Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Dialogue Between Emerging Pedagogies and Emerging Technologies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Future of Ubiquitous Learning

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Educational Technology ((LNET))

Abstract

This chapter discusses the mutual influence of emerging technologies and emergent pedagogies. The potential of one specific technology or application has to be analysed in a particular scenario. We maintain that the dialogue between technology and pedagogy is absolutely necessary because there is a constant influence between them. The difference is that as technology becomes more invisible, pedagogy needs to make its practices visible offering practices that take into account the fundamental needs of modern society. This chapter is divided into three sections. Firstly, we will describe the main educational challenges of the networked knowledge society. Secondly, we will centre on the main directions and theories that support emergent pedagogies. Finally, we will conclude this chapter with an analysis of the implications and relationship between emerging pedagogies and emergent technologies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The first NMC Horizon Report was published in 2004.

  2. 2.

    http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/.

  3. 3.

    http://www.tlrp.org/.

  4. 4.

    In the last case, the original is ‘teachers and policies’. We have extended the cluster to educators and researchers.

References

  • Abiko, T. (2011). A response from Japan to TLRP’s ten principles for effective pedagogy. Research Papers in Education, 26(3), 357–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, H., & Du, Y. (2007). Student responses to criteria-referenced self-Assessment. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(2), 159–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ala-Mutka, K., Redecker, C., Punie, Y., Ferrari, A., Cachia, R., & Centeno, C. (2010). The Future of Learning: European Teachers’ Visions. Report on a foresight consultation at the 2010 eTwinning Conference. Seville.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, R. (2004). Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(1), 7–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. (2010a). Theories for learning with emerging technologies. In G. Velesianos (Ed.), Emerging technologies in distance education (pp. 23–40). Edmonton, Canada: AU Press/Athabasca University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, T. (2010b). Theories for Learning with Emerging Technologies. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Emerging technologies in distance education (pp. 23–39). Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Attwell, G. (2007). Personal learning environments-the future of eLearning? Elearning papers, 2(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaty, L., Cousin, G., & Hodgson, V. (2010). Revisiting the e-quality in networked learning manifesto. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 585–592).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S., & Maton, K. (2010). Beyond the “digital natives” debate: Towards a more nuanced understanding of students’ technology experiences. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 26(5), 321–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canning, N. (2010). Playing with heutagogy: Exploring strategies to empower mature learners in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(1), 59–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canning, N., & Callan, S. (2010). Heutagogy: Spirals of reflection to empower learners in higher education. Reflective Practice, 11(1), 71–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carvalho, L. & Goodyear, P. (2014). The architecture of productive learning networks.Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatti, M. A. (2013). The LaaN Theory. Personal learning environments, networks, and knowledge. www.elearn.rwth-aachen.de/dl1151|Mohamed_Chatti_LaaN_preprint.Pdf.

  • Chatti, M. A., Jarke, M., & Frosch-Wilke, D. (2007). The future of e-learning: a shift to knowledge networking and social software. International journal of knowledge and learning, 3(4–5), 404–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatti, M. A., Agustiawan, M. R., Jarke, M., & Specht, M. (2010a). Toward a personal learning environment framework. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 1(4), 66–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatti, M. A., Jarke, M., & Quix, C. (2010b). Connectivism: The network metaphor of learning. International Journal of Learning Technology, 5(1), 80–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cormier, D. (2008). Rhizomatic education: Community as curriculum. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 4(5), 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, H., Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. V. (2007). The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Downes, S. (2006). Learning networks and connective knowledge. Collective intelligence and elearning, 20, 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downes, S. (2010). New technology supporting informal learning. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Web Intelligence, 2(1), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Facer, K. (2011). Learning futures: Education, technology and social change. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Facer, K., & Sandford, R. (2010). The next 25 years? Future scenarios and future directions for education and technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 74–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, B. M., & Langworthy, M. (2013). Towards a new end: New pedagogies for deep learning. Seattle, Washington: Collaborative Impact.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M., & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (2004). Advances in research on networked learning. Dordrecht: Klüwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurung, B (2013). Emerging pedagogies in changing contexts: Pedagogies in networked knowledge society, New Mexico State University, 1(2), 105–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hase, S. (2009). Heutagogy and e-learning in the workplace: Some challenges and opportunities. Impact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace E-learning, 1(1), 43–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2007a). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: An International Education, 4(1), 111–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hase, S., & Kenyon, C. (2007b). Heutagogy: A child of complexity theory. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education, 4(1), 111–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hase, S. & Kenyon, C. (2000). From andragogy to heutagogy. UltiBase. Retrieved December 28, 2005, http://ultibase.rmit.edu.au/Articles/dec00/hase2.htm

