Using digital media sensibly in the classroom

Aspects of digitalization in school education

Textbook , 2019 , 64 Pages

Pedagogy - Media Pedagogy

Hardly any other society is as critical of digital media as it’s the case in Germany. This attitude also slows down the use of digital media in school. And this despite the fact that new technologies can noticeably improve teaching. In addition, children and young people must also learn how to use the new media consciously.

Why are the reservations about digitalization so strong in Germany? Under what conditions could this change? How effective is digitally supported learning really? In his book, Tim Bastian presents the advantages and disadvantages of digitalization in school education.

Bastian describes how computer technology has developed over the last few decades and the importance it already has for teaching and learning processes as well as for the development of lessons. It clarifies how a learning-effective and reflected work with digital media works.

From the content:
- social media;
- Digital dementia;
- hypertext;
- Teacher;
- Media Literacy

Table of contents

Table of contents

1 Introduction: Problem definition, research interest, methodological precedentgo

2 Hypertext systems – features, structure, potentials, objections

3 Empirical studies on the effectiveness of digital media
3.1 Meta-analyses
3.2 Tablet use in schools and lessons
3.3 Reasons for the overall low effect sizes

4 Concerns and objections against digital learning at school
4.1 Fundamental criticism: Manfred Spitzer and Rolf Lankau
4.2 Parallels to the criticism of the hypertext structure of the 80s and 90s
4.3 Summary and evaluation

5 Conditions for success and failure for digital teaching

6 Insights and backgrounds on learning in schools of the future
6.1 Franz-Stock-Gymnasium Arnsberg
6.2 Community School Alemannenschule Wutöschingen
6.3 European School Otto-Hahn-Gymnasium Monheim
6.4 Schools of the future – reasons for their success in the use of digital media

7 Conclusion – Results, Desiderata, Outlook

Bibliography

Appendix
Appendix 1
Appendix 2

1 Introduction: Problem definition, research interest, methodological precedentgo

It is not without irony that Germany is a world leader – together with the Anglo-American countries – when it comes to critical views of digital media.¹. This may well be helpful as a counterweight to overly euphoric protagonists of digital education or as a relativization of the financially strong IT industry, but it becomes problematic at the latest when such arguments make their contribution to Germany ranking at the bottom of the world when it comes to the use of digital technology in school learning processes. Why this is currently the case and which conditions for success must be fulfilled in order to correct this is an essential goal of this bachelor thesis.

The second chapter will provide a brief review of the rapid development of computer technology over the past decades. The focus is on hypertext systems in terms of their design and their potential to support learning processes. Subsequently, critical evaluations of the use of hypertexts at the time will be presented.².

The third chapter draws a line from the hypertext discourse, especially of the 80s and 90s, to the currently heated debate about digitization and its significance for teaching/learning processes in general and teaching development in particular. Existing empirical findings on the effectiveness of different concepts of digitally supported learning are presented and critically evaluated (III.1 and III.2)³. It will also become clear that the interpretation of the empirical studies – depending on the interest – can lead to very different findings (Chapter III.3). In the fourth chapter, insights into the current very polarized debate on digital education follow – exemplarily⁴. Among other things, it will also be investigated whether and to what extent comparable patterns of argumentation as in the hypertext debate in the 1980s and 1990s can be found - on the one hand celebrated as a panacea for good teaching, on the other hand demonized with the reference to an alleged digital dementia (IV.2).

The present bachelor thesis cannot deal in detail with the numerous concerns and objections to digital learning in schools, which are presented from a socio-psychological, legal or media-theoretical perspective (cf. in detail chapters IV.1 and IV.3). Rather, it is about working out conditions that, despite the undeniable risks, can enable learning and reflective work with digital media.

Subsequently, in addition to typical failure conditions (ideal-typical) success conditions for a didactically and pedagogically meaningful use of digital media in the classroom are worked out (Chapter V). Digital media are seen in the context of personnel development, organizational development and teaching development.

In the sixth chapter – based on the findings of the previous chapters – successful application examples are presented: Schools in which digital media, mainly tablets, are already used continuously and well-founded in everyday life, partly with reference to the pedagogical-didactic specialist literature, partly with the help of their own classroom visits and discussions with teachers and with the school management.

