Abstract
AbstractOver the past decade, self-assessment tools have garnered significant attention in the interest of measuring the skillset required by educators and students to function productively and ethically in digitally mediated environments, particularly in relation to education policy implementation. Since stated beliefs do not always align with actual practice, gaps have been shown to occur between self-reporting and performance in practice. Having an external assessor can counteract this imbalance; however, both perspectives should be taken into consideration as both are equally important. Against this background, this study develops and validates two rubric-based frameworks that supplement self perceived student and educator digital competence with classroom observation and task performance analysis. The DigComp and DigCompEdu self-assessment frameworks were used as a starting point to develop a student rubric and an educator rubric, respectively, underpinned by criteria validated in previous frameworks. The expert technique, which is the base for the Delphi Method, was used to validate each rubric, after which the rubrics were implemented at a Spanish university to test their reliability. The results indicated that the force of agreement across raters was consistent and both rubrics had a high degree of internal consistency, therefore both instruments are reliable.
Funder
Universidad del País Vasco
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Library and Information Sciences,Education
Reference52 articles.
1. Alaoutinen, S. (2012). Evaluating the effect of learning style and student background on self-assessment accuracy. Computer Science Education, 22(2), 175–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2012.692924
2. Amin, H., & Mirza, M. S. (2020). Comparative study of knowledge and use of Bloom’s digital taxonomy by teachers and students in virtual and conventional universities. Asian Association of Open Universities Journal, 15(2), 223–238.
3. Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
4. Austen, L., Parkin, H., Jones-Devitt, S., McDonald, K., & Irwin, B. (2016). Digital capability and teaching excellence: an integrative review exploring what infrastructure and strategies are necessary to support effective use of technology enabled learning (TEL). Project Report. Gloucester, The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. Sheffield Hallam University. Retrieved 24 November 2023 from https://shura.shu.ac.uk/13750/.
5. Basilotta-Gómez-Pablos, V., Matarranz, M., Casado-Aranda, L. A., & Otto, A. (2022). Teachers’ digital competencies in higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(8), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00312-8