Researching student agency in digital education as if the social aspects matter: students’ experience of participatory dimensions of online peer assessment

En metode til undersøgelse af digitale interaktioner fra de studerendes perspektiv

“…Argumentet i artiklen er, at afsaettet kan give os mulighed for at afdaekke de mange aspekter, der tilsammen påvirker udbyttet af interaktionen og måden, hvorpå interaktionens vaerdi formes. I den forskning, som artiklen traekker på, er disse ideer og principper udtrykt via modellen 'The adapted gestalt framework' (APAG) (Stenalt, 2021b), som er en analytisk ramme, der kan hjaelpe forskere, undervisere og paedagogiske konsulenter til at konceptualisere forbindelsen mellem mennesker, teknologi og aktiviteter på forskellige niveauer.…”

“…Derfor kan nogle tiltag, der har til hensigt at manipulere interaktionen, kraeve en mere omsiggribende strategi end andre. Se Stenalt (2021b) for en detaljeret analyse af den digitale interaktionen.…”

Digital student agency: Approaching agency in digital contexts from a critical perspective

“…The starting point of the paper is not to develop a new definition of agency as such but to broaden understandings of agency as a primarily individual phenomenon with a more relational understanding of agency (Burkitt, 2016;Stenalt, 2021), building on the premises of the digital. Moreover, while emerging into an arena with blurry boundaries between human and nonhuman agency (Fenwick & Landri, 2012;Leonardi, 2010), the paper focuses on students as the primary research object and uses conceptualisations of human agency as a stepping stone.…”

“…Sources refer here to the broad array of internal dispositions, relational, and contextual sources or resources known from mainstream agency frameworks. While the sources cultivate student agency in higher education contexts (Jääskelä, Poikkeus, et al, 2020;Toom et al, 2017), research has also made clear that technology and educational instructions can hinder access to sources of agency (Stenalt, 2021). Moreover, Ashwin and McVitty (2015) have emphasised that educational planning of student engagement includes stratified and directive access to knowledge and influence.…”

“…Following Bayne et al (2019), students might turn to acts of resistance if they cannot control their selfrepresentation. Similarly, research has found limited options for self-representation to decrease student engagement (Stenalt, 2021).…”