Digital Futures in Teacher Education: Exploring the opportunities and challenges of creative uses of digital literacy in schools Anna

Gruszczynska and Richard Pountney, Sheffield Hallam University a.gruszczynska@shu.ac.uk, r.p.pountney@shu.ac.uk Abstract This paper draws on early findings of a project "Digital Futures in Teacher Education" (DeFT) currently being undertaken as part of the third phase of the JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee) UK Open Educational Resources (OER) programme. It discusses issues emerging in the context of attempts to embed OER practice within teacher education sector. One of the key aims of the DeFT project is to develop guidance on practice in teaching and learning in the school sector involving digital literacy (occasionally referred to in the paper as DL). Accordingly, the project team, based at Sheffield Hallam and University of Sheffield, are working towards release of OERs, in the form of an Open Textbook (Connexions, 2009), which address the opportunities and challenges of creative and innovative uses of digital literacy in the context of the school and teacher education sectors. The team are also working with teachers in primary and secondary schools in South Yorkshire to develop case studies examining digital practices in schools, focusing on the use of mobile devices and Web2.0 applications for enhancing the digital literacy skills of pupils. Finally, the project also incorporates the involvement of Higher Education lecturers and students and supporting them in designing OER which will support effective practice with digital literacy for teachers at all stages of their careers. Keywords Open Educational Resources, school sector, teacher education, digital literacy Introduction: Context of the UKOER programme To start with, this paper arises in the context of the UK-wide Open Educational Resources programme, currently in its third year, which was launched in April 2009 as collaboration between the Higher Education Academy and JISC, with funds provided by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). This funding enabled UK-based Higher Education Institutions to explore cultural, technical and pedagogical issues involved in the OER development, discovery and use (JISC, 2008). This paper adopts the definition of OERs offered in the context of the programme, where they have been described as: teaching and learning materials () freely available online for everyone to use, whether you are an instructor, student or self-learner () [these] resources [are] contained in digital media collections from around the world (JISC/HEA, 2010). The key element of OERs is the fact that they encompass a variety of teaching resources which are free at point of access and that they can be re-used by anyone regardless of whether they are affiliated with a formal educational institution or not. Importantly, OERs are highly customisable and allow for re-use and sharing with few copyright restrictions given that they either reside in the public domain or have been released under a license (most commonly a Creative Commons [CC] license) that permits their free use or repurposing by others (Atkins et al., 2007:4). Mackintosh (2011) has broadened this definition to incorporate three interrelated dimensions: educational values (in terms of barrier-free access to the resources), pedagogical utility (anyone accessing OERs should be able to reuse, revise, remix and redistribute the resources) and technology enablers (i.e. OERs should be in a format

which ensures that they are meaningfully editable). This means that potential (re)users of OERs are positioned not as mere consumers but as active participants in the process of creating and sharing the resources (Tosato and Bodi, 2012). Whilst there have been two phases of OER funding for HE to date, there remains little coordinated development of resources for the school sector. A notable exception has been the BECTA-funded (British Educational Communications and Technology Agency) project "Repurpose, Create, Share" whose aim was to create and share digital resources across participating secondary schools and the National Education Network (Hemsley, 2008). Since the demise of BECTA in 2010 there has been less support in this area. What remain are the regional networks that have formed around broadband consortia to work with local authorities to provide resources, advice and continuing professional development, and the pockets of excellent practice that arise from the school partnerships that have emerged from the relationship between HEI training providers and the school sector. Furthermore, existing research on OERs in the UK context engages mostly on issues of relevance to the higher education sector, with a number of studies examining the use of OER and their impact on academic practice as well as barriers and enablers to OER uptake (Browne et al., 2010; Nikoi et al., 2011; Rolfe, 2012). In terms of issues of relevance to the school sector, most existing research focuses on the implementation of OERs in developing countries. This includes initiatives such as The High School BLOSSOMS (Blended Learning Open Source Science or Math Studies Initiative) project in the Middle East Region (Larson and Murray, 2008) which examined low-tech solutions to overcoming barriers to accessing OERs. The Teacher Education in sub-Saharan Africa project (TESSA) undertaken by Open University examined issues involved in supporting user communities to harness and integrate OERs for their own systems and cultures (Thakrar et al., 2009, Wolfenden et al. 2010). Context: Digital literacy frameworks JISC have developed an anatomized framework for DL that looks at access, skills and practices, and the contexts in which these practices exist, in for example the personal/social and learning contexts and communities (JISC, 2011). An initial mapping of the DeFT case studies to this framework highlights the value of this framework for the application of DL technologies to learning activities, but does not allow for the meanings that are made within and through these practices (Gillen and Barton, 2011). There is a pressing need for teachers to engage with digital literacy throughout education, and increasingly the skills and experience that learners (and their teachers) have or need is changing and the baseline is being raised. However, at the same time, the increasing possibilities offered by new technologies and the diversity of digital practices associated with them have prompted much debate around the growing gulf between literacy provision in schools and the rapidly changing digital literacies in learners lives (Burnett, 2011). Burnett brings up a number of arguments which attempt to account for this disconnect, such as for instance inadequate access to equipment and competing pressures relating to print literacy. Yet another oft-cited argument is that pointing to an existence of a stark divide between teachers and pupils in terms of their competence and confidence levels , where the pupils are portrayed as "digital natives" (Prensky, 2001), who have been exposed to new technologies from a very young age. However, a number of studies critique this proposition and suggest a more nuanced understanding of divisions between individuals experience of digital technologies, where levels of access and competence/confidence are determined by factors such as societal position, race, and gender, rather than age and educational status (Selwyn 2004; Hargittai, 2010). A further body of research, involving a large scale investigation in Australian Schools,

