Introduction
There are a number of extant standards frameworks that describe national and international expectations in terms of teacher competency with digital technologies. They come from differing sources: some are theoretical and drawn from systematic research while others are systemic policy guidelines or mandatory requirements. They appear to be either millstones or milestones. The millstone is political and can cynically be seen to be part of the ‘quality’ agenda adopted by systems (Dinham, 2013; Pyne, 2012b). The milestone is aspirational and can be seen positively as marking out both personal learning goals and system transformation. This chapter will introduce and critique selected frameworks.
CRITICAL QUESTIONS
What is the purpose of the national and international frameworks that describe and map teacher competency with digital technologies?
Do they adequately describe the characteristics of a teacher with a high level of digital competency?
Are they useful in guiding individuals towards digital competency?
If there is a singular obsession of the late 20th and early 21st centuries in industrialised nations, it is the unprecedented need to categorise people in terms of competence or skill. Measurement, high-stakes testing, and standardisation will come to be recognised as symptoms of the pathological condition of regulatory reification. For example, we subject children to national and international tests divorced from the context of their lives and then use the results of these tests for national and international comparisons as if mathematics or reading were now Olympic events and the playing field was level (Dinham, 2013; McDonald, 2012; Pyne, 2012a).
Review the options below to login to check your access.
Log in with your Cambridge Higher Education account to check access.
If you believe you should have access to this content, please contact your institutional librarian or consult our FAQ page for further information about accessing our content.