About the course
There are different ways to approach the course aimed at developing digital competencies. The first might be an effort to impart a specific instrumental skill. In such a concept, we would draw up a list of tools and tasks that the student has to cover and, using instructional design. We could guide him through the points of the entire course. We believe that such a concept does not belong in the university because it does not build real competence.
The DigComp authors stress that these are competencies that are essential for civic life. That's why we've decided on a course concept that takes the student through individual competencies that are structured into five headings. We'll try to show him what their relationship is to the society we live in as much as possible. That he chooses to develop some competence (which we firmly hope he will) also practically is primarily his personal decision. It should be able to find the appropriate material background for such learning.
We use a "tool chapter" included in each thematic dimension to make the course more practical. It's about choosing the most important or exciting apps for a student to try. They may not all, of course, but within each circuit, they must select five instruments to use and describe the instruments and reflect on what they are used for and why.
Course assignments are built primarily reflectively. We want the student to think for himself about a society that would not have a given competence developed in the long term or the consequences of such a state. At the same time, we are trying to establish a level of auto evaluation in the course to learn something new.
There is also an emphasis on peer review. Each student must give feedback five times a semester on the tasks of their classmates (typically two).
If you find any errors or shortcomings in the course, we would be happy to hear from you. Students' behavior is monitored anonymously on the web by web analytics.
The site will be available to you after the course so that you can come back to it (and the materials from it) during or after the course. Data analytics tools are used in the course.
Course schedule
Start of course - Information and Data Literacy
- Homework: 8.10.
- Peer Assessment: 15.10.
Safety Module
- Homework: 19.11.
- Peer Assessment: 26.11.
Communication and Collaboration Module
- Homework: 22.10.
- Peer Assessment: 29.10.
Problem Solving Module
- Homework: 3.12.
- Peer Assessment 10.12.
Digital Content Creation Module
- Homework: 5.11.
- Peer Assessment: 12.11.
Final test: By 15.1. 2024
Dear students, there may be a situation for some of you where you give feedback to someone else, and there may be a new situation where you receive it from your classmates. We want to start by mentioning two things - giving and receiving feedback is extremely important. It is an integral part of the learning process, and it is also being targeted at foreign universities or MOOCs. So don't take feedback from others or others as something that's inexpert or less valuable. On the contrary, you are learning a great deal. So we're not about making our job easier (we'll randomly go through your feedback and assignments) but about stimulating the learning in you and a way of thinking that can't be supported much else. But if you get feedback that you think is entirely wrong and inadequate, please let us know -- we'll look, evaluate, make corrections if necessary.
Feedback will be displayed on your notepads. It's not clear-cut, but it's not that bad either. We trust you'll get used to it. There is a component at IS MU for feedback work, which we were heavily involved in testing last year. We hope you'll be pleased with it.
Because repair tasks are drawn by machine through an algorithm, at the closing time of the corresponding commit, it is highly unpleasant if you turn in the task late - and it doesn't matter all that much whether it's by five seconds or two days. Your assignment won't go to anyone anymore, and you won't read anything either.
What to focus on in feedback?
Generally, you follow two areas:
1. Formal correctness - does the task have all parts? Can it be considered fulfilled? Did the creator forget something? In this area, you check that the task has everything it has. Please include this aspect for all sub-questions in the evaluation.
2. The content aspect - it's more complicated here, of course - but try to see if what the student turned in makes sense. Try to keep any comments constructive, don't be afraid to help or advise others. In general, please avoid saying that someone has dismissed something, but rather ask questions or offer something else to or give your own perspective on the issue to help your classmate broaden his horizons. You should write at least two to three sentences on each sub-question. You help the others, and you learn as well.
Remember that feedback should be specific and addressed - sentences like great homework or okay, they're fine, but they won't be constructive.