top of page

DM7915 Research Proposal

Shortcuts:

Research question:

 

How can UK primary schools (KS1&KS2) future proof learning in new technologies: augmented, virtual and mixed realities. Are children able to utilise these programs as a problem solving tools, driving development of new skills and new thinking for their future employability in a technology driven society. 

​

Outline

​

Are we educating the workforce of the future the skills to think in these environments?

Future thinking, involves new technologies, robust learning environments and design thinking that will set our future workforce apart from computer machine learned skills. Are teachers equipped to meet those challenges? Do we have the digital technology to support future learning?

​

Scope

​

Limitations of my study are to investigate state schools only, the English national curriculum latest version 2022, and the Levelling Up UK government paper on the future of education. The articles for this research were compiled following a systematic search using the universities’ online library, Google Scholar, email citation alerts and reference sections of relevant articles and literature reviews.

 

Definition of terms can be found in Appendix 1.

​

Preface

​

My search criteria spans the years 2014 – 2022, in particular AR in education. I have had particular struggles trying to find literature to review that is relevant to the UK education system. See Appendix 2.
Most material I have found has been based on education systems of Canada and the USA.

 

The closest article to my question that has similar themes is that by Melanie J. Maas and Janette M. Hughes in their paper: Virtual, augmented and mixed reality in K–12 education: a review of the literature. Canada 2020. This piece of research fits best as it is determined to question to assist the  future workforce abilities form within education. Maas and Hughs work relies upon the Ontario government education services definitions of what our future workforce will need. This takes into account work already undergoing in other nations including England Ireland, Scotland and Wales. 

 

The document published in 2016, ‘21st Century competencies for Ontario’, looks globally as well as locally at the needs of education. They see the five main headlines as: 

  1. Defining 21st century competencies.

  2. The Ontario context.

  3. Identify and define 21st century competencies in teaching and learning. 

  4. Implications for practice.  

  5. Implications for education policy. 

 

My qualitative research question is asking the wider community in the UK about the education being delivered at KS1 & KS2 and to whether it is future appropriate for the needs of our society. What skills will employers look for in the next 20 years?

​

“Studies in health and well-being have found that characteristics such as perseverance, grit, and tenacity are sometimes a more accurate predictor of success than IQ scores.”

(p11 Ontario 2016)

​

In the document (Appendix 2) it outlines: Fundamental skills, personal management skills, teamwork skills seen to be the areas that would secure future employment. The document also added innovative skills such as, creativity, problems solving, risk taking as important additions to the future skills list. 

​

See thought cloud diagram below:

​

 

​

fig 1.png

Through the frameworks (Appendix 3), we can see the global wants and needs of future skills in a workforce, but how are we addressing these in the UK? This will be a basis of the questions I have for education educators.

 

My literature review and the research of theory models that follow are used to assist my knowledge with reflexive or recursive relationship with the subject. Also it ensures that the quality of my academic approach is sound. These models are: Teaching, Learning and 21st century skills. 

 

My research question can be defined as an action project (Byrne, D. (2017), defining my research in this way will mean that I am looking at how the world of teaching at KS1&2 can take on board new technologies such as AR into the classroom. By providing teachers with a training pack or a training course will the intervention make a difference? Will it do what it was supposed to do? 

​

I will evaluate the research by using qualitative data gathered from the UNDEREARTH project (Gover K & Scahill T 2022), also the feedback from the training materials designed in the final project.

Teach

Teaching

​

How we acquire and embed new knowledge, in an organisation.

​

Klob’s four stage process of how we acquire and embed new knowledge (opposite) is through the Experiential Learning Cycle.

​

The model allows for a flow and change of thought, for playfulness and experiences, and allows for this to occur continually. 

 

My involvement in an arts project has enabled me first hand to model and observe the embedding of new knowledge. The UNDEREARTH digital art project was funded to bring new technology awareness to 24 Year 4 children from two Hampshire primary schools. The 10 week mentee position gave me an insight into training, lesson planning, engagement and enabling learners to try something new. We delivered AR, 3D scanned models, stop motion animation, computer coding, storytelling, character creation, plot development, key framing, charcoal drawing, and other art forms. Visit the website : www.underearth.co.uk and read my blog on the first 6 weeks here:

https://www.scahilldesign.co.uk/post/underearth-cas-air-project-2022

 

Klob’s model identified with the delivery of the project, we experimented with mud painting, reflected on what our characters would think and feel, we visited a site when we physically connected with the earth, and we used abstraction through imagery - free thinking... they could create anything.

Fig 2.png

It became very apparent that we were helping to embed knowledge of these different digital forms and the link home with parents required them to be made aware of the value of technology in their children’s lives and their learning. Through the interactive exhibition the parents who attended thought the project and the way their children reacted to it was nothing but positive. 