  • James, M., & Pollard, A. (2008). Primary Review Research Survey: 2/4 Learning and teaching in primary schools: insights from TLRP. Cambridge: University of Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, M., & Pollard, A. (2011). TLRP’s ten principles for effective pedagogy: Rationale, development, evidence, argument and impact. Research Papers in Education, 26(3), 275–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Adams, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). The NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Adams, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013). The NMC Horizon Report: 2013 Higher Education Edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Levine, A., Smith, R., & Stone, S. (2010). The 2010 Horizon Report. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, L., Smith, R., Willis, H., Levine, A., & Haywood, K. (2011). The 2011 Horizon Report. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (1997). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications (working paper). Retrieved from http://www.cours.fse.ulaval.ca/edc-65804/latour-clarifications.pdf

  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayes, T., Morrison, D., Mellar, H., Bullen, P. & Oliver, M. (2009). Transforming higher education through technology-enhanced learning. http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/learningandtech/Transforming.pdf

  • Mas, X. (2014). La integració dels usos de la tecnologia digital de les persones adultes. Barcelona: Universitat de Barcelona. Dissertation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng’ambi, D. (2013). Effective and ineffective uses of emerging technologies: Towards a transformative pedagogical model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 652–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redecker, A. C., Leis, M., & Leendertse, M. (2011). The future of learning: Preparing for change. Seville: Institute for Prospective Technological Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharples, M., McAndrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Hirst, T., & Gaved, M. (2013). Innovating pedagogy 2013: Exploring new forms of teaching, learning and assessment, to guide educators and policy makers. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharples, M., McAndrew, P., Weller, M., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Hirst, T., et al. (2012). Innovating pedagogy 2012: Open University innovation report 1. Milton Keynes: The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing knowledge. Available at http://www.elearnspace.org/Knowin-gKnowledge_LowRes.pdf

  • Sinay, E., & Yashkina, A. (2012). Technology and innovation in education: Towards a single vision and plan for the Toronto District School Board. Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoyanov, S., Bert, H., & Paul, K. (2010). Mapping major changes to education and training in 2025. JRC Technical Note.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, S. C., Divaharan, S., Tan, L., & Cheah, H. M. (2011). Self-directed learning with ICT: Theory, practice and assessment. Singapore: Ministry of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. P. (1980). The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee. New York: Teachers College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veletsianos, G. (2010). Emerging technologies in distance education. Edmonton: Athabasca University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universidad de Barcelona, Passeig Vall d’Hebron, 171, 08035, Barcelona, Spain

    Begoña Gros

Authors
  1. Begoña Gros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Begoña Gros .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Facultat de Pedagogia, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

    Begoña Gros

  2. Athabasca University, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

    Kinshuk

  3. Department of Psychology and Education, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain

    Marcelo Maina

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gros, B. (2016). The Dialogue Between Emerging Pedagogies and Emerging Technologies. In: Gros, B., Kinshuk, ., Maina, M. (eds) The Future of Ubiquitous Learning. Lecture Notes in Educational Technology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47724-3_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47724-3_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-47723-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-47724-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation