Učinki pandemičnega izobraževanja na daljavo na obrtno pedagogiko: priložnosti, izzivi in interakcija
Povzetek
Pandemija covida-19 je v veliko državah povzročila številne nenadne družbene spremembe, med drugim tudi prehod na izobraževanje na daljavo. Na Finskem se izobraževanje na daljavo nanaša tudi na obrt kot na navaden šolski predmet, ki v osnovnem izobraževanju združuje vidike umetnosti, oblikovanja, tekstila in tehnologije. Skladno s tem so se finski učitelji obrti spoprijeli s situacijo poučevanja na daljavo brez primerov, ki pogosto vključujejo praktične dejavnosti z otipljivimi orodji in materiali. Ta raziskava preučuje, kako se je obrtna pedagogika prilagodila izobraževanju na daljavo, pri čemer obravnava priložnosti in izzive, s katerimi se spoprijema, in učinke na interakcijo v razredu. Podatki so sestavljeni iz rezultatov dveh spletnih seminarjev (tj. 27 skupinskih nalog 123 udeležencev), ki sta bila organizirana jeseni 2020 ter namenjena učiteljem in študentom obrti na različnih ravneh izobraževalnega sistema. Kvalitativna vsebinska analiza, ki temelji na podatkih, razkriva, da poučevanje na daljavo zagotavlja koristne priložnosti za vključevanje vsakdanjega življenja učencev in njihovih družin v obrtno izobraževanje. Ostajajo pa izzivi, povezani z neenakomerno porazdelitvijo gradiv ter tehničnih in socialnih virov na različnih ravneh izobraževanja in v različnih kontekstih. Naša raziskava tudi ugotavlja, da je poučevanje na daljavo bolj osredinjeno na učitelja in nalogo kot interakcija v razredu. Spletni učni pripomočki učiteljem omogočajo, da učencem zagotovijo več individualnih povratnih informacij, vendar otežujejo vzdrževanje medsebojne interakcije učencev. Čeprav se je zdelo poučevanje obrti na daljavo najprej zelo zahtevno, je učiteljem uspelo ustvariti koristne pedagoške prakse, ki jih je mogoče uporabiti v obdobju pandemije covida-19 in po njem.
Prenosi
Literatura
Alcott, B., Rose, P., Sabates, R., & Torres, R. (2018). Handbook on measuring equity in education. UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/handbook-measuring-equity-education-2018-en.pdf
Arnove, R. F. (2020). Imagining what education can be post-COVID-19. Prospects, 49(1–2), 43–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09474-1
Aguilera, E., & Nightengale-Lee, B. (2020). Emergency remote teaching across urban and rural contexts: Perspectives on educational equity. Information and Learning Sciences, 121(5/6), 471–478.
Bosco, A., Santiveri, N., & Tesconi, S. (2019). Digital making in educational projects. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 9(3), 51–73. https://www.cepsj.si/index.php/cepsj/article/view/629/367
Choi, M., Tessler, H., & Kao, G. (2020). Arts and crafts as an educational strategy and coping mechanism for Republic of Korea and United States parents during the COVID-19 pandemic. International Review of Education, 66(5), 715–735.
Coleman, K., & MacDonald, A. (2020). Art education during the COVID-19 lockdown. https://www.teachermagazine.com.au/articles/art-education-during-the-covid-19-lockdown?lang=en
Daugherty, M. K. (2013). The prospect of an “A†in STEM education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 14(2), 10–15.
De Bono, E. (1985). Six thinking hats. MICA Management Resources.
d’Orville, H. (2020). COVID-19 causes unprecedented educational disruption: Is there a road towards a new normal? Prospects, 49(1–2), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09475-0
FINEEC [Finnish Education Evaluation Centre]. (2020). Poikkeuksellisten opetusjärjestelyjen vaikutukset tasa-arvon ja yhdenvertaisuuden toteutumiseen Osa I: Kansallisen arvioinnin taustaraportti, synteesi ja tilannearvio valmiiden aineistojen pohjalta [The impacts of exceptional teaching arrangements on equity. Part I: The background report of national assessment, synthesis and estimation based on existing data]. https://karvi.fi/app/uploads/2020/05/Poikkeuksellisten-opetusj%C3%A4rjestelyjen-vaikutukset-osa-I-Karvi-7.5.2020-1.pdf
FNAE [Finnish National Agency for Education]. (2020, March 13). Education services and the coronavirus. https://www.oph.fi/en/news/2020/education-services-and-coronavirus
FNBE [Finnish National Board of Education]. (2016). National core curriculum for basic education 2014. Publications 2016: 5. Finnish National Board for Education.
Freedman, K., & Escaño, C. (2020). Reflections from education and the arts in the COVID-19 era. Reflections IX, X. Communiars. Revista de Imagen, Artes y Educación CrÃtica y Social, 4, 25–28. https://idus.us.es/handle/11441/100833
Friese, S. (2012). Qualitative data analysis with ATLAS.ti. Sage.
Fullan, M. (2020). Learning and the pandemic: What’s next? Prospects, 49(1–2), 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09502-0
Garzón Artacho, E., MartÃnez, T. S, MartÃn, J. L., MarÃn, J., & Gómez GarcÃa, G. (2020). Teacher training and lifelong learning: The importance of digital competence in the encouragement of teaching innovation. Sustainability, 12(7), 2852. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12072852
Giovannella, C., Passarelli, M., & Persico, D. (2020). The effects of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Italian learning ecosystems: The school teachers’ perspective at the steady state. Interaction Design and Architucture(s), 45, 264–286. http://www.mifav.uniroma2.it/inevent/events/idea2010/doc/45_12.pdf
Hakkarainen, K., Hietajärvi, L., Alho, K., Lonka, K., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2015). Socio-digital revolution: Digital natives vs. digital immigrants. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (Vol 22, 2nd ed., pp. 918–923). Elsevier.
Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. M. (2013). Studio thinking 2: The real benefits of visual arts education (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press.
Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning
Hughes, C. (2020). COVID-19 and the opportunity to design a more mindful approach to learning. Prospects, 49(1–2), 69–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09492-z
Ilomäki, L., & Lakkala, M. (2020). Finnish upper secondary school students’ experiences with online courses. Education in the North, 27(2), 73–91.
Inki, J., Lindfors, E., Sohlo, J., Aadeli, S., & Bläuer, H. (2011). Käsityön työturvallisuusopas — Perusopetuksen teknisen työn ja tekstiilityön opetukseen [Occupational safety guide for crafts—For teaching technical work and textile work in basic education]. Opetushallitus.
Iivari, N., Sharma, S., & Ventä-Olkkonen, L. (2020). Digital transformation of everyday life: How the COVID-19 pandemic transformed the basic education of the young generation and why information management research should care? International Journal of Information Management, 55, 102–183.
Kini-Singh, A. (2020). Art education in the time of a pandemic. http://www.unboundjournal.in/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Amita_Kini-Singh_03_Critiques.pdf
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Sage.
Kokko, S. (2021). Approaches to craft studies at higher education. FormAkademisk - Forskningstidsskrift for Design Og Designdidaktikk. https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.4197
Kokko, S., Almevik, G., Høgseth, H., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2020). Mapping the methodologies of the Craft Sciences in Finland, Sweden and Norway. Craft Research, 11(2), 177–209. https://doi.org/10.1386/crre_00025_1
Kokko, S., Kouhia, A., & Kangas, K. (2020). Finnish craft education in turbulence. Techne serien - Forskning i Slöjdpedagogik och Slöjdvetenskap, 27(1), 1–19. https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/3562
Koskela, T., Pihlainen, K., Piispa-Hakala, S., Vornanen, R., & Hämäläinen, J. (2020). Parents’ views on family resiliency in sustainable remote schooling during the COVID-19 outbreak in Finland. Sustainability, 12(21), 8844. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218844
Korhonen, T., Tiippana, N. M., Laakso, N. L., Meriläinen, M., & Hakkarainen, K. (2020). Growing mind: Socio-digital participation in and out of the school context. Students’ experiences 2019. University of Helsinki, Department of Education. https://doi.org/10.31885/9789515150189
Kyngäs H. (2020). Inductive content analysis. In H. Kyngäs, K. Mikkonen, & M. Kääriäinen (Eds.), The application of content analysis in nursing science research (pp.13–21). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30199-6_2
Laurell, J., Seitamaa, A., Sormunen, K., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., Korhonen, T., & Hakkarainen, K. (2021). A socio-cultural approach to growth-mindset pedagogy: Maker-pedagogy as a tool for developing a next-generation growth mindset. In E. Kuusisto, M. Ubani, P. Nokelainen, & A. Toom (Eds.), Good teachers for tomorrow’s schools - Purpose, values, and talents in education (pp. 296–312). Brill Sense.
Mannila, L. (2018). Digitally competent schools: Teacher expectations when introducing digital competence in Finnish basic education. Seminar.net. International Journal of Media, Technology and Lifelong Learning, 14(2), 201–215. https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/seminar/article/view/2980/2882
Milman, N. (2020). This is emergency remote teaching, not just online teaching. Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/03/30/this-is-Emergency-remote-teaching-not-just.html
MinEdu [Ministry of Education and Culture]. (2019). Finnish VET in a nutshell. Education in Finland. Ministry of Education and Culture. https://minedu.fi/documents/1410845/4150027/Finnish+VET+in+a+Nutshell.pdf/9d43da93-7b69-d4b5-f939-93a541ae9980/Finnish+VET+in+a+Nutshell.pdf
MinEdu [Ministry of Education and Culture]. (2021). Liberal adult education. https://minedu.fi/en/liberal-adult-education
Niemi, H. M., & Kousa, P. (2020). A case study of students’ and teachers’ perceptions in a Finnish high school during the COVID pandemic. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), 352–369.
Niemi, H., Kynäslahti, H., & Vahtivuori-Hänninen, S. (2013). Towards ICT in everyday life in Finnish schools: Seeking conditions for good practices. Learning, Media and Technology, 38(1), 57–71.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2010). Not for profit: Why democracy needs the humanities (Vol. 2). Princeton University Press.
Popa, S. (2020). Reflections on COVID-19 and the future of education and learning. Prospects, 49(1–2), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09511-z
Porko-Hudd M., Pöllänen S., & Lindfors E. (2018). Common and holistic crafts education in Finland. Techne Series: Research in Sloyd Education and Craft Science, 25(3), 26–38.
Pöllänen, S. (2019). Perspectives on multi-material craft in basic education. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 39(1), 255–270.
Robinson, S. K. (2020). A global reset of education. Prospects, 49(1–2), 7–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-020-09493-y
UNESCO. (2020). #LearningNeverStops. COVID-19 education response. UNESCO. https://en.unesco.org/covid19/educationresponse/globalcoalition.
Wood, D. (2021). Introduction: Re-crafting an unsettled world. In D. Wood (ed.), Craft is Political (pp. 1–17). Bloomsbury Publishing.
Øgaard, A. (2018). Conventional classroom teaching through ICT and distance teaching. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 13(1), 9–23.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
