Advertisement

Roles and Domains to Teach in Online Learning Environments: Educational ICT Competency Framework for University Teachers

  • Teresa Guasch
  • Ibis Alvarez
  • Anna Espasa
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter is aimed at presenting an integrated framework of the educational information and communications technology (ICT) competencies that university teachers should have to teach in an online learning environment. Teaching through ICT in higher education involves performing three main roles – pedagogical, socialist, and design/planning – and also two cross-cutting domains that arise from the online environment: technological and managerial. This framework as well as the competencies for university teachers associated with it were validated at a European level by a dual process of net-based focus groups of teachers and teacher trainers in each of the participating countries in a European Project (Elene-TLC) and an online Delphi method involving 78 experts from 14 universities of ten European countries. The competency framework and the examples provided in the chapter are the basis for designing innovative professional development activities in online university environments.

Keywords

Focus Group Delphi Method Online Environment Teacher Trainer Pedagogical Role 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Anderson, T., & Kanuka, H. (2003). E-research: methods, strategies, and issues. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teacher presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning networks, 5(2), 1–17.Google Scholar
  3. Beetham, H., & Sharpe, Rh (eds). (2007). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: designing and delivering e-learning. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Berge, Z. L. (1995). Facilitating computer conferencing: recommendations from the field. Educational Technology, 35(1), 22–30.Google Scholar
  5. Coppola, W. N., Hiltz, R., & Rotter, N. (2002). Becoming a virtual professor: pedagogical roles and asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(4), 169–189.Google Scholar
  6. Dondi, C., Mancinelli, E., & Moretti, M. (2006). Adapting existing competence frameworks to higher education environments. In The challenge of eCompetence in academic staff development ( chapter 2). http://www.ecompetence.info/uploads/media/ch2.pdf. Accessed 02 June 2009.
  7. Egan, M. T., & Akdere, M. (2005). Clarifying distance education roles and competencies. Exploring similarities and differences between professional and student-practitioners perspectives. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(2), 87–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eraut, M. (1998). Concept of competence. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 12, 127–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gonczi, S., Hager, P., & Athanasou, J. (1993). The development of competency-based assessment strategies for the professions. In Australian National Office of Overseas Skills Recognition, Research paper no. 8. Canberra: Australian Gvt. Pub. Service.Google Scholar
  10. Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, J., Steeples, C., & Tickner, S. (2001). Competencies for online teaching: a special report. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 65–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Guasch, T., Alvarez, I., & Espasa, A. (2009). University teacher competencies in a virtual teaching/learning environment: Analysis of a teacher training experience. Teaching and Teacher Education, 1–8.Google Scholar
  12. Gunawardena, C., & Zittle, F. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hung, D., & Der-Thanq, Ch. (2001). Situated Cognition, Vygotskian Thought and Learning from the Communities of Practice Perspective: Implications for the Design of Web-Based E-Learning. Educational Media International, 38(1), 3–12.Google Scholar
  14. Jonassen, D. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: a constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.Google Scholar
  15. Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. J., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology. A constructivist perspective. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  16. Klein, J., Spector, M., Grabowski, B., & De la Teja I. (2004). Instructor competencies. Standards for face-to face, online and blended settings. USA: AECT and ibstpi.Google Scholar
  17. Laurillard, D. (2002a). Rethinking teaching for the knowledge society. EDUCAUSE Review, 37(1), 16–25. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0201.pdf. Accessed 02 June 2009.Google Scholar
  18. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Mac Labhrainn, I., McDonald Legg, C., Schneckenberg, D., & Wildt, J. (eds). (2006). The challenge of eCompetence in academic staff development. Galway: NUI Galway.Google Scholar
  20. McClelland, D. C. (1998). Identifying competencies with behavioral-event interviews. Psychological Science, 9(5), 331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Prestera, G. E., & Moller, L. (2001). Exploiting opportunities for knowledge building in asynchronous distance learning environments. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 2(2), 93–104.Google Scholar
  22. Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating. The key to teaching and learning online. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  23. Spencer, L. M., & Spencer, S. M. (1993). Competence at work. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Tigelaar, D., Dolmans, D., Wolfhagen, I., & van der Vleuten, C. (2004). The development and validation of a framework for teaching competencies in higher education. Higher Education, 48(2), 253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Westera, W. (2001). Competences in education: a confusion of tongues. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 33(1), 75–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Williams, P. (2003). Roles and competences for distance education programs in higher institutions. American Journal Education, 17, 45–57.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology and EducationOpen University of CataloniaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations