DIGITALIZATION IN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION: DIDACTIC ASPECTS
PDF

Keywords

didactics of higher education
university teacher
digitalization
"digital natives"
"digital immigrants"
educator's digital competence

How to Cite

[1]
M. A. Abysova, M. H. Kravchuk, and O. M. Hurniak, “DIGITALIZATION IN UNIVERSITY EDUCATION: DIDACTIC ASPECTS”, ITLT, vol. 93, no. 1, pp. 68–79, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.33407/itlt.v93i1.5097.

Abstract

Intensively developing digital technologies are transforming the basic processes studied by the didactics of higher education: ways of the teacher-student interrelated activity; the student and the knowledge, skills, and competencies intended to be learnt and gained; the teacher and the methodology of educational material. The learning goals set by the information society shift the focus from mastering the system of knowledge and developing professional skills to developing competencies, the formation of students’ readiness to design their own unique educational trajectories based on a competency-based approach. As higher education becomes more digitalized, there is a shift from coordinating teaching and learning activities to projecting, forming, and mastering individual educational plans. To meet the challenges of modern education, educators are expected to be able to comprehend changes impacting all of the components of didactic theory, including goals, content, forms, technologies, and learning tools. Digitalization processes lead to the dominance of infographic forms of presentation of educational material instead of narrative (text) forms associated with the development of voluminous texts. The variety of forms of organization of educational activities in the digital educational environment is increasing significantly, they are becoming a dynamic open system of educational modules. The educators are being faced with new theoretical tasks due to the active modernization of university educational practice, including the need to find ways to implement continuity between traditional and innovative methods of organizing the educational process while taking into account specific cognitive, motivational, and need-based characteristics of the digital generation. The transition from teaching as the educators’ primary activity to the variety of pedagogical roles they play in the digital educational process actualizes teachers’ mastery of the information technologies and the development of their personal professional teaching strategy.

 

PDF

References

“Education. Strategy of Ukraine 2030”. [Online]. Available: https://www.slideshare.net/UIFuture/2030-148758034 (in Ukrainian).

“Digital agenda for Europe”. [Online]. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0245&from=en (accessed 2020) (in English).

“Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth”. [Online]. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC2020&from=en (accessed 2020) (in English).

“Digital agenda of Ukraine”. [Online]. Available: https://ucci.org.ua/uploads/files/58e78ee3c3922.pdf (accessed 2020) (in Ukrainian).

J. F. Helliwell and R. D. Putnam, “Education and Social Capital”. [Online]. Available: https://www.jstor.org/stable/20642328 (in English).

F. Fukuyama, “Social Capital and Civil Society”, in IMF Working Paper, pp. 1–19. Accessed: April 2000. [Online]. Available: https://ssrn.com/abstract=879582 (in English).

E. L. Glaeser, “The Formation of Social Capital”. [Online]. Available: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/17/1824983.pdf (in English).

M. J. Alessandrini, “Getting Connected: Can Social Capital be Virtual”. [Online]. Available: https://www.webology.org/data-cms/articles/20200515034902pma33.pdf (in English).

B. K. Daniel, “Building Social Capital in Virtual Learning Communities”, 2002. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2855721_Building_Social_Capital_in_Virtual_Learning_Communities (in English).

B. K. Daniel, R. A. Schwier, and G. I. McCalla, “Social Capital in Virtual Learning Communities and Distributed Communities of Practice”. Accessed: October 2003. [Online]. Available: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/43189/ (in English).

D. Engelbart and H. Lehtman, “Working together”, in BYTE. Accessed: December 1988. [Online]. Available: http://www.dougengelbart.org/about/bibliography.html (in English).

J. Fresen, “Quality assurance practice in online (web-supported) learning in higher education: an exploratory study”. [Online]. Available: https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/29858/Complete.pdf?sequence=11 (in English).

T. Koschmann, A. Zemel, and M. Conlee-Stevens, et. al. “How do people learn? Members’ Methods & Communication Mediation,” in Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication and How They May Be Overcome. R. Bromme, F. W. Hesse, H. Spada, Eds., Springer, Boston, MA, 2005, pp. 265–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-24319-4_12 (in English).

K. Bereiter and M. Scardamalia, “Learning to Work Creatively with Knowledge”. [Online]. Available: http://ikit.org/fulltext/inresslearning.pdf (in English).

“Chatbots in Education: Applications of Chatbot Technologies”. [Online]. Available: https://elearningindustry.com/chatbots-in-education-applications-chatbot-technologies (in English).

R. Owusu Boateng and A. Amankwaa, “The Impact of Social Media on Student Academic Life in Higher Education”, Global journal of human-social science: G Linguistics & Education, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1–7, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331000005_The_Impact_of_Social_Media_on_Student_Academic_Life_in_Higher_Education_The_Impact_of_Social_Media_on_Student_Academic_Life_in_Higher_Education (in English).

M. Prensky, “Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants”, On the Horizon, vol. 9, no. 5, 2001. [Online]. Available: https://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf (in English).

M. Prensky, “Is the human brain still the smartest thing on the planet? When enhanced by technology, it is”, Our Brains Extended, vol. 70, no. 6, 2013. [Online]. Available: http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar13/vol70/num06/Our-Brains-Extended.aspx (in English).

“U.S. Smartphone Use in 2015”. Pew Research Center. [Online]. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015 (in English).

K. W. Lai and K. S. Hong, “Technology Use and Learning Characteristics of Students in Higher Education: Do Generational Differences Exist?”, British Journal of Educational Technology, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 725–738, 2015. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12161 (in English).

K. E. May and A. D. Elder, “Efficient, helpful, or distracting? A literature review of media multitasking in relation to academic performance”, International journal of educational technology in higher education, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 2–17, 2018. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-018-0096-z (in English).

M. M. Martin-Perpina, F. V. Poch, and S. M. Cerrato, “Media multitasking impact in homework, executive function and academic performance in Spanish adolescents”, Psicothema, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 81–87, 2019. doi: https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.178 (in English).

S. P. Carter, K. Greenberg, and M. S. Walker, “The Impact of Computer Usage on Academic Performance: Evidence from a Randomized Trial at the United States Military Academy”, Economics of Education Review, vol. 56, pp. 118–132, 2017. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.12.005 (in English).

“Digital Competence Framework for Educators (DigCompEdu)”. [Online]. Available: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/digcompedu (accessed 2017) (in English).

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2023 Марія Абисова, Марія Кравчук, Оксана Гурняк

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.