In Norway, digital skills are defined as an essential proficiency in the national curricular plans, and learning worldwide is in many ways changed by contemporary Web 2.0 technologies. Even so, teacher training is lagging behind when it comes to developing digital learning cultures and providing digital role models for future teachers. At the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), we used a Massive Online Open Course (MOOC) approach to provide a digital professional development (DPD) program to faculties at the Department of Teacher Training. A main idea was to develop this program at the meso-level (horizontally) with some mutual structures and offerings, avoiding a top-down approach, which, based on experience, is likely to fail. The findings in this study present a four-step model, the collaborative learning approach (CLA), to account for the development and implementation of a blended learning MOOC (bMOOC) for professional digital competency development. Vol. 13, No. 1-2018, p. 24–39 ISSN ONLINE: 1891-943X 25 NORDIC JOURNAL OF DIGITAL LITERACY | VOL. 13 | NO. 1-2018 This article is downloaded from www.idunn.no. © 2017 Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). INTRODUCTION Digital competence, which comprises digital knowledge, skills, attitude and literacy, has become a key competence in education in most developed countries. Norway is currently one of the most digitized countries within the OECD area. Digital penetration in several sectors of the society demonstrates Norway’s digital maturity and readiness (OECD 2017). However, the government’s strategy for digital competence development (Kunnskapsdepartementet 2017a) emphasizes the need to further strengthen the use of ICT in the entire educational system to prepare for working life. The focus on the possibilities afforded by digital technology and the emphasis on digital skills development put Norway in the digital forefront and make the country a case well worth studying. In 2005, the Norwegian government defined digital skills as one of five key competences (Kunnskapsdepartementet 2005) and since then, all high school students have been provided with laptops. Initially, digital skills were linked to practical knowledge of various software programs (Erstad 2010). Over the years, however, a more sophisticated understanding of digital competence has developed; the upcoming generation should be able to use and produce multi-media content productively to learn, communicate, collaborate and present their work to various audiences. Furthermore, digital skills and digital literacy involve the ability to act responsibly online and to be conscious about an ethical use of the internet (Utdanningsdirektoratet 2015). Lately, there has also been a discussion as to the dangers that lurk online, for instance cyberbullies, haters, and trolls1, and on how to enable teachers and parents to protect their children against digital risks2 (PACER Center 2013). Despite government policies, Norwegian teacher training institutions are lagging behind when it comes to encouraging new teachers to use ICT as tools for learning, communication and collaborative knowledge development. A report from 2013 (Tømte et al. 2013) states that teacher training in Norway does not live up to the expectation to educate digitally competent teachers, and that faculties in these institutions are mainly making use of traditional teaching methods. When used, technology is mostly limited to learning management systems (LMS) to administer learning, presentation tools to scaffold lectures, interactive tasks with instant feedback and digital portfolios to store and retrieve student work. Even if the teacher trainees belong to the digital generation, as coined by Tapscott (1998), they have limited knowledge about digital technology and social media when it comes to using these as tools to scaffold learning in didactical settings. Langseth (2012) shows similar findings and concludes that this is a fair picture of teacher training in Norway. The research suggests that teacher educators and student teachers follow the digital development in general, but that their awareness vis-à-vis digital technology and digital professional development is more poorly developed. This points to a challenge for the teacher training institutions. In this study, we followed a group of preand in-service teacher