After several months of personal journey towards accepting that the coronavirus pandemic is real (see Jandrić 2020a, b), in early March, it dawned on me that the pandemic does not need only so-called essential workers. Self-quarantined after returning from abroad weeks before the Croatian government locked down the country, I immediately wrote an editorial for Postdigital Science and Education and argued that 'While doctors, nurses, politicians, food suppliers, and many other brave people self-sacrifice to support our daily survival, this editorial argues that academics have a unique opportunity, and a moral duty, to immediately start conducting in-depth studies of current events.' (Jandrić 2020c: 234) I had no idea how to even approach these studies, yet I had a strong feeling that something needed to be done urgently. So, I just did what I know best and issued calls for 3 different types of Covid-19-related material to be published in Postdigital Science and Education: short testimonies, longer commentary articles, and full-length original articles. I had no idea how much material I would receive, what this material would look like, and what I would do with this material. I just had a deep gut feeling that we are witnessing a unique time in human history, a once-in-a-lifetime event, that needs to be recorded as it unfolds. For better or for worse, I decided to follow that feeling. This general vision, without a clear idea of what I was doing, paved a bumpy road for the development of this collection. On 17 March 2020, I shared the Call for Testimonies on Postdigital Science and Education social network sites and I emailed it to the journal's mailing list. Based on my previous experience with similar calls, I expected to receive 10 to 15 contributions and produce a standard-length collective article aiming at postdigital dialogue (Jandrić et al. 2019) about the pandemic. Yet my call went 'viral', at least for academic standards, and a couple of weeks later, I had more than 50,000 words written by more than 80 authors. So how do I make sense of all that material? My dear friend and Associate Editor of Postdigital Science and Education, Sarah Hayes, came to my rescue. We first tried to make sense of the contributions using critical discourse

It is commonly suggested that emerging technologies will revolutionize education. In this paper, two such emerging technologies, artificial intelligence (AI) and educational robots (ER), are in focus. The aim of the paper is to explore how teachers, researchers and pedagogical developers critically imagine and reflect upon how AI and robots could be used in education. The empirical data were collected from discussion groups that were part of a symposium. For both AI and ERs, the need for more knowledge about these technologies, how they could preferably be used, and how the emergence of these technologies might affect the role of the teacher and the relationship between teachers and students, were outlined. Many participants saw more potential to use AI for individualization as compared with ERs. However, there were also more concerns, such as ethical issues and economic interests, when discussing AI. While the researchers/developers to a greater extent imagined ideal future technology-rich educational practices, the practitioners were more focused on imaginaries grounded in current practice.

The use of blended learning environments in higher education has rapidly increased in the 21st century. Tools and techniques that initially were used in experimental distance education courses are today part of mainstream education with blended learning as a continuum between traditional face-to-face teaching and pure online courses.In this wide variety of course design there are success stories, but at the same time examples with low pass rates and poor learning outcomes.The research question for the study is: Which aspects have to be considered in the design and implementation of blended learning in higher education? To answer this question, 15 selected publications were analysed in a I iterature review with the aim to identify important and critical factors when implementing blended learning in higher education.As a result of the inductive analysis around 50 found factors have been grouped into 10 Categories of critical factors and 4 Blended learning perspectives in a strive to identify critical aspects of contemporary blended learning in a comprehensive structure. One conclusion is that blended learning today can be seen as a mature educational concept still in need of redesign. Problems that were reported two decades ago are now combined with other more recently identified critical factors. The presented categories and perspectives might be valuable as a checklist for implementations of blended learning and hopefully a useful base for further research in the field of blended learning. KEYWORDSBlended learning, Technology enhanced learning, E-learning, Higher education INTRODUCTIONBlended learning in higher education has rapidly increased in the 21st century and as pointed out by Garrison & Kanuka (2004) the adoption of blended learning approaches in higher education is inevitable. From being an experimental concept in distance education courses, blended learning are today part of mainstream education. In a broad definition blended learning could be seen as the continuum between traditional fa ce-to-fa ce teaching and pure online distance courses (Watson, 2008) but the more complex definition must also include the concept of integrating the strengths of synchronous and asynchronous learning activities in a thoughtful design (Garrison & Kanuka , 2004).The synchronous and asynchronous teaching and learning design could be seen as part of the technological and multimodal dimension in Picciano's (2009) conceptual blended learning model. There is no single type of blended education, and along the continuum from fully online to fully fa ce-to-face extremes there will probably be a growing number of variations. Online curricula will evolve as a natural component of ICTE Journal, 2017, 6(2) : 37-51 instruction design at the same time as an increasing number of primarily distance-based programs can include face-to-face teaching components (Wa tson, 2008).In this wide variety of instructional design several success stories have been identified, but at the same time there are many reports on failures in design...

No abstract

The idea of building intelligent machines has been around for centuries, with a new wave of promising artificial intelligence (AI) in the twenty-first century. Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) is a younger phenomenon that has created hype and promises, but also been seen as a threat by critical voices. There have been rich discussions on over-optimism and hype in contemporary AI research. Less has been written about the hyped expectations on AIED and its potential to transform current education. There is huge potential for efficiency and cost reduction, but there is also aspects of quality education and the teacher role. The aim of the study is to identify potential aspects of threat, hype and promise in artificial intelligence for education. A scoping literature review was conducted to gather relevant state-of-the art research in the field of AIED. Main keywords used in the literature search were: artificial intelligence, artificial intelligence in education, AI, AIED, teacher perspective, education, and teacher. Data were analysed with the SWOT-framework as theoretical lens for a thematic analysis. The study identifies a wide variety of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for artificial intelligence in education. Findings suggest that there are several important questions to discuss and address in future research, such as: What should the role of the teacher be in education with AI? How does AI align with pedagogical goals and beliefs? And how to handle the potential leak and misuse of user data when AIED systems are developed by for-profit organisations?