As a teacher and researcher at the Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, I find myself at the intersection of several disciplines as researchers from computer science, mathematics, engineering, linguistics, social sciences and humanities jointly develop information and communication technologies (ICTs) and explore the interaction between these technologies and people in the society, as well as the technology mediated interaction between people and how this transforms our societies. In this intricate field of tension, I see my task as a teacher to present and invite our students into this world, open up and show the possibilities that lie ahead of them.
Working in an environment, where new technological applications are constantly developed, paves way for innovative approaches in pedagogy, too. I have been involved in the development of systems for educational use since the very early experiments in the 1990s until today. My perspective has been and is that of a user rather than that of a technical developer focusing on the pedagogical aspects in educational technology.
As a teacher, I see myself not as “a sage on the stage, but a guide on the side”. I facilitate, support, show opportunities, provide tools but also try to ensure that each individual is on the ‘right track’ in their learning as it is my responsibility as a teacher to ensure that the expected learning outcomes are reached or at least that everyone is given equal opportunities to achieve these goals. This is a huge challenge in the present era of internationalization and globalization, as my students have very diverse backgrounds in all aspects: age, social, cultural and educational. Therefore also their expectations regarding courses/programs are very different due to their previous experiences from studying at various levels of education within different educational traditions. These differences can lead to confusion and frustration when faced with the system and traditions that my educational institution represents. As higher education is becoming increasingly international and even global, it is even more important to be aware of these differences.
When designing for the online Master program ICT for Development, open for international attendance, I made a special effort in taking these differences into account. In online environment, it becomes especially important to make it clear to students what is expected of them, how the studies are structured, what they are expected to do and achieve during the course/program. It is also important to describe the ways of working, and the student’s role in the process. In this way, I hope to influence expectations and bring understanding of the organization of teaching and learning and the pedagogical ideas that steer the set-up. In an online program, it is especially important to provide exact information that is easy to find and easy to understand. Within the Master program, I have designed, basic information about the course syllabus, examination, and literature is presented in a standardized ‘package’ that looks the same for every course so that it is easier for students to recognize and grasp. I also introduced a ‘progress bar’ which is connected to all the tasks and assignments in the course showing to each student which of the tasks they have completed and what still lies ahead. I also use short introduction video clips to present the course content and the study environment for the students. These are examples of how I facilitate for the student orientation in the online environment. Another consequence of the different educational backgrounds of the students is their diverse levels of knowledge and skills. Although the entry requirements should ensure that students are at the same level of knowledge, the reality is different. This I try to turn into an advantage and strength in my teaching. I see learning as a collective undertaking (socio-cultural perspective (Dysthe, 2003)) as much as individual and I believe in collaboration between students. I want to turn the varying levels of knowledge and different experience into a strength and an asset in the learning situation. Everyone can contribute in their own way and enrich the common experience.
As a teacher, I’m a facilitator. I see it as my primary task to create opportunities for learning where collective examination, analysis and reflection about concepts, phenomena, etc. can be realized. New knowledge emerges in a process of collective construction in which each participant can contribute with their thoughts, ideas, and knowledge, which jointly transform into something new and different that broadens, deepens and gives new perspectives to the already known. Learning is thus a transformation of the individual but also the collective. Inspired by Vygotsky’s notion of proximal development zone and scaffolding / support structures (Vygotsky, 1978, 2012) I have designed my courses making use of the student interactions, particularly in the form of dialogue. In seminars, be these online or in a classroom, students are trained in the ability to contribute to the creation of knowledge through conversations. By this I mean to develop the ability to listen in a sympathetic manner and at the same time be prepared to argue for their own position, and to reflect critically. Another important objective of the dialogue is to develop an in-depth understanding of the material that is being studied. My experience is that when students explain to their peers how they have understood the material, it becomes an opportunity to process the material further. This also gives an opportunity to intertwine theoretical knowledge with one’s personal experiences, which further deepens the understanding. My role is to keep the conversation on the ‘right’ track meaning to see that the students have understood the material and that the topics that are to be covered are being covered. This requires active listening and guiding with suitable questions which is no easy task. Trying to build the learning environment with‘creative tension’(Pettersen, 2008, pp. 341–350) where a balance between demands and support exists, is really difficult, as each group is very different and you as a teacher need to read the group in order to make the adjustments in your approach: how to formulate the metacognitive challenges and when to present them. The work as a seminar leader is very demanding but also very rewarding when you manage to reach the ‘flow’state when you can actually see how the students are performing at the top of their ability. In my courses, Understanding ICT for Development I and II at advanced level, dialogue is applied as a central pedagogical method. Students’ task is to first read a certain material, then write a personal reflection on the material. As support, they get a number of questions that I have formulated. After having submitted their individual reflection texts, they will read and react to each other’s texts. This exercise grows into a living dialogue within the student group. As a teacher, I comment both the individual reflections and the collective conversation.