​

Educators need to enable useful and creative ways to engage and empower children, families, schools and communities to seek new ways of learning. I am going to investigate the ALPS method by Alistair Smith that accelerates learning but also works with positive self esteem and problem solving can-do attitudes.

 

Having ‘TIME’ in education seems to be the laughable word. Even at the end of the TV broadcast of Howard Gardner and his 5 future minds lecture, the teachers scoffed at the idea of being able to find time to talk with colleagues about bringing curriculum goals closer together.

fig 3.png

Seeking a wider remit than just the individual I need to consider the implementation of future thinking within the education systems in England. During my research The book ‘The art of empowerment’ by Johnson, R. & Redmond D 1998, provides a useful and proven framework, and whilst dated in the last century, has much to offer.

 

Perhaps the question of placing new technology and future thinking into the classroom should look at the local level on how the school could adapt and find the time to empower its teachers, to future proof its curriculum, to release the pressure from above and teachers to have ownership of a vibrant learning environment.

 

Changing an organisation to adopt new technology, Theory O (Beer, M. and Nohria,N.(2000) or a ‘Bottom up’ approach would demonstrate immediately and practically when things work and when they do not. This form of ideation and refinement can only happen in the context of a classroom, and would provide powerful examples for the teaching team.

Empowerment requires clear goals and clear leadership. The ‘Essential Steps to Empowerment’ are critical in order that we can trust in the team and organisation. Opposite is my addition to the Johnson & Redmond diagram where I have paced the external factors of commitment and trust = empowerment. 

​

Educators fundamentally want to help teach young minds, to give them hope, aspirations, quality, and care for their students future selves.  I believe a ‘coaching system’ to aid understanding will need to be delivered for the teaching team to get on board. We can learn from children, Children in turn learn from us, we all learn together a metacognative approach will need to be adopted. 

 

My research question essentially deals with change management and technological implementation. Johnson and Redmond state that “organisational goals cannot be met without involving the whole workforce” p5. Thinking of implementing an AR strategy or programme into KS1 and KS2 the empowerment of people will be wider than the teaching and stakeholder community.

Brown, A. D in the book Organisational Culture (1998), they illustrated a model of culture change from Gagliardi. He proposed that culture change was in smaller steps and not dismissive of the previous cultural pedagogy. Implementing new and future tech into a school system would suit this approach and would be the path of least resistance. 

 

Empowerment (defined by Johnson and Redmond) is required for the views of the culture to be valued, the metacognitive approach (Learning to Learn) could help to implement AR into primary schools, the barriers need to find a solution.  Process and function in order to manage the TIME deficit, if teachers could spend less time planning, more of their time learning new skills and delivering in their own way a classroom activity that pleases them and their students. The Oak National Academy was used extensively in lock down as a resource, this could be a solution to the problem of TIME.

fig 4.png

Learning

​

The Accelerated Learning Cycle, is used within teaching today. See Appendix 4. Smith’s learning cycle illustrates the process a learner goes through in order to make sense of the teaching, this is a significant consideration to my project if I am to produce an AR course for children. 

​

Accelerated learning cycle, in its essence is: Showing the Bigger Picture, learners will need to use a variety of intelligences and tools, be able to demonstrate what they know, and reflect on what has been learned and where to go next, see Fig 5.

​

The Accelerated learning cycle closely relies on understanding personality types and the ways in which students learn, including the VAK model of learning designed by Walter Burke Barbe (1979) along with Swassing, R.H. & Milone, M.N.

Fig 5.png
Learning
Fig 6.png

According to the VAK model the best way of lesson planning for a successful class should ideally incorporate activities that facilitate all three learning styles to cater to the needs of all pupils. This is relevant to the implementation of AR/VR/MR in a classroom setting, some learners will embrace the style, the advanced tech and the auditory response that can be enabled. And for others it will need elements turned off for the session to best fit all learning styles in a VAK theory.

​

“It is not enough to describe a problem-solving process and to describe how individuals differ in their approach to or use of it. It is also necessary to identify specific techniques of attending to individual differences.”

William G. Huitt 

​

Adding to my theory of successful implementation of a course in AR in schools. They will use sight, sound and movement to engage in learning delivery. 

21st century skills 

​

Personality types

​

William G. Huitt , 1992, his paper on problem solving and decision making using the Myers-Briggs type indicators was useful to evaluate. He discusses the research conducted for personality and cognitive styles which lead to individual differences on individuals ability to problem solve and make decisions, I felt this could affect the implementation of technology into the classroom environment. If we want children to adapt and adopt future tech we need to work within group and individual process and function, so we can deliver a course that can offer the best outcomes and assist future learning and thinking.

Huitt uses the ideas around the Myer-Briggs theory, which is adapted from the theory of ‘psychological types’ produced by Carl Gustav Jung. Jung based his theory on personalities on identifying 16 personality types, which Jung viewed as stereotypes. The heart of Myers Briggs theory from Jungs work is that there are four preferences.  See diagram opposite.

