Treść głównego artykułu


Artykuł analizuje doświadczenia nauczycieli związane z ich zaangażowaniem w filmy refleksyjne w ramach otwartego kursu online Pedagogical Information and Communication Technology (ICTPED). Celem kursu jest rozwój profesjonalnych kompetencji cyfrowych norweskich nauczycieli. Studium rozważa również, jak zaangażowanie nauczycieli w filmy do refleksji może wzmocnić ich kompetencje cyfrowe. Analiza doświadczeń nauczycieli opiera się na perspektywie kulturowo-historycznej, w szczególności na koncepcyjnym wkładzie Galperina. Metody mieszane zostały wykorzystane do analizy danych ukazujących zaangażowanie nauczycieli w filmy refleksyjne w latach 2016-2020. Ustalenia ujawniają, że zaangażowanie nauczycieli w filmy do refleksji przyczyniło się do rozwoju ich koncepcyjnego zrozumienia i ich zdolności do uczenia się online. W ten sposób, ich kompetencje cyfrowe mogły zostać wzmocnione.

Słowa kluczowe

kursy onlie masowe otwarte kursy internetowe ocenianie tożsamośc cyfrowa

Szczegóły artykułu

Jak cytować
Engeness, I., & Nohr, M. (2022). Ocena jako nauka. Forum Oświatowe, 35(Nr 2(68), 31-52.