My experience is that students complement each other as they find various perspectives into the material. They learn more when they read each other’s texts. This is also something they discover themselves and thank each other for the different insights. This is a part of the valuable cooperation that arises in the dialogue.I have also noticed that students’ own experiences can enrich the teaching situation in a powerful way. When students write about the material, they relate almost automatically to their own experiences. This is particularly important in a context where students come from different social and cultural backgrounds. Course content will be enriched, nuanced and exemplified by the students’ own authentic experiences, contributing to deeper learning.In cooperation and dialogue, students challenge each other’s thinking and reasoning in important ways. By asking questions, requesting for further explanations, by arguing, students show that they are together in a process of collaborative learning that demonstrates the spirit of democracy where everyone can contribute valuable insights into the common conversation and learning.
Someone said that teachers in higher education have a strange situation where it is assumed that they are able to teach even though they have no pedagogical training. As a PhD student, you are thrown into teaching without much preparation. Today, the situation might be slightly improving and doctoral students undergo a first university teaching course before they take on teaching duties. For me it was not so, but I had to do the best I could and leaned naturally on my own experiences as a student and saw my own teachers either as an example to look up to or to avoid! I was also in a special situation as a PhD student at DSV, as I became involved early in the experimental development of computer-based systems for education. These early experiments have been useful in many ways: through trial and error, we became to understand more and more of the dynamics of computer-mediated teaching and learning. And we also learnt a lot about development work, which I still use as examples in our design courses.
Educational technologies have developed enormously from those early days. An aspect that was not possible in the early text-based environments, that I find important for teaching and learning today, is multimodality. During my time at the Department of Education (UTEP), I was in charge of the development of a Digital Studio (Männikkö-Barbutiu, 2011), a multimodal learning environment where teachers and students could explore together the possibilities of different media and create narratives, music, and visual material. Even at my current department, I strive to provide my students a variety of teaching and learning materials: students may have to read a lot of text, but I also use visual materials such as photographs and videos, partly to lighten up the monotonous reading (which can be particularly stressful when you study online), partly because students have different learning styles and some can take better advantage of the visual than the written. I want to develop this much more as the technologies now provide improved opportunities for various forms of expression. Although my theoretical base rests on the socio-cultural perspective, I see that due to the digital developments connectivism (Rydberg, Buus, & Georgsen, 2012) has become a stronger framework for the understanding of teaching and learning in our present day society. There seems to be something very powerful in the ability to connect to different people with different skills, to different environments with different information, which changes the conditions for teaching and learning. Connectivism places new demands on students as well as us teachers for that matter. Source criticism becomes an essential skill and so does active processing of information. Ever so often, I give students tasks to search the learning material on the Internet and process it for presentation, rather than providing them with the material. This exercise trains them to critically review the information and present it in an understandable way for their fellow students. This student-activating method allows for deeper learning and also trains them in the skills that are important today and in the future (21st century skills).
These developments show how the focus is shifting from the teacher-centered teaching to student-centered teaching, changing my role as a teacher. When I was teaching my very first course, I still thought that I would need to come up with all the answers, be knowledgeable. Now, I do not have to, partly because it’s an impossibility in a knowledge society where the amount of new knowledge is exponential, and partly because knowledge creation has become a collective enterprise where all participants contribute in their own way. As a teacher, I am still the expert and thus the guide in the collective knowledge creation. This shift in perspective has made me freer as a teacher and given me space to devote myself to my own learning and development as a knowledge-seeking scholar in the collective knowledge creation within the context of my teaching.
My constant concern is how to further strengthen the link between my teaching and my research. I want to discover new, creative ways of working together with my students. Technological developments bring new opportunities for communication and information management (social media and big data). The question, however, is the way in which these opportunities can improve specifically my teaching. This requires continuous experimentation but also collegial cooperation, which opens up for exciting new explorations in the field of teaching and learning.
References:
Dysthe, O. (Ed.). (2003). Dialog, samspel och lärande. Studentlitteratur.
Männikkö-Barbutiu, S. (2011). Development Group as Context for Expansive Learning? About Attempts to integrate ICT in Teacher Education. REM – Research on Education and Media, 3(1). Retrieved from http://riviste.erickson.it/rem/view/15/june/2011/rem.html
Pettersen, R. C. (2008). Kvalitetslärande i högre utbildning. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
Rydberg, T., Buus, L., & Georgsen, M. (2012). Differences in understandings of networked learning theory. In L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, & D. McConnell (Eds.), Exploring the Theory, Pedagogy and Practice of Networked Learning (pp. 43–58). Springer Science+Business Media. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0496-5_3
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (2012). Thought and Language (Revised an). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.