 

A failure of the Myers-Briggs type indicators have been proven not to be as robust and accurate if the test is repeated, but as a starting point, I think that it is useful to consider it and the impact of the theory’s surrounding personality types for learning and the needs within Augmented/Virtual/Mixed reality teaching.

fig 7.png
21 C

Minds of the future 

​

fig 8.png

Howard Gardner’s Lecture in the RSA series (2015) reveals his theory of 5 Minds. He describes these 5 minds as future thinkers, see fig 8.

 

His world renowned research into education and the development of a ‘good’ society is respected, and has led to long running psychology projects, this work is shaping education at secondary to college level.

 

In the lecture Gardener says “Ideally as a policy maker, I would hope that we could engender all five of these minds in young people” (ref: 45.50mins 2015 TV show) 

 

The 5 Minds listed above, are required to enable young people to be valued and become useful members in future technology driven society. How far is this happening already? I feel this will need to be researched further than I have time for in this document.

Minds

Conclusion

​

Education, personality and learning styles along with the creative mind need to be brought together to allow for future thinking.  The main objectives for the project research are: 

  • Are we educating the workforce of the future, the skills to think in technology environments?

  • What will set our future workforce apart from computer machine learned skills (AI) that will narrow
    the employability market?

  • Are teachers in primary schools equipped to meet those challenges, now and in the future?

  • Is the English school system providing robust learning environments to allow for design thinking?

 

The UNDEREARTH project allowed me to gain primary evidence. Plus informal interviews with the teachers connected to the project. The technology involved confirmed my belief that UNDEREARTH was a project they could implement long after our delivery had finished. This has spurred me on to think about developing the resources to enable teachers and learners to access future technology and future thinking.

 

The final project is concerned with new and evolving technologies and wider issues such as the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, particularly surrounding climate change these are essential to informing future minds, our choices impact our world. The Royal Society for Computing (2021) speaks of the tech industry contributing “...from around 1.5% to 6.0% of annual global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, depending on how the sector’s boundaries are defined.” 

​

I intend to keep the climate change goals to the front of my project materials and a consideration in the course delivery. The UNDEREARTH project utilised a woodland (Andover Trees United) as the children’s creative impetus where they learnt about the earth and why woodlands are important as part of this successful tech project, I intend to find ways within the curriculum to deliver the same results.

Fig 9.png
conclusion

Next Steps

 

PHASE ONE:

  • Write up a report about the implementation of the Year 4 school project and the outcomes from the 6 delivered sessions within the two schools. 

  • Ask for feedback from both school teachers incl heads, also the lead artists Katt Grover on her program idea.

 

Ontological approach: the reality of the situation in schools and current learning.

  • by using the national curriculum framework.

  • by further researching the Levelling Up UK government paper.

  • via a questionnaires aimed at teaching staff.

 

My primary source of proof of concept will be taken from the UNDEREARTH Project from the two primary schools involved, signed up through Chapel Arts Studios.

 

Feedback from these will build the information I will require later in the creation of assets.

 

PHASE TWO:

I see the main questions I need to investigate are:

  • What DFEs the national curriculum say about teaching technology to this age group?

  • What key teaching theories teachers learn before they go out to teach. 

  • What professional development opportunities are available to teachers?

  • What would the structure look like to deliver a successful technical program into schools?

  • Who currently DFEs this and is it consistent in schools in the UK?

  • Are they encouraged to an educational practice that develops technology within the classroom – AR, MR 

  • Educators today and the impact of new technology on teachers time and personal development.

 

Also engage with education professors at University of Winchester (UoW) for their input if possible.

  • Bill Lucas, professor of Learning and Director of the centre for real-world Learning UoW,  

  • Caroline Stockman Senior lecturer of educational studies - specialism of technology, education and culture,

  • Jessica Hancock head of learning and teaching at UoW, CASTLE MA lead in HE teaching, 

  • Tim burgess Senior lecturer Primary ITE, he researched ‘the creative curriculum’ 2005.

 

PHASE THREE: 

Technologies I will analyse for future learning skills potential for a 21st century workforce, linking these with curriculum needs as defined in current government documents; National curriculum framework and the Levelling Up paper.

Programmes could be but not exclusive to: Scratch, Artivive, Qlone 3D scanning, Procreate, Blender, Adobe Aero, Mixamo.

 

PHASE FOUR:

  • Creation of the teaching resources to empower meaningful curriculum learning with new technologies. Using a analysis + synthesis for design thinking

  • Create a brand for the consultancy project

  • Create a website for the collection of materials  and a subscription model for the materials themselves.

Next Steps
next steps diagram DM7915_edited.jpg

References

The content of this webpage is for my MA course in Digital Media Practice. All references can be found in the buttons at the top of the page. All design work is my own unless otherwise stated. June 2022.
If you have any questions please contact me scahilldesigner@gmail.com

bottom of page