Digi-Tell: Using Technology for Authentic Learning

  • Mellita Jones
  • Karen McLean


This chapter builds on the discussion around the tenets of Learner as Central and Communities of Collaboration for pre-service teacher literacy education through community-based after-school learning clubs. This chapter introduces the tenet of information and communication technology (ICT) for learning to the authentic learning context provided through community-based after-school learning clubs. The discussion in this chapter will explore how the tenets of personalising learning are realised in the teacher education context through the delivery of Digi-Tell, a digital storytelling programme for children in the middle and upper years of primary education. In a core unit in their course, pre-service teachers plan, implement and evaluate a literacy programme designed to use ICT in authentic ways as part of an explicit literacy teaching focus. These descriptions provide insight into authentic contexts for effective literacy teaching and learning essential for personalising learning in teacher education.


  1. Australian Curriculum Assessment Reporting Authority [ACARA]. (2017). Australian curriculum. Retrieved from
  2. Brandenburg, R. (2008). Powerful pedagogy: Self-study of a teacher educator’s practice. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.). (2000). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures. South Yarra: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Davydov, V. V., Slobodchikov, V. I., & Tsukerman, G. A. (2003). The elementary school student as an agent of learning activity. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 41(5), 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edwards, S. (2012). Teaching through assessment: Reconsidering the transfer problem through a convergence of technology and assessment in early childhood teacher education. Teachers and Teaching, 18(5), 585–599. Scholar
  7. Elen, J., Clarebout, G., Lèonard, R., & Lowyck, J. (2007). Student-centred and teacher-centred learning environments: What students think. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(1), 105–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fuller, A. (2007). Critiquing theories of learning and communities of practice. In J. Hughes, N. Jewson, & L. Unwin (Eds.), Communities of practice: Critical perspectives (pp. 17–29). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re-imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching, 15(2), 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Halliday, M. A. K. (2004). Three aspects of children’s language development: Learning language, learning through language, learning about language. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. J. Webster (Eds.), The language of early childhood (pp. 308–326). New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  11. Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Keamy, K., Nicholas, H., Mahar, S., & Herrrick, C. (2007). Personalising education: From research to policy and practice. Melbourne: Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.Google Scholar
  13. Keene, E. K., & Zimmerman, S. (1997). Mosaic of thought: Teaching comprehension in a reading workshop. Portsmouth: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  14. Kravtsova, E. E. (2006). The concept of age-specific new psychological formations in contemporary developmental psychology. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 44(6), 6–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kvale, S., & Brinkman, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Land, S., Hannafin, M., & Oliver, K. (2012). Student-centered learning environments: Foundations, assumptions and design. In D. Jonassen & S. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (2nd ed., pp. 3–25). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation (learning in doing: Social, cognitive and computational perspectives). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Loughran, J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices: Responding to the challenges, demands and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Loughran, J. (2012). What expert teachers do: Enhancing professional knowledge for classroom practice. Florence: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  21. Loughran, J., Keast, S., & Cooper, R. (2016). Pedagogical reasoning in teacher education. In J. Loughran & M. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook on teacher education (Vol. 1, pp. 387–481). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McLean, K. (2017). Using reflective practice to foster confidence and competence to teach literacy in primary schools. In R. Brandenburg, K. Glasswell, M. Jones, & J. Ryan (Eds.), Reflective theory and practice in teacher education (pp. 119–139). Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Murphy, C., Bianchi, L., McCullagh, J., & Kerr, K. (2013). Scaling up higher order thinking skills and personal capabilities in primary science: Theory-into-policy-into-practice. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 10, 173–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Patrick, C.-J., Peach, D., Pocknee, C., Webb, F., Fletcher, M., & Pretto, G. (2008). The WIL [work integrated learning] report: A national scoping study, Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) final report. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology. Retrieved from and Scholar
  25. Repkin, V. V. (2003). Developmental teaching and learning activity. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 41(5), 10–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Seely Flint, A., Kitson, L., Lowe, K., & Shaw, K. (2014). Literacy in Australia: Pedagogies for engagement. Milton: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Swennen, A., Lunenberg, M., & Korthagen, F. (2008). Preach what you teach! Teacher educators and congruent teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 14(5–6), 531–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group [TEMAG]. (2014). Action now: Classroom ready teachers. Retrieved from
  29. The New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9–37). Melbourne: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  30. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Wenger, E. (2011). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. Retrieved from
  32. Wilhelm, J. D. (2007). Engaging readers and writers with inquiry: Promoting deep understandings in language arts and the content areas with guiding questions. New York: Scholastic.Google Scholar
  33. Wing Jan, L. (2009). Write ways: Modelling writing forms (4th ed.). Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Wise, A., & O’Neill, K. (2009). Beyond more versus less: A reframing of the debate on instructional guidance. In S. Tobias & T. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 82–105). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mellita Jones
    • 1
  • Karen McLean
    • 1
  1. 1.Australian Catholic UniversityBallaratAustralia

Personalised recommendations