Prácticas educativas para transformar y conectar escuelas y comunidades

  1. Ola Erstad 1
  2. Raquel Miño 2
  3. Pablo Rivera-Vargas 3
  1. 1 University of Oslo
    info

    University of Oslo

    Oslo, Noruega

    ROR https://ror.org/01xtthb56

  2. 2 Universitat de Barcelona
    info

    Universitat de Barcelona

    Barcelona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/021018s57

  3. 3 Universidad Andrés Bello
    info

    Universidad Andrés Bello

    Santiago de Chile, Chile

    ROR https://ror.org/01qq57711

Show affiliations +
Journal:
Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación

ISSN: 1134-3478

Year of publication: 2021

Issue Title: Escuelas públicas para la transformación en la Sociedad del Conocimiento.

Issue: 66

Pages: 9-20

Type: Article

DOI: 10.3916/C66-2021-01 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Comunicar: Revista Científica de Comunicación y Educación

Abstract

The current social and educational challenges force us to rethink the role of educational institutions and digital technologies in the 21st century, which requires a deeper understanding of learning activities in schools. In this article we analyze bottom-up initiatives for educational transformation implemented in public lower secondary schools from Norway, Chile and Spain that involved 230 students and 14 teachers. Three ethnographic case studies were carried out, using individual interviews, focus groups, participant observations and document analysis in six schools. The main goal was to deeply understand how bottomup school initiatives, with a comprehensive use of digital technologies, are contributing to generate connected practices and to involve teachers, learners and communities in the discussion about what kind of society they want in their future. The results of the analysis indicate that fostering a transformative agency in secondary schools has the potential of engaging students in the exploration of contemporary social issues and that digital connectedness can contribute to connect schools with youth life trajectories and communities. This study on transformative agency and digital connectedness reveals a new path for educational transformation that may interest everybody who, in one way or another, are involved in education systems all around the world.

€ View funding

Funding information

Esta investigación recibió el apoyo económico de las siguientes instituciones: Norwegian Research Council; Departamento de Educación de la Universidad de Oslo; Instituto de Investigación en Educación de la Universidad de Barcelona; Departamento de Didáctica y Organización Educativa de la Universidad de Barcelona; Programa «Educación para Todos» del Ministerio de Educación de Chile; y la Dirección General de Investigación de la Universidad Andrés Bello (Chile).

