NIDIT-Glossary
Here you can find a compilation of our most important definitions of terms related to digital and international teaching.
Augmented reality refers to an augmented reality in which digital elements are added to our surroundings in a live view. This is often done with the help of mobile devices, like smartphones or tablets. Possible applications can be found in the leisure sector, e.g. in games or smartphone applications, in the professional context, e.g. in training courses, in advertising, in commerce or in education.
Source:
Dörner, R; Broll, W.; Grimm, P.; Jung, B. (2019): Virtual und Augmented Reality (VR/AR). Grundlagen und Methoden der Virtuellen und Augmentierten Realität, Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Blended learning is the combination of on-site formats and online formats, such as e-learning elements, which complement each other and do not take place simultaneously. The teaching/learning elements are combined into one unit in such a way that the advantages of the respective learning form can be used in a beneficial way.
Digital teaching literacy, which is currently not yet known as a fixed term, is understood in the NIDIT project as higher education didactic competences in digitally supported teaching and learning settings. The competence grid by Eichhorn et al. (2017) serves as the basis for this. It describes a total of eight different dimensions (see below). Due to these different competence areas or dimensions, digital teaching literacy is to be regarded as a cross-sectional competence.
The eight dimensions of the competence grid (Eichhorn et al. 2017):
- Operate and use
- Inform and research digitally
- Communicate and cooperate digitally
- Digital teaching
- Digital identity and career planning
- Digital science
- Produce and present
- Analyse and reflect
Sources:
Eichhorn, M.; Müller, R.; & Tillmann, A. (2017): Entwicklung eines Kompetenzrasters zur Erfassung der ‚Digitalen Kompetenz‘ von Hochschullehrenden. In C. Igel (Hrsg.), Bildungsräume. Proceedings der 25. Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft für Medien in der Wissenschaft (GMW), Münster, New York: 2017. S. 209-219
Our Labs for Innovative Teaching aim to create meeting places where there is a willingness to be flexible, to try things out, to make mistakes and to work together without hierarchies in dealing with digital technologies. All university teachers and tutors are welcome in our labs, regardless of their previous knowledge. We offer fully equipped workstations and hardware to make it easier to get started with topics such as virtual reality or augmented reality and to overcome scepticism about the technology. Through the open workshop atmosphere, we want to promote exchange between interested people and thus encourage experimentation. We accompany these processes with further training and consulting services. In this way, we would like to sensitise teachers to the use of new technologies and inform them about the possible applications and their potential.
In the current linguistic practice of German universities, synchronous hybrid teaching refers to the simultaneous offering of online and face-to-face participation in courses. Part of the participants are physically present on site and the rest is connected online from different places. This combination of digital teaching with on-site formats allows students to participate in such formats flexibly and from any location.
Sources:
Reinmann, G. (2021): Hybride Lehre - ein Begriff und seine Zukunft für Forschung und Praxis, in: Impact Free 35. Journal für freie Bildungswissenschaftler. Hamburg. ( https://epub.sub.uni-hamburg.de/epub/volltexte/2021/122564/pdf/Impact_Free_35.pdf ) [last access on 13.03.2023]
Schulmeister, R. (2017): Presence and Self-Study in Blended Learning. The special role of presence. eleed. Hagen. ( https://eleed.campussource.de/archive/12/4502 ) [last access on 13.03.2023]
Virtual international teaching is a planned learning process, in which different participants (students, lecturers, etc.) from at least two different nationalities use digital media in teaching and learning processes, as well as to communicate among themselves. Virtual interaction makes it possible that students and teachers do not necessarily have to be in the same physical location: Purely virtual or hybrid learning settings enable different teaching formats aside from face-to-face scenarios. Virtual international teaching can be synchronous (e.g. via web conference) or asynchronous. As a special form of distance learning, virtual international teaching improves the possibilities of intercultural interchange in higher education institutions without the need for physical mobility.