The conclusion (Chapter VII) looks back at the course of the argumentation, especially with regard to analogies between the hypertext controversy at the time and the current debate on digital education. With a view to the research debate (Chapter III), the conditions for success and the application examples (Chapters IV to VI), possibilities are shown as to whether and to what extent the current digital backwardness in German schools - mentioned at the beginning - can be overcome.

2 Hypertext systems – features, structure, potentials, objections

The first chapter first explains what characterizes hypertext or hypermedia systems and what typical features of information representation they have. Afterwards, potentials and possible disadvantages of working in a teaching/learning context are presented. The connection between the hypertext controversy at the time and today's digitization debate is also hinted at and later (in Chapter IV.2) explained in more detail. Other aspects such as the history and development of hypertext, technical precursors, the relationship between author and reader or the connection between hypertext and literature can only be considered marginally with regard to the guiding questions of the bachelor thesis (cf. Chapter I).

Hypertext is a mostly short text with a net-shaped, dynamic structure connected by links. The construct is structured like a spider's web, the individual hyperlinks form the threads and connect the digital spider web with each other. The links can run in all directions, cross each other or return to the exit⁵. Ted Nelson first coined the term 'hypertext' in his work "A File Structure for The Complex, The Changing and the Indeterminate"⁶. Early visions of hypertext date back to 1945, when Vannevar Bush, an engineer and technical advisor to the American government, presented a draft of an associative link for the meaningful structuring of information.⁷. The aim was to develop a comprehensively flexible knowledge database in non-linear form and thus also to facilitate the findability of published research results and to contribute to the development of better typewriters. On the basis of this idea, the hypertext format of the Internet was later built.

The difference to conventional texts, which are committed to linearity and a fixed sequence, is obvious. Due to the diverse cultural and social contexts, there were differences in the way of reading, but in the end all texts followed the same concept. Rather linear print media have orientation aids such as indexes, footnotes and glossaries, which the reader⁸ can follow. However, footers and cross-references, for example, are often very cumbersome for the reader to understand, as he has to leave the usual linear process; this interrupts the flow of reading and reduces the attention span.

In order to enable readers to access a content area on their own paths, and not in a predetermined traditional linear form, local and network-based learning and information systems based on a common conception of hypertext were technically implemented. The digital text has been provided with links and other building blocks that eliminate the linearity of texts. The best-known hypertext markup language with which such constructs are possible is the Hypertext Markup Language, HTML for short. HTML was invented in 1991, a year earlier the U.S. National Science Foundation decided to make the Internet usable for commercial purposes, making it publicly available beyond universities. Every user can now theoretically extend the global hypertext system with self-written contributions. In addition, there are many opportunities for 'hands-on projects' such as blogs or wikis. The continuous and rapid development of the technology since the beginnings of digital literature has enabled a variety of different forms of the medium in a very short time, such as the e-book, which can be unlocked online for a fee, so that the user gains immediate access. E-books can also contain links to the Internet, a place of publication best suited for hypertexts - and even a single gigantic hypertext - is of course the World Wide Web.

The two central properties of hypertext are therefore the nonlinear or non-equential structure and interactivity. The literary scholar George Landow, one of the best-known interpreters of hypertext systems, sums it up as follows: "hypertext (is) as multisequentially read text"⁹. The nonlinear arrangement of the text units makes it possible to flexibly and self-directedly search for a path through the text, to explore, to process cognitively and to reassembling the information nodes in each case. A text unit provides several links to choose from, otherwise the text would be linear¹⁰. Landow summarizes: "(...) linking is the most important fact about hypertext; particularly as it contrasts to the world of print technology"¹¹. If the hypertext contains images, sounds, graphics or films, it is called 'hypermedia'. The most successful example of this is today's Wikipedia. The reader is not forced to read the text from beginning to end, but can autonomously decide which topics interest him; he can jump from information to information and, of course, save time in obtaining information.

A current example of the rapid further development of hypertext or hypermedia shows that the line between author and reader/user is becoming more and more blurred. The interactive film "Black Mirror: Bandersnatch"¹², released on Netflix in December 2018, is about the developer of a video game who wants to program a video game based on a book called "Bandersnatch" by fictional author Jerome F. Davies. With this book, the reader has the opportunity to actively change and determine the course of history. The courses of action are predetermined, but the sequence varies from reader to reader, similar to a labyrinth. The film was developed on the same basis, the viewer has a few seconds to choose between two different plot paths and can thus determine the end of the film. This breaks up the linear sequence, which is common in the conventional medium, and makes the possibility of directly interfering with the active action. Black Mirror: Bandersnatch to a hybrid between film and computer game. A total of five hours of footage is divided into 250 chapters, hidden behind the viewer's respective decisions. However, there is always the task of keeping the film character alive through the right decisions. If the viewer makes a wrong decision, he can return at that time and vote again.

It becomes clear that hypertext/hypermedia systems open up particularly good opportunities to support open, constructivist processes and promote the acquisition of knowledge. These features and the conceptual objectives result in numerous potentials for the users:¹³

The acquisition of knowledge is supported by a network-like information representation, which challenges the cognitive flexibility of the users.

The interactivity opens up initial orientations in new topics and subject areas. The user also has great freedom and previously unimagined options.

There are possibilities for flexible user-oriented access to the information. The acquisition of knowledge in hypertext/hypermedia systems is supported and promoted by a self-directed process of constructing knowledge¹⁴.

Through the links, the user may come across information that he would otherwise never have looked at. One can speak of a welcome "deadweight effect". Hypertext can be understood as a basic building block for digitization.¹⁵. Today, a few decades later, you can create simple hypertexts with any word processor or with programs for creating web pages.

After the initial hypertext euphoria, a number of risk factors were identified, also on the basis of empirical findings on the use of hypertexts, which can be assigned to two basic types of learning problems. Due to the lack of linearity and the high number of choices, it can easily lead to disorientation or confusion, so that the reader can get lost in hypertext. In such a case, the information gathering fails. This is referred to as an "information overflow"¹⁶. This hypertext-specific reception situation forms the framework for the second problem, the so-called cognitive overload. Empirical studies questioned that the reader of a hypertext could collaborate sufficiently with its author. "Hypertext then has the potential to liberate readers from the linear dominion of physically stable")¹⁷ are certainly seen, but these learning opportunities often fail due to learners' lack of competences in the use of hypertext functions and ultimately lead to superficial learning. Hypertext requires active and attentive users with the ability for metacognitive control, who regularly check and update the content so that each hyperlink continues to lead to hypertext so as not to get lost in the construct of the Internet ("lost in hyperspace"). However, this is not (yet) the case with the majority of learners¹⁸.

Landow and Tergan take a critical view of previous hypertext/hypermedia research and point to conceptual and methodological shortcomings¹⁹. This concerns, among other things, design decisions and the fixation on traditional school learning success criteria such as the retention of presented information. Also, instead of considering hypertext technology as stand-alone systems, an embedding in suitable teaching-learning arrangements must be investigated. The innovative potential of hypertext systems for individual and collaborative work, which can be used in the context of self-directed learning, require an expansion of the spectrum of criteria for successful learning²⁰.

3 Empirical studies on the effectiveness of digital media

The discussion about the use of digital media in schools and lessons is very controversial in the public, but also in scientific publications. Two examples may illustrate this: Andreas Schleicher, international coordinator of the PISA studies, points to the irreversibility of digitization and sees great opportunities in it, as it democratizes learning and makes it possible to "respond much better to the various learning disabilities and strengths of the students"²¹, while the media scientist Rolf Lankau already considers the terms 'digital learning' or 'digital education' to be wrong from a socio-critical perspective²². For him, a digital learning environment is only in the interest of the IT industry. According to Lankau, the "essence of digitization" is the "transformation of human and social educational institutions into digitally automated learning factories"²³ – an ominous process that leads to isolation, social division and social coldness.

In the following, empirical findings on digital learning will be presented (Chapter III.1). In the last more than 40 years, there have been countless studies on the learning effectiveness of digital media in the classroom.²⁴. In addition, studies specifically on tablet use - with a view to the topic of the bachelor thesis - are examined and presented in more detail (Chapter III.2). A critical review of the empirical studies concludes the chapter (Chapter III.3).

3.1 Meta-analyses

Meta-analyses are quantitative-empirical long-term studies that compile and view the results of numerous studies and try to present a synthesis from their individual results. With the help of the meta-analyses, the effectiveness of a concrete factor, the so-called effect size, is to be determined²⁵. Effect size is a statistical measure that indicates the importance of the relationship between two factors²⁶.

