Laws, regulations and policies have influenced, guided and regulated the systems and conditions surrounding my digital and collaborative learning innovation. Consciously and unconsciously, they have contributed to my innovation.
Within our school there are a number of policies that have been relevant to this innovation. Namely our school’s copyright policy, use of images policy and ICT policy. The ICT Policy is also supported by a Kawa of Care document. The Kawa of Care is a document that all students and whānau sign to indicate they understand and accept the rights and responsibilities associated with using iPads and Chromebooks. The Kawa of Care also outlines the expectation of students to participate in and become CyberSmart Learners. CyberSmart focuses on empowering our young people to engage in online behaviour and thinking that elevates positive actions (Manaiakalani, n.d.). It is school policy that students and whānau sign the Kawa of Care document, which sets the platform for effective use of digital tools within our kura. This approach aligns with UNESCO (2013), who advocate for schools to promote the responsible and healthy use of mobile technologies. Throughout the innovation, the students' use of iPads was generally appropriate, with most students consistently demonstrating the Kawa of Care. I believe this to be a result of the explicit teaching relating to the appropriate use of devices and the Kawa of Care. By bringing school policy to life i.e. explicit and consistent teaching and learning related to the policy, it has become a relevant, living policy, rather than something that is used to hold students accountable when things go wrong.
These policies were formed to give effect to the Education Act 1989, and have been refreshed and updated where necessary to give effect to the subsequent Education and Training Act 2020. Unlike policies, a law is a set of directives set by the Government to allow for the smooth functioning of the country. Laws constitute the minimum behavioural rules to be followed and apply to everyone that the legislative body has legislation over (UpJourney, 2019). The Education and Training Act 2020 contains provisions that are directly relevant to how schools should manage an incident involving digital technology when it is involved in an incident (Ministry of Education, n.d.). These acts and provisions guided the application of my innovation, albeit indirectly and less explicitly when compared against the policy framework which there was a direct and explicit connection with.
The Technology Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007) has recently been revised to incorporate Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko learning (Ministry of Education, 2018). From the beginning of this year, the teaching of digital technologies through and within the curriculum is expected for all students from year 1. This change was designed to ensure students develop skills to be innovative creators of digital solutions, rather than just users and consumers of digital technologies (Ministry of Education, 2018). This curriculum area has two technological areas; computational thinking skills and developing and designing digital outcomes. Within my classroom, students are generally working to progress outcome indicator one. Whilst using iPads, students have been exposed to some applications and gained an understanding that digital devices store content, which can be retrieved later (Ministry of Education, 2018). The Technology Curriculum guided my planning, implementation and expected outcomes for students and supported me to make explicit connections between my innovation, its desired outcomes, and the New Zealand Curriculum.
The e-Learning Planning Framework (eLPF) (Ministry of Education, n.d.) is a framework to help schools and teachers reflect on and evaluate their e-learning capability based on five phases - pre-emerging, emerging, engaging, extending and empowering. After reviewing the eLPF, I considered that my innovation aligned with the engaging phase as I endeavoured to use digital technologies appropriately to support higher-order (deep/critical), collaborative teaching and learning. In order to meet the extending phase, I would need to have established authentic collaboration with students to develop co-constructed learning throughout the innovation.
By examining the laws, regulations and policies operating within my school and the wider education sphere, I have a newfound appreciation of the relevance of these. By considering these from a view of how they affect my innovation, I have been able to synthesise relevant laws, regulations and policy and now have a much clearer understanding of their impact on my professional practice and the learning culture within my classroom.
References
Manaiakalani. (n.d.). Manaiakalani CyberSmart - Smart Learners. Retrieved from https://sites.google.com/manaiakalani.org/manaiakalani-cybersmart/being-cybersmart/smart-learners
Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Digital Technology: Safe and responsible use in schools. Retrieved December 1, 2020, from https://education.govt.nz/school/digital-technology/digital-technology-guide-for-schools/digital-technology-safe-and-responsible-use-in-schools/new-cd-page-3/the-legislation-and-rules/
Ministry of Education. (n.d.). E-learning Planning Framework. Retrieved from
http://elearning.tki.org.nz/Professional-learning/e-Learning-Planning-Framework#framework
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum. Retrieved from https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum
Ministry of Education. (2018). Digital Technologies and Hangarau Matihiko learning. Retrieved from https://www.education.govt.nz/our-work/changes-in-education/digital-technologies-and-hangarau-matihiko-learning/
UNESCO. (2013). Policy guidelines for mobile learning. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000219641_eng
UpJourney. (2019). What Is the Difference Between Law, Policy, and Regulation, According to 7 Experts. https://upjourney.com/what-is-the-difference-between-law-policy-and-regulation
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comment.