questions if a digital divide even exists or if stakeholders are overreacting tremendously (Bennett et al., 2008). Digital literacy and the ICT curriculum Importantly, the project takes into account current debates focusing on issues of ICT in the curriculum and their relationship to digital literacy issues. As Merchant argues, there are a number of competing discourses in the UK which see ICT either as a set of skills (the National Curriculum for ICT, QCA, 2000); as a tool or vehicle for learning (DfES, 2004) or as transformative influence which has an impact on all aspects of schooling (DfES, 2005) (Merchant, 2007). These discourses are reflected perhaps most vividly in the recent Royal Society report which argues that the current delivery of ICT curriculum is highly unsatisfactory and uninspiring for the pupils and focuses on the development of basis skills while excluding the more advances skills that could be gained through exposure of pupils to Computing Science (The Royal Society, 2012). Interestingly, in that context, digital literacy is defined as "the general ability to use computers" and a set of skills such as the ability to use word processors or database software, with no reference being made to the socio-cultural aspects of digital literacy practices. The authors of this paper view digital literacy as a continuum between the purely social and the purely technological in which they engage with the concept not just as a set of skills but also as a social practice. This practice exists in the relations between people, within groups and communities, rather than as a set of properties residing in individuals, where the focus is on what people do with literacy (Barton and Hamilton 1998, 78). The project, therefore, considers digital literacy to be a blend of ICT, media and information skills and knowledge situated within academic practice contexts while influenced by a wide range of techno-social practices involving communication, collaboration and participation in networks (JISC, 2011). The project remains unclear at this point as to the place of creativity in digital literacy, but is mindful of how Bloom's revised taxonomy might provide a useful focus on actions, processes and learning behaviours associated with Web2.0 technology (Churches, 2009), for example. Furthermore, the authors of the paper align themselves more closely with frameworks which move from the singular literacy to the plural literacies which emphasise the sheer diversity of existing accounts of digital literacy (Lankshear and Knobel, 2008). In that context, our engagement with the narratives which have arisen in the context of the project focuses on "the constantly changing practices through which people make traceable meanings using digital technologies" (Gillen and Barton, 2011). The next section will engage with the data collected in the context of the project so far and examines meanings and perspectives on digital literacies as expressed by project participants, including teachers in participating schools as well as trainee teachers enrolled on PGCE programmes. The material we are drawing upon in this section comes from interactions with teachers during project meetings as well as two focus groups undertaken with groups of PGCE students from participating universities. All of the meetings and focus groups were recorded, with the recordings transcribed by the project officer. The following sections will also draw on feedback from the evaluator who acts as a critical friend to the project throughout its formative stages. Understandings of digital literacy While the analysis will draw upon frameworks discussed earlier, the authors are keen to stress that they treat these frameworks as a proposition and a basis of opening up the