The best-known meta-analysis is the study "Visible Learning" by the New Zealand educational scientist John Hattie²⁷. Hattie compared the effectiveness of several hundred factors that influence school learning – from class size and tutoring systems to the use of PowerPoint and smartphone and laptop use. After more than 15 years of research, "Visible Learning" with well over 800 meta-analyses represented the largest data set of empirical educational research to date²⁸. Hattie has since continuously updated the data sets; the 2017 edition includes over 1400 meta-analyses based on around 80,000 individual studies with an estimated 300 million learners²⁹. In the new edition 2017, 24 factors deal with digital learning, e.B digitization in reading, digitization in writing, digitization in primary education, digitization in secondary education. In 2008, there were just six factors – this alone shows the rapid increase in the importance of digitization.³⁰.

The result is ambivalent: There is certainly an increase in learning when learning is supported digitally – and in all factors. Overall, however, the yield is rather modest and usually remains below the average effect size of 0.40³¹. Surprisingly, this applies in particular to digitization in mathematics or digitization in the natural sciences, which are considered to be particularly "digitization-savvy"³² be valid. On the other hand, with an effect size of 0.57, very positive effects can be seen in learners with special needs. Here, for example.B methods of visualization for the deaf and verbalization for the blind open up extended forms of participation in the classroom. Klaus Zierer: "Furthermore, this factor includes intervention programs that support learners with special needs, especially in the acquisition of knowledge and thus at the levels of reproduction and reorganization."³³. Other international meta-studies confirm Hattie's findings. There are slight positive learning gains, but overall the effects are relatively small³⁴.

3.2 Tablet use in schools and lessons

The term iPad is often equated with learning and teaching with tablets. This is certainly justified in view of the market power of the apple company, but in this work I am only talking about tablets, regardless of the make, as the market is now diversifying.³⁵.

In Germany, the school distribution of tablets was very slow, as the ICILS study 2013 showed – 6.5% of the 8th year could use tablets at least selectively – in Australia e.B. it was 63.6%³⁶. Even in 2017, tablets are still a rarity in schools, as the JIM study showed: Just one fifth of students aged 12 to 19 came into contact with tablets in class³⁷.

Stefan Aufenanger thus rightly states that due to the lack of breadth of tablet use and the relatively short time since the introduction of Apple's iPad (2009), "no longer-term studies are yet available"³⁸.

In this respect, the empirical findings refer to a considerable extent to subjectively perceived success reports and opinion polls of schools on their tablet use. In some cases, the findings only refer to relatively short periods of a few months or only to individual learning groups or so-called tablet classes.³⁹. The successful use in the field of inclusive education is striking, as studies in the English-speaking world prove.⁴⁰. This corresponds to the results of Hattie's meta-analysis, which can prove a high effect size in the factor "digitization among learners with special needs".⁴¹.

Nevertheless, it is unmistakable that the popularity of the tablet in schools and classrooms is continuously increasing and has continued to increase since 2017. Aufenanger (2017), Welling (2017) and Zylka (2018) present German-language tablet projects – such as that of the Alemannenschule Wutöschingen and a grammar school in Hamburg – and each come to the preliminary conclusion that the use of tablets in school and teaching is "predominantly successful"⁴².

The limiting vocabulary "provisional" refers to the fact that there is "still considerable need for research" regarding the "effects" of the "use of tablets (and other mobile devices) on learning and teaching contexts with school connotations" and also on "which equipment concepts including (media) pedagogical and (media) didactic concepts are best suited to promote the various competencies of adolescents as optimally as possible and to promote educational processes in the sense of to support the change of self- and world references"⁴³.

3.3 Reasons for the overall low effect sizes

The interpretation of the empirical studies is very different. There is not even agreement on whether the use of digital media leads to educational added value. Lankau as a fundamental critic of the "digital doctrine of salvation" sees "no clear picture" in the current research results, especially since there are no "reliable comparative studies" yet.⁴⁴, while the other interpreters of the empirical studies concede an "improvement in learning effectiveness", albeit with rather small effect sizes⁴⁵.

In summary, the results of the empirical studies so far are rather disappointing. The reasons are manifold: The studies can only ever depict the past; the aggregated data are usually already a few years old at the time of publication, which is one of the greatest weaknesses of empirical research into the reality of learning in such a dynamic development as digitization is taking place. Think of the increasingly improving digital infrastructure in schools since 2016/2017 and, above all, of the gradually increasing motivation and qualification of teachers.⁴⁶. The KMK strategy on "Education in the Digital World" adopted in December 2016 has significantly accelerated this process, insofar as all federal states have committed themselves to ensuring that all pupils who move to lower secondary education from the 2018/19 school year onwards have the skills described in the strategy at the end of their compulsory schooling.⁴⁷.

It should also be taken into account that most empirical work is carried out in a "technology-centered perspective"⁴⁸ Focus as much as possible on the learning performance and the learning effectiveness of digital media, instead of focusing on the learning effectiveness of certain teaching/learning arrangements or the conditions of learning. This is exactly what an international meta-analysis by Sokolowski, Li and Willson undertakes.⁴⁹. This study examines the use of digital media in mathematics lessons in the context of explorative learning. With such a problem-oriented and open setting, a significantly high effect size of 0.60 was achieved⁵⁰.

This shows, Schaumburg concludes, "that the way in which didactic integration into the classroom is crucial for the learning effectiveness of digital media and that student-centered and constructivist approaches have greater potential here than integration into teacher-centered teaching."⁵¹.

Other ways of learning growth, such as the "promotion of key qualifications"⁵², are also ignored in most empirical studies , including Hattie. In the course of rapid social changes that encompass all areas of life, however, the competent handling of new technologies and digital information plays the role of a key competence. Digital tools contribute to the Acquisition of interdisciplinary competences, in particular for the acquisition of computer and information-related competences in⁵³.

4 Concerns and objections against digital learning at school

This chapter presents key concerns and objections to digital learning. With Manfred Spitzer and Rolf Lankau, the focus will be on two prominent fundamental critics (Chapter IV.1)⁵⁴. Subsequently, parallels to the criticism of the hypertext structure of the 90s are shown - using Chapter II - (IV.2). This is followed by a summary and evaluation of the arguments (IV.3).

4.1 Fundamental criticism: Manfred Spitzer and Rolf Lankau

Manfred Spitzer, Professor of Psychiatry and Brain Researcher, is one of the best-known critics of digitization. In numerous essays and especially in his publications "Vorsicht Bildschirm!" and "Digitale Demenz"⁵⁵ he sees worrying developments in digital media – be it television, computers or smartphones. He also knows, of course, that they cannot be abolished; he sees that digital media are part of our culture, increasing productivity and making life easier⁵⁶. However, referring to his own experiences in the Psychiatric University Hospital Ulm, which he heads, as well as with reference to the annual report of the Federal Government Commissioner for Addiction, Spitzer emphasizes its high addictive potential and points to the increase in computer game addicts and Internet-dependent patients.⁵⁷.

The hope of making progress in learning in schools with the help of an accelerated use of media has proven to be deceptive in recent decades, on the contrary, in his opinion computers prevent young people from making educational progress; he refers to them as "learning prevention machines"⁵⁸. In this context, Spitzer refers, among other things, to the failure of the once acclaimed language laboratories and programmed teaching in the 70s.⁵⁹. Referring to findings in neurobiology, especially on brain research, Spitzer emphasizes "the negative effects of digital media on mental and spiritual processes in the evolutionary and neurobiological framework."⁶⁰. He refers to studies by Korean scientists (2007), who have found a loss of mental performance and even forgetfulness, especially among young people in view of the high flood of information.⁶¹. Spitzer calls this a gradual mental decline, the so-called "digital dementia", in reference to the disease of the same name.⁶². Spitzer justifies this – beyond the area of school – with a variety of examples, such as the uncritical use of social networks, mindless-violent online games or the in his opinion nonsensical use of laptops in kindergarten. All this contributes to the "decline in education", as it contributes to digital superficiality and social isolation.⁶³ or "social dementia"⁶⁴ Spitzer sees in the digital euphoria, which in his opinion is completely misguided, a manipulation of people by the IT industry, which has managed to largely blind all social groups - including politicians of all parties - and to influence them in their commercial sense.⁶⁵. Spitzer summarizes that modern information technology leads to "more superficial thinking," distracts, and has "undesirable side effects, ranging from mere disturbances to child pornography and violence."⁶⁶.

Rolf Lankau, Professor of Media Design and Media Theory at Offenburg University of Applied Sciences, supports and reinforces Spitzer's socio-critical approach by expanding the triangle of business interests, foundations and politics for the digital field trials on pupils. For him, digital technology is 'dataism', as all human behaviour is digested on computers and smart devices and is then available to the IT monopolies.