Funders

Bibliographic References

  • Bajaj, M. (2009). ‘I have big things planned for my future’: the limits and possibilities of transformative agency in Zambian schools. Compare, 39(4), 551-568. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920701844503
  • Barbour, R.S. (2013). Los grupos de discusión en Investigación Cualitativa. Morata
  • Bender, S., & Peppler, K. (2019). Connected learning ecologies as an emerging opportunity through Cosplay. [Los entornos de aprendizaje conectado como oportunidad emergente mediante el Cosplay]. Comunicar, 58, 31-40. https://doi.org/10.3916/C58-2019-0
  • Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132-149. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2007.1166154
  • Biesta, G.J. (2006). Beyond learning: Democratic education for a human future. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315635811
  • Bolívar-Botía, A., & Bolívar-Ruano, R. (2011). School principals in Spain: From manager to leader. International Journal of Education, 3(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v3i1.463
  • Buckingham, D. (2006). Defining digital literacy: What do young people need to know about digital media? Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 10, 21-35. https://bit.ly/2XdnqXq
  • Chayko, M. (2014). Techno?social life: The Internet, digital technology, and social connectedness. Sociology Compass, 8(7), 976-991. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.1219
  • Claxton, G. (2008). What’s the point of school? Rediscovering the heart of education. OneWorl
  • Denzin, N.K. (2003). Performance Ethnography. Critical Pedagogy and the Politics of Culture. Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412985390
  • Edwards, A., & Mackenzie, L. (2006). Steps towards participation: The social support of learning trajectories. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 24(4), 287-302. https://doi.org/10.1080/02601370500169178
  • Engeström, Y. (2016). Studies in expansive learning: Learning what is not yet there. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781316225363
  • Erstad, O., Gilje, O., & Arnseth, H.C. (2013). Learning lives connected: Digital youth across school and community space. [Vidas de aprendizaje conectadas: Jóvenes digitales en espacios escolares y comunitarios]. Comunicar, 40, 89-98. https://doi.org/10.3916/C40-2013-02-09
  • Eynon, R. (2018). Into the mainstream: Where next for Critical Ed Tech research? Learning, Media and Technology, 43(3), 217-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.150697
  • Giroux, H.A. (2020). On critical pedagogy. Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/978135014501
  • Green, J.L., Dixon, C.N., & Zaharlick, A. (2005). Ethnography as a logic of inquiry. In J. Flood, D. Lapp, J. Squire, & J. Jensen (Eds.), Methods of research on teaching the English language arts (pp. 155-204). Routledge. https://bit.ly/2ZEw
  • Herrington, J., Reeves, T.C., & Oliver, R. (2014). Authentic learning environments. In J.M. Spector, M.D. Merrill., J. Elen, & M.J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 401-412). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185
  • Holland, D., Lachicotte, W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Harvard University Press. https://bit.ly/2WxcKl
  • Holstein, J.A., & Gubrium, J.F. (2016). Narrative practice and the active interview. Sa
  • Hull, G.A., & Katz, M.L. (2006). Crafting an agentive self: Case studies of digital storytelling. Research in the Teaching of English, 41(1), 43-81. https://bit.ly/2B8vP5W
  • Imsen G., & Volckmar N. (2013). The Norwegian school for all: Historical Emergence and Neoliberal Confrontation. In U. Blossing, G. Imsen, & L. Moos (Eds.), The Nordic Education Model. ‘A School for All’ Encounters Neo-Liberal Policy (pp. 35-55). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7125-3
  • Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., Shor, J., Sefton-Green, J., & Watkins, S.C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. https://bit.ly/2XFZ
  • Kajamaa, A., & Kumpulainen, K. (2019). Agency in the making: Analyzing students’ transformative agency in a school-based makerspace. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 26(3), 266-281, https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2019.16475
  • Lipman, P. (2011). The new political economy of urban education: Neoliberalism, race, and the right to the city. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/978020382180
  • Mezirow, J. (2012). Learning to think like an adult: Core concepts of transformative learning theory. In E. Taylor, & P. Cranton (Eds.), Handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 73-96). Jonn Wiley & Sons. https://bit.ly/3he1
  • Miño-Puigcercós, R., Rivera-Vargas, P., & Cobo, C. (2019). Virtual Communities as Safe Spaces Created by Young Feminists: Identity, Mobility and Sense of Belonging. In S. Habib, & M. Ward (Eds.), Identities, youth and belonging (pp. 123-140). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96113-2_8
  • Rajala, A., Hilppö, J., Lipponen, L., & Kumpulainen, K. (2012). Expanding the chronotopes of schooling for the promotion of students’ agency. In O. Erstad, & J. Sefton-Green (Eds.), Identity, community, and learning lives in the digital age (pp. 107-125). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139026239.00
  • Rasmussen, I. (2005). Project work and ICT. Studying learning as participation trajectories. [Doctoral dissertation, University of Oslo]. https://bit.ly/2ODRJBP
  • Rule, A.C. (2006). Editorial: The components of authentic learning. Journal of Authentic Learning, 3(1), 1-10. https://bit.ly/3dgXD
  • Sancho-Gil, J.M., Rivera-Vargas, P., & Miño-Puigcercós, R. (2020). Moving beyond the predictable failure of Ed-Tech initiatives, Learning, Media and Technology, 45(1), 61-75 https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2019.1666873
  • Selwyn, N. (2016). Is technology good for education? John Wiley & Sons. https://bit.ly/2ZDa
  • Shah, A. (2017). Ethnography? Participant observation, a potentially revolutionary praxis. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory, 7(1), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.14318/hau7.1.00
  • Stetsenko, A. (2019). Radical-transformative agency: continuities and contrasts with relational agency and implications for education. Frontiers in Education, 4, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00
  • Stornaiuolo, A., Smith, A., & Phillips, N.C. (2017). Developing a transliteracies framework for a connected world. Journal of Literacy Research, 49(1), 68-91. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296X16683419
  • Thomas, D., & Brown, J.S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. CreateSpace. https://bit.ly/30rjQcP
  • Virkkunen, J. (2006). Dilemmas in building shared transformative agency. Activités, 3, 43-66. https://doi.org/10.4000/activites.185
  • Yin, R.K. (2014). Case study research: sign and methods. Sage
Data source: Dialnet