Virtual reality refers to a computer-generated environment with scenes and objects that appear to be real, which can be experienced with the help of specific software and hardware. By using a VR headset and corresponding controllers, users are given the feeling of being immersed in a virtual world by using high-resolution displays, 360° or 3D content, and auditory and haptic features. Possible VR applications can be found in the leisure sector with single and multi-player games, in the professional context, e.g. in training courses and simulations or in collaborative teamwork applications, and in the education sector.
Source:
Dörner, R; Broll, W.; Grimm, P.; Jung, B. (2019): Virtual und Augmented Reality (VR/AR). Grundlagen und Methoden der Virtuellen und Augmentierten Realität. Springer Verlag. Berlin.
Within the framework of academic monitoring, effectiveness analysis in the context of digital teaching and learning can be used to examine and verify the desired goals (e.g., increase in knowledge of certain contents among students after attending a course, learning goals when attending a continuing education course for teachers, suitability of the course for the target group) and their achievement. For this purpose, specific and individual sub-goals are usually defined and their degree of achievement is measured, which enables a more detailed examination (including non-quantifiable goals and benefit aspects of digital teaching and learning offers). This is done on the basis of different research designs or evaluation cycles, in which different research methodological expertise (e.g., qualitative and quantitative research methods) is incorporated and thus often co-determines the focus of the working method. The challenge with effectiveness analyses is that assessments of "greater learning success" cannot be attributed exclusively to digital teaching and learning opportunities due to many potential "influencing factors" (e.g., differences in students' prior knowledge). (cf., Bremer, Krömker, Voß, 2010).
Source:
Bremer, C.; Krömker, D.;Voss, S. (2010): Wirtschaftlichkeits- und Wirksamkeitsanalysen sowie Vorgehensmodelle zur Einführung und Umsetzung von E-Learning an Hochschulen, in: Holten, Roland/Nittel, Dieter (Hrsg.): E-Learning in Hochschule und Weiterbildung – Einsatzchancen und Erfahrungen, Bielefeld 2010
The impact analysis conducted as part of action research at the THM is intended as an offer for lecturers who ask questions about their own teaching and want to approach them with scientific methods and in exchange with university didactics experts. In this way, the lecturers themselves determine the process of knowledge. At the same time, their teaching becomes their own object of research. The lecturers become researchers in the context of higher education didactics (Huber 2011, 2014). In a continuation of SoTL (Scholarship of Teaching and Learning), we at the ZekoLL integrate subject-specific methodological competence, primarily from empirical social research, into joint research and development work (cf. Huber 2011, p. 15 or also Huber 2014, p. 30).
Results from action research help to reflect on one's own teaching in a science-led way, to research the perspective of students on newly tested teaching/learning offers and thereby to further develop teaching/learning concepts in a way that is beneficial to learning in the long term. At the same time, this is a contribution to staff development in that teachers, with the support of expertise in higher education didactics, systematically and question-led reflect on their own teaching activities. This process promotes the competence of teachers to question teaching/learning situations above and beyond concrete projects (cf. Grassl 2016, p. 52ff).
Sources:
Huber, L. (2011). Scholarship of Teaching and Learning – Forschung zum (eigenen) Lehren. In B. Berendt, B. Szczyrba, H.-P. Voss & J. Wildt (Hrsg.), Neues Handbuch Hochschullehre. Lehren und Lernen effizient gestalten. 51. Ergänzungslieferung, J 1.11. Stuttgart: Raabe.
Huber, L. (2014). Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. Konzept, Geschichte, Formen, Entwicklungsaufgaben. In L. Huber, A. Pilniok, R. Sethe, B. Szczyrba & M. P. Vogel (Hrsg.), Forschendes Lehren im eigenen Fach. Scholarship of teaching and learning in Beispielen. Blickpunkt Hochschuldidaktik. 125, S. 19-36. Bielefeld: Bertelsmann.
Grassl, R. (2016). Veränderung durch Fragen. Die sokratische Methode als Instrument der Aktionsforschung. In E. Cendon, A. Mörth & A. Pellert (Hrsg.), Theorie und Praxis verzahnen. Lebenslanges Lernen an Hochschulen, Band 3, S. 51-66. Münster: Waxmann.