For Lankau, digital technology is therefore a technique of counter-enlightenment, whose materialistic understanding of education, shaped by neoliberal digital capitalism, is incompatible with a humanistic and democratic image of man.⁶⁷. Lankau also highlights privacy issues, citing the school as a social shelter, as the algorithmically driven applications are based on personal data and can create complete learning and personality profiles of minors. In his opinion, schools should be taken off the internet as long as the legal questions in connection with the General Data Protection Regulation, which has been in force since May 2018, are not answered in a binding manner and valid solutions under data protection law are available.⁶⁸.

[...]

---

¹ Vgl. Zylka, Johannes: Digitale Schulentwicklung: Das Praxisbuch für Schulleitung und Steuergruppen. Weinheim: Beltz 2018, S.99.

² Vgl. Tergan, Sigmar-Olaf: Hypertext und Hypermedia: Konzeption, Lernmöglichkeiten, Lernprobleme und Perspektiven. In: Ludwig Issing, Paul Klimsa (Hg.): Information und Lernen mit Multimedia und Internet. 3., vollständig überarbeitete Auflage. Weinheim: Beltz 2002, S. 99-112.

³ Vgl. Schaumburg, Heike: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte des digital unterstützten Lernens. In: Nele McElvany [u.a.] (Hg.): Digitalisierung in der schulischen Bildung. Chancen und Herausforderungen. Münster: Waxmann 2018, S.27-40.

⁴ In the present work, the term "digital education" is to be understood in analogy to terms such as "political education" or "scientific" education against the background of the changed educational mission in an increasingly networked world. By no means does this mean that all learning processes should take place digitally in the future; cf. Irion, Thomas und Eickelmann, Birgit: Digitale Bildung in der Grundschule, in: Grundschule. Keine Angst vor Tablet & Co, 7, 2018, S.7.

⁵ cf. Brech, Johann: „A digitalized Derrida“ – Zum Verhältnis von Poststrukturalismus und Hypertext. Norderstedt: Grin 2012, S.8.

⁶ Nelson, Ted: A File Structure for The Complex, The Changing and the Indeterminate. 20th National Conference. Association for Computing Machinery, New York: 1965.

⁷ Nelson, Ted: As We May Think. See also the German translation: Bush, Vannevar: Wie wir denken werden. In: Karin Bruns, Ramón Reichert, Hg., Reader Neue Medien. Texte zur digitalen Kultur und Kommunikation. Bielefeld: Transkript-Verlag 2006, S. 106-125.

⁸ When this work refers to the reader, user, author, etc., it generally refers to the function and not the person.

⁹ Landow, George P.: hypertext. The convergence of contemporary critical theory and technology. Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press 1992, p.4

¹⁰ Bachleitner, Norbert: https:/www.netzliteratur.net/bachleitner/VOdigilit1.1-2.pdf. o.J. (accessed on 9.03.19).

¹¹ Landow, George P.: Hyper/Text/Theory. Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press 1994, p.7.

¹² https://www.netflix.com/de/title/80988062 (accessed 9.3.19).

¹³ The following compilation is based on Sigmar-Olaf Tergan's research overview on hypertext systems. cf. Tergan: Hypertext and Hypermedia, pp.104-108.

¹⁴Ibid., p. 56

¹⁵ Martin Kaiser, an experienced school digitization expert, comments in detail on this (see the transcript of the interview in Annex 1).

¹⁶ cf. Haack, Johannes: Interaktivität als Kennzeichen von Multimedia und Hypermedia. In: Ludwig Issing, Paul Klimsa (Hg.): Information und Lernen mit Multimedia und Internet. 3., vollständig überarbeitete Auflage. Weinheim: Beltz 2002, S. 126-136, hier S.130.

¹⁷ readsØl, Gunnar: Wittgenstein, Genette, and the Reader's Narrative in Hypertext. In: Landow, George P.: Hyper/Text/Theory. Baltimore & London: The Johns Hopkins University Press 1994, p.104.

¹⁸ cf. Tergan: Hypertext and Hypermedia, pp.108-111.

¹⁹ cf. Landow. hypertext. The convergence of contemporary critical theory and technology 1992.

²⁰ cf. Tergan: Hypertext and Hypermedia, p.112.

