Information and digital literacy in education via the digital path

The primary focus of any instruction should be to focus on the learning outcomes or capabilities you are trying to achieve. Bloom (1956, 1964) identified three types of learning outcomes: cognitive (knowledge), affective (attitudes, emotions, and values), and psychomotor (skills). For each outcome, instructors should also consider the level of outcome they are trying to achieve. So, if you are teaching cognitive skills, such as mathematics or language, you should determine if you need your students to remember (level 1), understand (level 2), apply (level 3), analyze (level 4), evaluate (level 5), or create (level 6) (Krathwohl, 2002). Once you have determined the level(s) of outcome, you should align your assignments to those levels. A multiple-choice exam can assess level 1 and possibly level 2 outcomes, but it will not assess students’ abilities to apply, analyze, evaluate, or create. Consequently, you will need to devise more challenging assignments to elicit higher levels of performance from students, using essays, problem-based learning assignments, and case studies, for example.

Many learning providers will be welcoming new learners to their courses in September and this new Jisc guide looks in depth at how organisations can plan an inclusive induction programme. Whether you are taking a hybrid, face-to-face or blended learning approach you will find information about accessibility, wellbeing and helpful resources. You will also find many case studies to inspire you.

In March 2020, UK higher education embarked on a sudden shift to digital learning. In the vast majority of cases, it wasn’t a designed and fully realised transformation of teaching and learning.

It was an emergency response to an unprecedented situation that relied on upskilling staff rapidly enough to enable them to deliver the remainder of their courses, and assess them, in as effective and equitable way as possible. 

The extent of this digital shift, and the tools, techniques and platforms used, varied not only between universities but also within them, depending on the demands of different departments and the confidence and capabilities of the staff.