politically committed to social justice (Beaty et al. 2002; Networked Learning Editorial Collective 2020). Gathered around the biennial Networked Learning Conference,1 the Research in NetworkedLearning book series,2 and a series of related projects and activities, the NL community has left a significant trace in educational transformations over the last few decades. Twenty years ago, founding members of the NL community offered a definition of NL which has strongly influenced the NL community's theoretical perspectives and research approaches (Goodyear et al. 2004).3 Since then, however, the world has radically changed. With this in mind, the Networked Learning Editorial Collective (NLEC) recently published a paper entitled 'Networked Learning: InvitingRedefinition' (2020). In line with NL's critical agenda, a core goal for the paper was to open up a broad discussion about the current meaning and understandings of NL and directions for its further development. The current collectively authored paper presents the responses to the NLEC's open call. With 40 contributors coming from six continents and working across many fields of education, the paper reflects the breadth and depth of current understandings of NL. The responses have been collated, classified into main themes, and lightly edited for clarity. One of the responders, Sarah Hayes, was asked to write aconclusion. The final draft paper has undergone double open review. The reviewers, Laura Czerniewicz and Jeremy Knox, are acknowledged as authors. Our intention, in taking this approach, has been to further stimulate democratic discussion about NL and to prompt some much-needed community-building. ; lict