²¹ Schleicher, Andreas: Im Gespräch. In: Bildungsmesse im Blick. Isernhagen: A.V.I. 2019, S.14.

²² See my definition of 'digital education' in Note 4.

²³ Lankau, Rolf: Digitale Heilsversprechen. Im Interview mit Meik Bruns. In: Bildung heute 2 (2019b), S.6 f.

²⁴ cf. Schaumburg: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte, S.27 sowie Zierer, Klaus: Lernen 4.0. Pädagogik vor Technik. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer Digitalisierung im Bildungsbereich. 2. Auflage. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider 2018, S.41.

²⁵ cf. Schaumburg: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte, S.28 unter Bezug auf die Studie von Cohen. Cohen, Jacob: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2. Auflage. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1988.

²⁶ Hattie, John, Zierer, Klaus: Kenne deinen Einfluss! „Visible Learning“ für die Unterrichtspraxis. 2. Auflage. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider 2017, S.28; dort auch mit genaueren methodischen Erläuterungen, z.B. zur notwendigen Größe untersuchter Gruppen sowie zur Umgehensweise mit Standardabweichungen.

²⁷ cf. Hattie, John: Lernen sichtbar machen. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider 2013.

²⁸ cf. Zierer, Klaus: Lernen 4.0. Pädagogik vor Technik. Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer Digitalisierung im Bildungsbereich. 2. Auflage. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider 2018. S.42-44.

²⁹ cf. Hattie, John, Zierer, Klaus: Kenne deinen Einfluss!, S. 26-37.

³⁰ cf. Zierer, Klaus: Lernen 4.0. Pädagogik vor Technik, S.43. Vgl. auch die Auflistung der Faktoren und ihrer jeweiligen Effektstärke in: Hattie, John, Zierer, Klaus: Kenne deinen Einfluss!,, S. 195- 215.

³¹ "This value represents the average of all effect sizes collected and marks the range of 'desired effects' in 'Visible Learning'. It is generally compared to the increase in learning that is achieved on average in a school year." Zierer, Klaus: Lernen 4.0. Pädagogik vor Technik. 2018, S.45. Siehe dazu auch Schaumburg: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte, S.29..

³² Zierer, Klaus: Lernen 4.0. Pädagogik vor Technik, S.48.

³³Ibid., p. 56

³⁴ See the list of recent international meta-analyses at Schaumburg: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte, p.30.

³⁵ cf. Welling, Stefan: Methods matter. Methodisch-methodologische Perspektiven für die Forschung zum Lernen und Lehren mit Tablets. In: Jasmin Bastian, Stefan Aufenanger (Hg.): Tablets in Schule und Unterricht. Forschungsmethoden und –perspektiven zum Einsatz digitaler Medien. Wiesbaden: Springer 2017, S.17.

³⁶ cf. Bos, Wilfried, Eickelmann, Birgit, Gerick Julia (Hg.): ICILS 2013 – Computer – und informationsbezogene Kompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern in der 8. Jahrgangsstufe im internationalen Vergleich. Münster: Waxmann 2014, S.162.

³⁷ Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverband Südwest (Hg.): JIM 2017: Jugend, Information, (Multi-) Media. Basisstand zum Medienumgang 12- bis 19-jähriger in Deutschland. Stuttgart: 2018, S.52-54 und S.64..

³⁸ Aufenanger, Stefan: Zum Stand der Forschung zum Tableteinsatz in Schule und Unterricht aus nationaler und internationaler Sicht. In: Jasmin Bastian, Stefan Aufenanger (Hg.): Tablets in Schule und Unterricht. Forschungsmethoden und –perspektiven zum Einsatz digitaler Medien. Wiesbaden: Springer 2017a, S.120.

³⁹Ibid., p. 54 & 55

⁴⁰Ibid., p. 56

⁴¹ see above Note 33.

⁴² Aufenanger, Stefan: Zum Stand der Forschung zum Tableteinsatz in Schule und Unterricht S.126; siehe auch S.122-125. Ähnlich äußert sich Zylka: Digitale Schulentwicklung, S.8 und S.70-95.

⁴³ Welling: Methods matter, p.18.

⁴⁴ Lankau, Rolf: Kein Mensch lernt digital. Über den sinnvollen Einsatz neuer Medien im Unterricht. Weinheim: Beltz 2017, S.21.

⁴⁵ cf. Schaumburg: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte, S.38. Zu tendenziell ähnlichen Folgerungen gelangen unter anderem Welling, Aufenanger, Zylka, Hattie und Zierer.

⁴⁶ cf. Zierer, Klaus: Lernen 4.0. Pädagogik vor Technik, S.41 sowie zu den Einstellungen der Lehrpersonen Lorenz, Ramona: Ressourcen, Einstellungen und Lehrkraftbildung im Bereich Digitalisierung. In: Nele McElvany [u.a.] (Hg.): Digitalisierung in der schulischen Bildung. Chancen und Herausforderungen. Münster: Waxmann 2018, S. 53-67.

⁴⁷Kultusministerkonferenz (2016): Bildung in der digitalen Welt. Strategie der Kulturministerkonferenz. https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/pdf/PresseUndAktuelles/2016/Bildung_digitale_Welt_Webversion.pdf (am 09.03.2019) vgl. Digitalisierung, S. 24 Quellenangabe; dazu ausführlich Eickelmann, Birgit: Digitalisierung in der schulischen Bildung. Entwicklungen, Befunde und Perspektiven für die Schulentwicklung und die Bildungsforschung. In: Nele McElvany [u.a.] (Hg.): Digitalisierung in der schulischen Bildung. Chancen und Herausforderungen. Münster: Waxmann 2018c, S.13-15.

⁴⁸ Schaumburg: Empirische Befunde zur Wirksamkeit unterschiedlicher Konzepte, S.32.

⁴⁹ Ibid., p.37 with reference to: https://stemeducationjournal.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40594-015-0022-z 2015 (accessed 10.3.19).

⁵⁰ Ibid.

⁵¹ Ibid.

⁵²Ibid., p. 56

⁵³ cf. Eickelmann, Birgit: Digitalisierung in der schulischen Bildung. Entwicklungen, Befunde und Perspektiven für die Schulentwicklung und die Bildungsforschung. In: Nele McElvany [u.a.] (Hg.): Digitalisierung in der schulischen Bildung. Chancen und Herausforderungen. Münster: Waxmann 2018c, S.18f.

⁵⁴ Lembke, Gerald, Leipner, Ingo: Die Lüge der digitalen Bildung. 3. Auflage. München: Redline 2015.

⁵⁵ Spitzer, Manfred: Vorsicht Bildschirm, Elektronische Medien, Gehirnentwicklung, Gesundheit und Gesellschaft. München: dtv 2006 sowie ders.: Digitale Demenz. Wie wir uns und unsere Kinder um den Verstand bringen. München: Droemer 2016.

⁵⁶ cf. Spitzer: Digitale Demenz, S.296.

⁵⁷ Ibid., p.7f. Spitzer refers to the 2012 annual report, in which 1.4 million 14- to 24-year-olds were identified as problematic Internet users. Compare this also Lankau, who also emphasizes the health consequences of the screen media (Lankau, Rolf: Digitalisierung als De-Humanisierung von Schulen http://futur-iii.de/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2019/01/dbt-kinderkommission_jan2016_textlankau.pdf (aufgerufen am 13.2.2019) 2019a, S.13f.

⁵⁸ Spitzer: Digitale Demenz, p.91.

⁵⁹ Ibid., p.13f.

⁶⁰ Ibid.

⁶¹ cf. Spitzer: Digitale Demenz, p.18.

⁶² Ibid., p.19, p.42, p.52, p.60, p.293f. u.ö.

⁶³Ibid., p. 56

⁶⁴ Lembke: Die Lüge der digitalen Bildung 2015.

⁶⁵ cf. Spitzer: Digitale Demenz, pp.293-295.

⁶⁶Ibid., p. 56

⁶⁷ Lankau: Kein Mensch lernt digital sowie ders.: Lankau, Rolf: Digitale Heilsversprechen. Im Interview mit Meik Bruns. In: Bildung heute 2 (2019b), S.4-7.

⁶⁸ cf. Lankau: Kein Mensch lernt digital, S.163f. sowie ders.: Digitalisierung als De-Humanisierung von Schulen, S.19f.

• Author: Tim Bastian (Author)
• Year: 2019
• Pages: 64
• Catalog Number: V1176140
• ISBN (eBook): 9783346586476
• Language: English
• Tags: social media, digital dementia, digital media, media literacy