Pedagogical documentation in the era of digital platforms: Early childhood educators’ professionalism in a dilemma

IF 0.6 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Emilia Restiglian, J. Raffaghelli, Monica Gottardo, Paola Zoroaster
{"title":"Pedagogical documentation in the era of digital platforms: Early childhood educators’ professionalism in a dilemma","authors":"Emilia Restiglian, J. Raffaghelli, Monica Gottardo, Paola Zoroaster","doi":"10.14507/epaa.31.7909","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The so-called logic of datafication and platformisation, as a consolidated business model for the BigTech industry with applications to education (van Dijck et al., 2018), can also reach (and affect) early education and care. In a kid’s culture that values documenting and sharing with parents, social media and instant messaging are widely used. Educators feel overloaded with the challenges posed by digital platforms, but contextual issues are relevant to finding ways for resistance and engagement in political actions to transform the edtech platforms’ dominance. Investigating the specific discourses and approaches to platformisation from early education professionals appears relevant to promoting not only awareness but also ways to rethink professional and political agency. Our preliminary study is based on 14 individual interviews and one group interview with educators in the Italian region of Veneto. The results of our thematic analysis indicate that achieving a balance between technology-based documentation and children’s privacy is not straightforward. Also, educators are calling for policies and further support for technology-driven services and activities that make thoughtful and conscious use of technology to avoid harming children. On these bases, we advance recommendations to deepen early childhood educators’ professional development requirements in a data-driven and post-digital society.\n ","PeriodicalId":11429,"journal":{"name":"Education Policy Analysis Archives","volume":"22 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education Policy Analysis Archives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.31.7909","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The so-called logic of datafication and platformisation, as a consolidated business model for the BigTech industry with applications to education (van Dijck et al., 2018), can also reach (and affect) early education and care. In a kid’s culture that values documenting and sharing with parents, social media and instant messaging are widely used. Educators feel overloaded with the challenges posed by digital platforms, but contextual issues are relevant to finding ways for resistance and engagement in political actions to transform the edtech platforms’ dominance. Investigating the specific discourses and approaches to platformisation from early education professionals appears relevant to promoting not only awareness but also ways to rethink professional and political agency. Our preliminary study is based on 14 individual interviews and one group interview with educators in the Italian region of Veneto. The results of our thematic analysis indicate that achieving a balance between technology-based documentation and children’s privacy is not straightforward. Also, educators are calling for policies and further support for technology-driven services and activities that make thoughtful and conscious use of technology to avoid harming children. On these bases, we advance recommendations to deepen early childhood educators’ professional development requirements in a data-driven and post-digital society.  
数字平台时代的教学文件:处于两难境地的幼儿教育工作者的专业精神
所谓的数据化和平台化逻辑,作为大科技行业应用于教育领域的综合商业模式(van Dijck et al.在重视记录和与父母分享的儿童文化中,社交媒体和即时通讯被广泛使用。教育工作者对数字平台带来的挑战感到不堪重负,但背景问题与寻找抵制和参与政治行动的方法有关,以改变教育技术平台的主导地位。调查早期教育专业人员对平台化的具体论述和方法,似乎不仅有助于提高认识,还有助于重新思考专业和政治机构。我们的初步研究基于对意大利威尼托大区教育工作者的 14 次个人访谈和 1 次小组访谈。我们的专题分析结果表明,要在技术文件和儿童隐私之间取得平衡并非易事。此外,教育工作者呼吁制定政策,进一步支持技术驱动型服务和活动,深思熟虑、有意识地使用技术,避免对儿童造成伤害。在此基础上,我们提出了在数据驱动和后数字社会中深化幼儿教育工作者专业发展要求的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Education Policy Analysis Archives
Education Policy Analysis Archives Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
164
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Education Policy Analysis Archives/Archivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas/Arquivos Analíticos de Políticas Educativas (EPAA/AAPE) is a peer-reviewed, open-access, international, multilingual, and multidisciplinary journal designed for researchers, practitioners, policy makers, and development analysts concerned with education policies. EPAA/AAPE accepts unpublished original manuscripts in English, Spanish and Portuguese without restriction as to conceptual and methodological perspectives, time or place. Accordingly, EPAA/AAPE does not have a pre-determined number of articles to be rejected and/or published. Rather, the editorial team believes that the quality of the journal should be assessed based on the articles that we publish and not the percentage of articles that we reject. For EPAA “inclusiveness” is a key criteria of manuscript quality. EPAA/AAPE publishes articles and special issues at roughly weekly intervals, all of which pertain to educational policy, with direct implications for educational policy. Priority is given to empirical articles. The Editorial Board may also consider other forms of educational policy-relevant articles such as: -methodological or theoretical articles -commentaries -systematic literature reviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信