discussion, rather than attempting to apply rigid or prescriptive understandings to the stories of project participants. This is of key importance given our methodology which is underlined by a reflexive approach, where OERs are seen as a tool to elicit the more tacit, taken for granted elements of pedagogical practice with an emphasis on examining practices with/through literacies. The authors will argue that the accounts of participants reflect the tension between understandings of DL which point to DL as a skillset and focus issues of technical competence as opposed to understandings which focus more on socio-cultural practices and in particular the communication aspect. That tension was reflected in the question posed by one of the teachers during the second project meeting where she was reflecting on how her understanding of DL shifted from when she first got involved with the project: When I first came to the project I did not know what you meant: knowing how to use things, or how to analyse a filmit's different isn't it? What we need to have on the product that we are going to make is a sort of definition of what we see as digital literacy. The quote illustrates the multi-faceted aspects of digital literacies and the process of meaning-making where the teachers participating in the project are constantly re-evaluating their understandings of DL both for themselves and other actors involved in the project. DL as a practice focusing on communication A number of the teachers were keen to point out what they saw as a positive aspect of engaging with digital literacies in their teaching practice. In particular, they commented on ways in enhancing the digital literacy skills of their pupils led to improved communication skills. For instance, one of the teachers argued that through blogging, her pupils had a chance to learn how to write collaboratively for a target audience, thus becoming active producers of content rather than passive consumers. The same teacher commented on how blogging helped the classroom walls to become more porous, enabling children to engage with the outside word. Other teachers brought up ways in which enhancing pupils' digital literacy skills helped them overcome communication difficulties they might have been struggling with. For instance, one of the teachers introduced the concept of "stealth reading and writing" where through the process of recording short movies pupils who normally struggled to express themselves were equipped with the tools to present a coherent story. This aspect of DL practices was also picked up by the project evaluator who in her notes after the meeting commented: I gained a terrific sense of new opportunities DLs now offering to the classroom incl[uding] authentic audience, remix, producing where used to be only consumers; endeavours to enhance students' criticality e.g. re commercialism. At the same time, issues stemming from the notion of digital literacy as a set of technical competencies/capabilities constituted a recurrent thread in the accounts of both the teachers and the PGCE students. Interestingly, in that context, the accounts of project participants shifted from emphasis on the positive aspects of DL (as discussed above) to the "darker side" of DL, where the underlying theme was that of barriers and challenges experienced in their teaching practice.

Understandings of DL: a "theory of barriers" Both teachers and PGCE students mentioned numerous barriers they experienced in the school setting in terms of their access to equipment and software as well as Web2.0 applications. A number of teachers mentioned very strong filters on social networking services in schools which they felt limited their options in terms of offering their pupils a more interactive learning experience. Other teachers felt quite frustrated about the seemingly random ways in which the filters operated, for instance one of the teachers mentioned that it was possible to use the Wordpress platform on school computers and so the pupils could blog, however some of the elements of the blogs would be blocked by the school software and so elements of the blogging platform were inaccessible in the classroom. The issue of esafeguarding/e-safety seemed quite emotive, with one of the teachers speaking about the "culture of fear" in his school where he compared the school's approach to "teaching road safety and never letting the child out". The design of the case studies, as accounts of practice with digital literacy, reflected some of these barriers as well. For instance, one of the teachers who wanted to focus on the use of QR codes for educational purposes mentioned that he would ideally like to be able to rely on smartphones due to their connectivity features; however mobile devices were not permitted in schools. Furthermore, even if he managed to obtain permission for students to use their mobile phones in the classroom, they would be prevented from accessing the school's Wi-Fi network. At the same time, it has to be noted that reliance on student devices could be problematic given that it cannot be assumed all students had access to smartphones. Instead, he decided to opt to use iPod touches provided by the project team. DL and the curriculum A number of teachers and PGCE students also commented on the time-consuming nature of introducing more creative/advanced aspects of digital literacy skills and practices within the curriculum. For instance, one of the PGCE students, when talking about the possibilities of exploring digital literacy issues with her pupils, touched upon the clash between the desire to engage in more creative learning process and the need to "teach for an exam": In terms of teaching and digital literacy the ultimate question we constantly need to deal with is - is this going to help the students when they get to an exam? Because what I would like to see happening is the fostering of a community, personal growth etc. but most of the time it is about having to teach "for an exam". Teachers had similar concerns when talking about the effort involved in putting together the case studies for the project. They argued it was often difficult to justify taking up two to three weeks of pupils' time where the end result would seem disproportionate to the time and effort invested in producing for instance a one-minute video. While it could be argued that there are a number of other classroom activities which are equally time consuming where the end result is not always very representative of the preparatory work needed, nevertheless, this points to tensions and competing pressures related to emphasis on print literacy within the curriculum (Burnett, 2011). DL and the tensions of sharing resources Furthermore, some teachers commented on the tensions of producing polished resources, such as the above-mentioned short video, which emphasised the end result rather than the

process and related that discussion to some concerns they had in terms of releasing their own teaching resources and exposing their teaching practice. While most teachers argued they appreciated engaging with accounts of pedagogical practice which were not perfect but showcased challenges and problems encountered by other practitioners; they were also very reluctant to produce accounts which revealed their own struggles with technology as that could put them in a very vulnerable position. Similarly, on the one hand, the PGCE students were keen to stress that they saw the process of sharing resources as an essential requirement of their chosen profession, as one of the students put it, "you have to be sharing with the kids anyway all the time". On the other hand, when contemplating the possibility of releasing their own resources online so that they could be shared openly with others, the students said they would be very careful and would only consider sharing materials that were of sufficiently high quality. For instance, a number of students were quite adamant they would not want to share their lesson plans so as not to reveal that they "had no clue what they were doing". Arguably, the tension between the wish to showcase "polished performance" and the need to engage with accounts of "real-life" practice has implication for sharing resources and releasing then openly and will be explored further as the project progresses. Understanding DL: Stories of a digital divide Other barriers related to teachers' confidence in their own level of digital literacy and in particular their ability to "keep up" with the new tools and modes of learning and in particular with the increasing technical competence on the part of their pupils. One of the teachers argued that "what is new and exciting one day is old hat the next" and worried that her case study might potentially be out of date before it was even finalised. The literature on the place of professional development in the use of ICT in schools points to a complex set of individual orientations to the use of technology as a tool for teaching (Pountney, 2003). The feeling of struggling to keep up with the pupils was particularly prominent in the accounts of the PGCE students who saw their pupils as much more capable than themselves. Some went as far as to claim that they felt powerless and argued that they were witnessing an inversion of the power relationship where now it was the pupils guiding them, rather than the other way round. Interestingly, the PGCE students drew very heavily on the rhetoric of "digital natives" and positioned themselves as belonging to a generation which grew up without immersion in digital technologies or access to smartphones. As one of the students quite nostalgically commented, My pupils were shocked to discover that I didnt have a mobile phone as a teenager and when you arranged to meet with your mates you just agreed on a meeting time and point and then waited. You would actually talk to each other, you know, rather than keep texting. Another student mentioned that her pupils were equally fascinated by her account of "life before Google". At the same time, this account of a seemingly deep technological divide was quite striking, given that the PGCE students taking part in focus groups were predominantly women in their early-to-mid twenties. At the time of the recording, they were on a placement in a secondary school where they worked with A-level pupils and so in reality, they would only be 4-5 years younger than their pupils, yet they maintained that their experiences were drastically different. At the same time, both the teachers and the PGCE students, while perhaps at times feeling alienated from and threatened by their pupils, argued that often their students' engagement

with technology was often quite superficial and so as teachers, their role was to offer guidance and signposting. New avenues for investigating DL It is becoming clear that methodologies needed to investigate DL include reflexive accounts and reflections in action and this project will continue to explore this. This takes into account the starting points for digital literacy outlined above, but will continue to explore the ways in which understandings around DL are expressed and shared. This builds on current frameworks but also seeks to indentify where the accounts of DL are incomplete or only partially realised in school contexts. Within this is the need to re-examine DL in the context of the debate around ICT in the curriculum and the removal of the programmes of study, in order that meanings about what remains, and what is starting to emerge can be made. References Atkins D.E., Brown J.S., Hammond A.L. (2007). A Review of the Open Educational Resources (OER) Movement: Achievements, Challenges, and New Opportunities , Hewlett Foundation. Available from: http://www.oerderves.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/areview-of-the-open-educational-resources-oer-movement_final.pdf (Last accessed 22 February 2012). Barton D., & Hamilton M. 1998. Local literacies: Reading and writing in one community. London: Routledge Bennett, S, Maton, K, & Kervin, L. (2008). The digital natives debate: A critical review of evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 775786. Browne, T., Holding, R., Howell, A., Rodway-Dyer, S. (2010).The challenges of OER to Academic Practice. Journal of Interactive Media in Education , 3, Available from: http://www-jime.open.ac.uk/jime/article/view/2010-3. (Accessed 3 February 2012) Burnett, C. (2011). Pre-service teachers' digital literacy practices: exploring contingency in identity and digital literacy in and out of educational contexts. Language and Education, 25(5): 433-459. Churches, A. (2009). Blooms digital taxonomy. Available from: http://edorigami.wikispaces.com/Bloom's+Digital+Taxonomy (Last accessed 24 February 2012). Connexions (2009). What are open textbooks? Available from: http://cnx.org/content/m15226/latest/ (Last accessed 29 February 2012). DfES. (2004). Learning and Teaching using ICT: example materials from Foundation Stage to Year 6. London: DfES. DfES. (2005). Harnessing Technology: Transforming Learning and Childrens Services. London: DfES Gillen, J. & Barton, D. (2010). Digital literacies. A research briefing by the technology enhanced learning phase of the teaching and learning research programme . London: London Knowledge Lab, Institute of Education, University of London. Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet Skills and Uses among Members of the Net Generation. Sociological Inquiry. 80(1):92-113. Hemsley, Keith (2008). Becta Repurpose, Create, Share in the YHGfL Region . Unpublished project report. Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). (2011). Digital literacy anatomised: access, skills and practices. Available from http://jiscdesignstudio.pbworks.com/w/file/40474828/Digital%20literacies %20anatomy.pdf (Last accessed 29 February 2012).

Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC).Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC). 2008. HEFCE/Academy/JISC Open Educational Resources Programme: Call for Projects. Available from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/funding/2008/12/oercall.doc (Last accessed 17 February 2012). Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC)/ Higher Education Academy (HEA). (2010). What are Open Educational Resources? Available from: https://openeducationalresources.pbworks.com/w/page/24836860/What%20are%20Open %20Educational%20Resources (Last accessed 19 February 2012) Lankshear C, Knobel M. (2008) Digital literacies: Concepts, policies and practices. Peter Lang, New York. Larson, R. C., & Murray, E. (2008). Open educational resources for blended learning in high schools: Overcoming impediments in developing countries. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(1): 85-103. Mackintosh, W. (2011). OERU Planning meeting: Information pack. Available from: http://wikieducator.org/index.php?oldid=659570 (Last accessed 20 February 2011). Merchant, G. (2007) Digital writing in the early years, in J. Coiro, M. Knobel, C. Lankshear & D. Leu (Eds.) New Literacies Research Handbook. Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 755778. Nikoi, S. K.; Rowlett, T.; Armellini, A. & Witthaus, G. (2011). CORRE: a framework for evaluating and transforming teaching materials into open educational resources, Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 26:3, 191-207. Pountney, R. (2003). Ready and willing? Factors impacting on engagement with professional development in ICT in primary schools. Paper presented at the ITTE (The Association for Information Technology in Teacher Education) 2003 conference, Leeds, July 2003. Available from http://shu.academia.edu/RichardPountney/Papers/1363534/Ready_and_willing_Factors_im pacting_on_engagement_with_professional_development_in_ICT_in_primary_schools (Last accessed 12 February 2012). Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5):16. QCA (2000). Information and Communication Technology, the National Curriculum for England. London: Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. Rolfe, V. (2012) Open educational resources: staff attitudes and awareness, Research in Learning Technology, 20(1):719. The Royal Society. (2012). Shut down or restart? The way forward for computing in UK schools. London: The Royal Society. Available from http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/education/policy/computingin-schools/2012-01-12-Computing-in-Schools.pdf (Last accessed 28 February 2012). Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media Society, 6(3): 34162. Thakrar, J., Zinn, D., and Wolfenden, F. (2009). Harnessing open educational resources to the challenges of teacher education in Sub-Saharan Africa International review of research in open and distance learning, 10:4 Available from www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/download/705/1342 (Last accessed 28 February 2012). Tosato,P.& Bodi, G. (2011). Collaborative Environments to Foster Creativity, Reuse and Sharing of OER. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. Special Themed Issue on Creativity and Open Educational Resources (OER). Available from: http://www.eurodl.org/materials/special/2011/Tosato_Bodi.pdf (Last accessed 11 February 2012).

Wolfenden, F.; Umar , A.; Aguti , J. & Abdel Gafar, A. (2010). Using OERs to improve teacher quality: emerging findings from TESSA. Paper presented at the Sixth Pan Commonwealth Forum on Open Learning, 24-28 Nov 2010, Kochi, India. Available from: http://oro.open.ac.uk/27174/2/PCF_6_Full_paper_Wolfenden_Amended.pdf (Last accessed 19 February 2012). License and Citation This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/. Please cite this work as: Gruszczynska, A & Pountney, R. (2012). Digital Futures in Teacher Education: Exploring the opportunities and challenges of creative uses of digital literacy in schools. In Proceedings of Cambridge 2012: Innovation and Impact Openly Collaborating to Enhance Education, a joint meeting of OER12 and OpenCourseWare Consortium Global 2012. Cambridge, UK.