educators in a vocational teacher-training program. The study took place from January 2014 to December 2016 at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU). The teacher educators developed a blended learning MOOC (bMOOC) on digital learning and offered it to fellow 1. See for instance Commonsense Media, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/cyberbullying 2. Medietilsynet/ Nettmobbing: http://www.medietilsynet.no/barn-og-medier/nettmobbing/ INGER DAGRUNN LANGSET, DAN YNGVE JACOBSEN AND HALVDAN HAUGSBAKKEN 26 This article is downloaded from www.idunn.no. © 2017 Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). teacher-training faculties as a resource to enhance their digital professional competencies. A main research goal in our study is to identify elements that will contribute to a change in digital practices after completing a digital professional development (DPD) program. DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT IN INSTITUTIONAL SETTINGS Over the last forty years, many institutions in higher education worldwide have initiated faculty development programs and other measures to enhance the quality of teaching and learning. Institutions usually organize the training in designated units where university teachers will come for shorter programs, usually between 7, 5 and 15 ICT credits. During the same period, learning environments in universities have changed significantly. Pedagogical understanding and discourse has developed, technology has offered unprecedented opportunities for access to education and enrichment, academic staff have engaged in reflections on their teaching, and recruiting students from new populations – ethnic, socio-economic and gender-wise – has indeed required new educational approaches (Chalmers & Gardiner 2015). According to Bates, web 2.0 technologies, such as blogs, YouTube, smartphones and cameras, virtual worlds, and e-portfolios enable learners to collect, create, transform, adapt and share learning materials. Furthermore, these online tools can be used for collaborative learning, group work and projects, problem solving and creative thinking to develop necessary aptitudes in the knowledge economy (Bates 2010). So far, higher educational institutions have been slow on the uptake of the benefits afforded by new technologies. Bound by tradition and accepted practices, and organized in geographically defined units, Bates (op. cit.) suggests that the old universities are likely to fall behind the more flexible “for-profit universities” in the pursuit of new methods of teaching and learning. According to Bates, this is mainly so because faculties will try to implement new methods in the existing structures and practices that have been there, literally, for centuries. A fairly common and well-known approach to digitalization is individual, tool-focused and campus-based courses to implement tools already purchased by the organization. Typically, training relates to a certain digital infrastructure, such as an LMS, that the institution expects faculties to use in their courses. According to Kennedy (2006) such top-down oriented approaches normally comprise of centrally or externally delivered course content that will support existing routines, curriculum plans or even a political agenda. In addition, educators are also usually left with a limited degree of autonomy. Not well received by educators, these approaches do not necessarily serve the purpose of new digital practices or support the necessary change in educational cultures. Nonetheless, the digital delay is probably also rooted in the long tradition of academic freedom, where autonomy to design courses according to personal pedagogical beliefs and established pathways is a key feature. A long tradition of freedom of individual professional development is also a main value contributing to this (Mårtensson & Roxå 2016). These traditions leave digitalization in the hands of individual faculties and let personal interest, values and preferences point out the direction and milestones for development. 