Skip to content

1

Between 2014 and 2017, a team of researchers from the Open University, Lancaster, and Manchester Metropolitan universities set out to explore the ways children use digital technology outside school and the extent to which that connects with what happens inside school.

The project was called NP3 — New Purposes, New Practices, New Pedagogy. It was funded by the Society for Educational Studies and ran over two years across 13 primary schools in England and Scotland. More than 100 children and 60 teachers took part. Forty-three 'log children' used digital cameras to capture their home digital technology use and were interviewed individually. More than 20 of their carers were also interviewed. Thirty-one teachers were each observed teaching at least one lesson and interviewed at least twice. It was a substantial piece of work.

What it found was, in retrospect, predictable, but the evidence matters. Schools and children were, in effect, living in parallel digital worlds.

...continue reading "What NP3 Taught Us About Children, Digital Technology, and Schools"

Originally posted 5th December 2018

One of the challenges facing the NP3 team was how to describe and differentiate between the pedagogical practices in the classrooms that we were researching. In essence, what were the key features of practice that needed to be considered in order to differentiate between the teaching in each setting? The obvious answer seemed to be to use core theories of learning and development as the basis for a framework to help us compare pedagogy across contexts. Patricia Murphy therefore devised the Innovative Pedagogy Framework, starting with the following theoretical positions:

  • Traditional (Behaviourist/Information Processing)
  • Constructivist
    • Cognitive/Piagetian
    • Radical
    • Social
  • Innovative (Sociocultural)
...continue reading "The Innovative Pedagogy Framework"

In Comparing Pedagogical Stances I set out the defining elements of four 'learning theories':

  • Traditional (A mix of Behaviourism and Information Processing)
  • Individual Constructivist
  • Social Constroctivist
  • Sociocultural

In another post (Analysing 'learning theories') I identified strengths and weaknesses of each of these four pedagogical stances.

...continue reading "Sociocultural theory – the best explanation of how we learn"

I want to explore the strengths and weaknesses of four 'learning theories' as explanations of how people learn. See Comparing Pedagogical Stances for the defining elements of each of these theories.

Before I start I want to make clear that the answer to the question 'Which theory best explains how people learn?' is different from the question 'Which theory should a school adopt as its pedagogical stance?'. Different people/schools will have different values and beliefs, and one has to start there.

...continue reading "Analysing ‘learning theories’"