From Tools to Wellbeing: A Proposed Digital Learning Maturity Model (Dlmm)

Holley, Debbie; Holley, Debbie

doi:10.21125/inted.2022.1235

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Potential solutions are offered in the institutional strategic mapping of student co-creation digital partnerships, such as those advocated by Biggins, Holley and Supa (2022); wider societal solutions are suggested by the reframing of the digital narrative suggested by Helsper (2021) who calls for more nuanced approaches in the addressing of socio-digital inequalities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing for student wellbeing: challenging assumptions about where our students learn

Holley

2023

JLDHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Student wellbeing has been foregrounded during the recent Covid-19 pandemic but this is broad brush and contested with different models being followed across the sector. One aspect of concern is the extent to which access to the technology institutions require students to use contributes to additional stress. A student survey (n=30) in one UK HEI revealed the ‘hidden spaces’ where students learn, and the findings indicate that the formal institutional Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), with its sophisticated learning analytics, did not fully capture the student experience. This work was followed up with a digital wellbeing survey (n=172) and, by drawing together the two datasets, we report on a more nuanced student experience. Initial findings indicate a schism between formal and informal spaces where students learn, especially within our institutional reporting of students working online. Examples include students using their own preferred tools such as WhatsApp, Trello, and Slack to communicate outside the formal channels; these behaviours thereby devalue the validity of the VLE datasets that student-facing staff are encouraged to use for decision-making. This paper offers insights into accessing and interpreting data in ways that are more useful for academics, learning developers, and learning designers, and suggests ways in which we can effectively frame student support by putting the ‘real’ student experience at the centre of our practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing for student wellbeing: challenging assumptions about where our students learn

Holley

2023

JLDHE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figure 1 shows an extract of some of the responses. From research undertaken by the authors into the use of learning in a digital environment, a digital learning maturity model (DLMM) has been developed (Biggins, Holley and Supa, 2022). From this model and its research, we extracted seven factors that were perceived to be important in order to gain the view of the attendees on their relative priority.…”

Section: Authors' Reflectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student wellbeing and technostress: critical learning design factors

Holley

2022

jldhe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In higher education, student wellbeing is now the responsibility of all of us. During the Covid-19 pandemic, the pivot by universities to online learning positioned technology as a panacea, and saw students being signposted to digital resources for digital skills and wellbeing support. Our use of the concept, technostress, is derived from the Student Minds report (2021) entitled ’Life in a pandemic’. It refers to the stress experienced by students when using technology within higher education, given the sector's expectations of their technical abilities. Our paper reported on the results of a digital health and wellbeing survey (n=103) with surprising responses from 80 students to the survey question about technostress. The findings indicate students feel let down by teaching staff who struggle with the mediating tools of their online trade – technology – and show little empathy for those they teach. McDougall and Potter (2018) argue that human-centred approaches, prioritising staff and students’ immediate and lifelong wellbeing rather than the mere use of digital tools, are key to success in developing policies for student wellbeing. The findings indicate that the formulaic approaches offered by academic staff to students in response to their digital health and wellbeing challenges will chime with learning developers championing student support as emancipatory practice. Attendees were invited to reflect on their own experience of technostress and share their considerations as to how to widen understanding of this phenomenon. The presentation concluded by recommending an integrated model for framing student wellbeing underpinned with exceptional learning design and considered the optimum on a continuum for the use of technological tools.

show abstract

From Tools to Wellbeing: A Proposed Digital Learning Maturity Model (Dlmm)

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Designing for student wellbeing: challenging assumptions about where our students learn

Designing for student wellbeing: challenging assumptions about where our students learn

Student wellbeing and technostress: critical learning design factors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About