  1. Armellini, A., & Padilla Rodriguez, B. C. (2016). Are massive open online courses (MOOCs) pedagogically innovative? Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 14(1), 17-28.
  2. Avidov-Ungar, O., & Forkosh-Baruch, A. (2018). Professional identity of teacher educators in the digital era in light of demands of pedagogical innovation. Teaching and Teacher education, 73, 183-191.
  3. Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition–Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5), 367-379.
  4. Barnard-Brak, L., Paton, V. O., & Lan, W. Y. (2010). Profiles in self-regulated learning in the online learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 11(1), 61-80.
  5. Beauchamp, C., & Thomas, L. (2009). Understanding teacher identity: An overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(2), 175-189.
  6. Brandmo, C., Panadero, E., & Hopfenbeck, T. N. (2020). Bridging classroom assessment and self-regulated learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 27(4), 319-331.
  7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2020). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative research in psychology, 1-25.
  8. Brevik, L. M., Gudmundsdottir, G. B., Lund, A., & Strømme, T. A. (2019). Transformative agency in teacher education: Fostering professional digital competence. Teaching and Teacher education, 86, 102875.
  9. Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. L. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies & academic achievement in online higher education learning environments: A systematic review. The internet and higher education, 27, 1-13.
  10. Caena, F., & Redecker, C. (2019). Aligning teacher competence frameworks to 21st century challenges: The case for the European Digital Competence Framework for Educators (Digcompedu). European Journal of Education, 54(3), 356-369.
  11. Castaño-Muñoz, J., Kalz, M., Kreijns, K., & Punie, Y. (2018). Who is taking MOOCs for teachers’ professional development on the use of ICT? A cross-sectional study from Spain. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 27(5), 607-624.
  12. Castleberry, A., & Nolen, A. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10(6), 807-815.
  13. Chauhan, A. (2014). Massive open online courses (MOOCS): Emerging trends in assessment and accreditation. Digital Education Review(25), 7-17.
  14. Chen, J. (2017). An e-Portfolio-Based Model for the Application and Sharing of College English ESP MOOCs. Higher Education Studies, 7(2), 35-42.
  15. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.
  16. Daradoumis, T., Bassi, R., Xhafa, F., & Caballé, S. (2013, October). A review on massive e-learning (MOOC) design, delivery and assessment. In 2013 eighth international conference on P2P, parallel, grid, cloud and internet computing (pp. 208-213).
  17. IEEE. del Mar Sánchez-Vera, M., & Prendes-Espinosa, M. P. (2015). Beyond objective testing and peer assessment: alternative ways of assessment in MOOCs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 12(1), 119-130.
  18. Downes, S. (2013). Assessment in MOOCs [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://
  19. Engeness, I. (2021a). Developing teachers’ digital identity: towards the pedagogic design principles of digital environments to enhance students’ learning in the 21st century. European Journal of Teacher Education, 44(1), 96-114.
  20. Engeness I. (2021b) The Development of Mental Actions and the Orienting Basis of Actions. In: I. Engeness (Ed.) P.Y. Galperin’s Development of Human Mental Activity. Cultural Psychology of Education, vol 14. Springer, Cham.
  21. Engeness, I., & Nohr, M. (2020). Engagement in Learning in the Massive Open Online Course: Implications for Epistemic Practices and Development of Transformative Digital Agency with Pre-and In-Service Teachers in Norway. Cultural Historical Psychology, 16(3), 71-82.
  22. Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational technology research and development, 53(4), 25-39.
  23. Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., Sein-Echaluce, M. L., & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2016). From massive access to cooperation: lessons learned and proven results of a hybrid xMOOC/cMOOC pedagogical approach to MOOCs. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 13(1), 24.
  24. Friesen, M. D., & Besley, S. C. (2013). Teacher identity development in the first year of teacher education: A developmental and social psychological perspective. Teaching and Teacher education, 36, 23-32.
  25. Gamage, D., Whiting, M. E., Rajapakshe, T., Thilakarathne, H., Perera, I., & Fernando, S. (2017). Improving assessment on MOOCs through peer identification and aligned incentives. Proceedings of the Fourth (2017) ACM Conference on Learning@Scale, Gorospe, J. M. C., Olaskoaga, L. F., Barragán, A. G.-C., Iglesias, D. L., & Agirre, B.
  26. O.-A. (2015). Formación del profesorado, tecnología educativa e identidad docente digital. RELATEC: revista latinoamericana de tecnología educativa, 14(1), 45-56.
  27. Ilomäki, L., Paavola, S., Lakkala, M., & Kantosalo, A. (2016). Digital competence–an emergent boundary concept for policy and educational research. Education and Information Technologies, 21(3), 655-679.
  28. Instefjord, E. J., & Munthe, E. (2017). Educating digitally competent teachers: A study of integration of professional digital competence in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher education, 67, 37-45.
  29. Kelentrić, M., Helland, K., & Arstorp, A. (2017). Professional digital competence framework for teachers. The Norwegian Centre for ICT in Education, 1-74.
  30. Laurillard, D. (2014). Anatomy of a MOOC for teacher CPD. The Pedagogy of a MOOC for CPD: Report on an IOEUNESCO Course.
  31. Laurillard, D. (2016). The educational problem that MOOCs could solve: professional development for teachers of disadvantaged students. Research in Learning Technology, 24.
  32. Lee, D., Watson, S. L., & Watson, W. R. (2019). Systematic literature review on self-regulated learning in massive open online courses. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1).
  33. Littlejohn, A., Hood, N., Milligan, C., & Mustain, P. (2016). Learning in MOOCs: Motivations and self-regulated learning in MOOCs. The internet and higher education, 29, 40-48.
  34. Lu, O. H. T., Huang, J. C. H., Huang, A. Y. Q., & Yang, S. J. H. (2017). Applying learning analytics for improving students engagement and learning outcomes in an MOOCs enabled collaborative programming course. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(2), 220-234.
  35. Martin, J., & Sugarman, J. (2000). Between the modern and the postmodern: The possibility of self and progressive understanding in psychology. American Psychologist, 55(4), 397.
  36. McGarr, O., & McDonagh, A. (2019). Digital Competence in Teacher Education. Output 1 of the Erasmus+ Funded Developing Student Teachers’ Digital Competence (DICTE) Project, 2019.
  37. Meek, S. E., Blakemore, L., & Marks, L. (2017). Is peer review an appropriate form of assessment in a MOOC? Student participation and performance in formative peer review. Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 42(6), 1000-1013.
  38. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
  39. Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 422.
  40. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and methods: Integrating theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
  41. Pintrich, PR, Zusho, A (2002) The development of academic self-regulation: The role of cognitive and motivational factors. In: Wigfield, A, Eccles, JS (eds) Development of Achievement Motivation. San Diego: Academic, 249–284.
  42. Robson, J. (2018). Performance, structure and ideal identity: Reconceptualising teachers’ engagement in online social spaces. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 439-450.
  43. Ross, J., Sinclair, C., Knox, J., Bayne, S., & Macleod, H. (2014). Teacher experiences and academic identity: The missing components of MOOC pedagogy. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 57-69.
  44. Schunk, D. H. (2014). Learning theories: an educational perspective. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  45. Schutz, P. A., Cross Francis, D., & Hong, J. (2018). Research on teacher identity: Introduction to mapping challenges and innovations. In P. A. Schutz, J. Hong, & D. Cross Francis (Eds.), Research on teacher identity (pp. 3–12). Retrieved from doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-93836-3_1
  46. Serdyukov, P., & Hill, R. (2013). Flying with clipped wings: Are students independent in online college classes. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching, 6(1), 52-65.
  47. Stetsenko, A. (2017). The transformative mind: Expanding Vygotsky’s approach to development and education. NY: Cambridge University Press.
  48. Suad Nasir, N. i., & Kirshner, B. (2003). The cultural construction of moral and civic identities. Applied Developmental Science, 7(3), 138-147.
  49. Van Manen, M. (2016). Phenomenology of practice: Meaning-giving methods in phenomenological research and writing. Routledge.
  50. Vivian, R., Falkner, K., & Falkner, N. (2014). Addressing the challenges of a new digital technologies curriculum: MOOCs as a scalable solution for teacher professional development. Research in Learning Technology, 22.
  51. Wang, C.-H., Shannon, D. M., & Ross, M. E. (2013). Students’ characteristics, self-regulated learning, technology self-efficacy, and course outcomes in online learning. Distance Education, 34(3), 302-323.
  52. Wu, T., Yao, Y., Duan, Y., Fan, X., & Qu, H. (2016, April). NetworkSeer: Visual analysis for social network in MOOCs. In 2016 IEEE Pacific Visualization Symposium (PacificVis) (pp. 194-198). IEEE.
  53. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 64-70.
  54. Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American educational research journal, 45(1), 166-183.
  55. Zimmerman, B. J., & Pons, M. M. (1986). Development of a structured interview for assessing student use of self-regulated learning strategies. American educational research journal, 23(4), 614-628.
  56. Aagaard, T., & Lund, A. (2019). Digital Agency in Higher Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning. Routledge Focus.