27 NORDIC JOURNAL OF DIGITAL LITERACY | VOL. 13 | NO. 1-2018 This article is downloaded from www.idunn.no. © 2017 Author(s). This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY-NC 4.0 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Neither institutionalized top-down approaches at the macro-level, nor individualized private initiatives at the micro-level seem to bring the institutions up to standard when it comes to new technologies and disruptive practices. The meso-level, which is to be found in between these positions, also entails problems. Research into higher education in Scandinavia (Mårtensson & Roxå op. cit.), shows that peer engagement for teaching is highly collegial and contextualized. At the meso-level, we find micro-cultures that can be described as strong or developing. Mårtenson & Roxå find that strong cultures are resilient to change and tend to develop from micro-cultures where individuals co-shape their habits, norms and traditions over time. Faculties in these settings consider themselves autonomous and self-controlled and share certain assumptions regarding teaching and assessment that are implicit in the culture. Strong micro-cultures also take certain ways of securing high quality teaching methods with long traditions for granted. Developing micro-cu

中文翻译：

---

数字化专业发展：采用协作学习方法将高等教育带入数字化时代

在挪威，数字技能被定义为国家课程计划中的一项基本技能，当代 Web 2.0 技术在许多方面改变了全球学习。即便如此，在发展数字学习文化和为未来教师提供数字榜样方面，教师培训仍然落后。在挪威科技大学 (NTNU)，我们使用大规模在线开放课程 (MOOC) 方法为教师培训系的教职员工提供数字专业发展 (DPD) 计划。一个主要想法是在中观层面（横向）开发该程序，具有一些相互的结构和产品，避免自上而下的方法，根据经验，这种方法可能会失败。本研究的结果提出了一个四步模型，即协作学习方法 (CLA)，负责开发和实施用于专业数字能力发展的混合式学习 MOOC (bMOOC)。卷。13, No. 1-2018, p. 24–39 ISSN 在线：1891-943X 25 北欧数字素养杂志 | 音量。13 | 不。1-2018 本文从www.idunn.no下载。© 2017 作者。这是一篇根据知识共享 CC-BY-NC 4.0 许可 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) 条款分发的开放获取文章。引言 数字能力包括数字知识、技能、态度和素养，已成为大多数发达国家教育的关键能力。挪威目前是经合组织地区内数字化程度最高的国家之一。数字在社会多个部门的渗透表明挪威的数字成熟度和准备程度（经合组织 2017）。然而，政府的数字能力发展战略（Kunnskapsdepartementet 2017a）强调需要在整个教育系统中进一步加强信息通信技术的使用，为工作生活做好准备。对数字技术提供的可能性的关注和对数字技能发展的重视使挪威处于数字前沿，使该国成为一个值得研究的案例。2005 年，挪威政府将数字技能定义为五项关键能力之一（Kunnskapsdepartementet 2005），从那时起，所有高中生都配备了笔记本电脑。最初，数字技能与各种软件程序的实践知识相关联（Erstad 2010）。然而，多年来，人们对数字能力有了更深入的了解。下一代应该能够有效地使用和制作多媒体内容来学习、交流、协作并向各种受众展示他们的作品。此外，数字技能和数字素养涉及负责任地在线行动和意识到互联网的道德使用的能力（Utdanningsdirektoratet 2015）。最近，人们还讨论了潜伏在网上的危险，例如网络欺凌、仇恨者和巨魔 1，以及如何使教师和家长能够保护他们的孩子免受数字风险 2（PACER 中心 2013）。尽管有政府政策，挪威教师培训机构在鼓励新教师使用信息通信技术作为学习、交流和协作知识开发的工具方面仍然落后。2013 年的一份报告（Tømte 等人。2013) 指出，挪威的教师培训没有达到培养数字化教师的期望，并且这些机构的教师主要使用传统的教学方法。使用时，技术主要限于用于管理学习的学习管理系统 (LMS)、用于搭建讲座的演示工具、具有即时反馈的交互式任务以及用于存储和检索学生作业的数字作品集。即使受训教师属于数字一代，正如 Tapscott（1998 年）所创造的那样，当他们将数字技术和社交媒体用作在教学环境中支撑学习的工具时，他们对数字技术和社交媒体的了解也很有限。Langseth (2012) 显示了类似的发现，并得出结论，这是挪威教师培训的公平图景。研究表明，教师教育工作者和学生教师普遍关注数字化发展，但他们对数字化技术和数字化专业发展的认识较不发达。这对教师培训机构提出了挑战。在这项研究中，我们在职业教师培训计划中跟踪了一群在职和在职教师教育工作者。该研究于 2014 年 1 月至 2016 年 12 月在挪威科技大学 (NTNU) 进行。教师教育者开发了一个关于数字学习的混合式学习 MOOC (bMOOC) 并将其提供给 1。例如见 Commonsense Media，https://www.commonsensemedia.org/cyberbullying 2. Medietilsynet/Nettmobbing：http://www. medietilsynet.no/barn-og-medier/nettmobbing/INGER DAGRUNN LANGSET，DAN YNGVE JACOBSEN 和 HALVDAN HAUGSBAKKEN 26 本文从 www.idunn.no 下载。© 2017 作者。这是一篇根据知识共享 CC-BY-NC 4.0 许可 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) 条款分发的开放获取文章。教师培训学院作为提高其数字专业能力的资源。我们研究的一个主要研究目标是确定在完成数字专业发展 (DPD) 计划后有助于改变数字实践的元素。机构环境中的数字化发展 在过去的四十年中，世界各地的许多高等教育机构启动了教师发展计划和其他措施，以提高教学质量。机构通常在指定的单位组织培训，大学教师将在那里参加短期课程，通常在 7、5 和 15 个 ICT 学分之间。在同一时期，大学的学习环境发生了重大变化。教学理解和话语已经发展，技术为获得教育和丰富内容提供了前所未有的机会，学术人员对他们的教学进行了反思，并且从新的人群中招收学生——种族、社会经济和性别——确实需要新的教育方法（Chalmers & Gardiner 2015）。根据 Bates 的说法，Web 2.0 技术，例如博客、YouTube、智能手机和相机、虚拟世界和电子档案，使学习者能够收集、创建、转换、改编和共享学习材料。此外，这些在线工具可用于协作学习、小组工作和项目、解决问题和创造性思维，以培养知识经济中的必要能力（Bates 2010）。迄今为止，高等教育机构在利用新技术带来的好处方面进展缓慢。受传统和公认做法的约束，并以地理定义的单位组织，贝茨（同前）认为，在追求新的教学和学习方法方面，旧大学很可能落后于更灵活的“营利性大学” . 根据贝茨的说法，这主要是因为学院将尝试在已有数百年历史的现有结构和实践中实施新方法。一种相当普遍和众所周知的数字化方法是个体化、以工具为中心和基于校园的课程，以实施组织已购买的工具。通常，培训与机构希望教师在课程中使用的特定数字基础设施（例如 LMS）相关。根据 Kennedy (2006) 的说法，这种自上而下的方法通常包括集中或外部提供的课程内容，这些内容将支持现有的常规、课程计划甚至政治议程。此外，教育工作者通常也只有有限的自主权。教育工作者不太接受，这些方法不一定服务于新的数字实践的目的或支持教育文化的必要变革。尽管如此，数字延迟可能也源于学术自由的悠久传统，根据个人教学理念和既定途径设计课程的自主权是一个关键特征。个人职业发展自由的悠久传统也是促成这一点的主要价值（Mårtensson & Roxå 2016）。这些传统让数字化掌握在各个学院的手中，让个人兴趣、价值观和偏好指明发展的方向和里程碑。27 北欧数字素养杂志 | 音量。13 | 不。1-2018 本文从www.idunn.no下载。© 2017 作者。这是一篇根据知识共享 CC-BY-NC 4.0 许可 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) 条款分发的开放获取文章。无论是宏观层面的制度化自上而下的方法，在涉及新技术和破坏性实践时，微观层面的个性化私人举措似乎也无法使机构达到标准。介于这些位置之间的中间层也带来了问题。对斯堪的纳维亚高等教育的研究（Mårtensson & Roxå op. cit.）表明，同伴参与教学是高度学院化和情境化的。在中观层面，我们发现可以描述为强大或发展中的微文化。Mårtenson & Roxå 发现强大的文化能够适应变化，并且倾向于从个体随着时间的推移共同塑造他们的习惯、规范和传统的微观文化发展而来。在这些环境中，教师认为自己是自主的和自我控制的，并分享某些隐含在文化中的关于教学和评估的假设。强大的微观文化也将确保具有悠久传统的高质量教学方法的某些方法视为理所当然。开发微铜