# Digital Technologies for Learning, Teaching and Assessment: Tackling the Perennial Problem of Policy and Practice

Deirdre Butler, Margaret Leahy

► To cite this version:

Deirdre Butler, Margaret Leahy. Digital Technologies for Learning, Teaching and Assessment: Tackling the Perennial Problem of Policy and Practice. IFIP World Conference on Computers in Education (WCCE), Aug 2022, Hiroshima, Japan. pp.687-696, 10.1007/978-3-031-43393-1_61. hal-05533299

HAL Id: hal-05533299

https://inria.hal.science/hal-05533299v1

Submitted on 2 Mar 2026

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

ifip

International Federation for Information Processing

This document is the original author manuscript of a paper submitted to an IFIP
conference proceedings or other IFIP publication by Springer Nature. As such, there
may be some differences in the official published version of the paper. Such
differences, if any, are usually due to reformatting during preparation for publication or
minor corrections made by the author(s) during final proofreading of the publication
manuscript.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

# Digital Technologies for Learning, Teaching and Assessment: Tackling the Perennial Problem of Policy and Practice

Deirdre Butler ID and Margaret Leahy(✉) ID

Institute of Education, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland
{deirdre.butler,margaret.leah}@dcu.ie

**Abstract.** Education policy implementation is a complex, evolving process that involves many stakeholders often with seemingly conflicting and opposing visions. This paper presents an account of work in progress in which the authors are conducting an analysis of the enactment of a strategy for digital learning in schools in Ireland. The aim of the study is both to analyse and theorise the extent to which the policy has achieved its aims but also to identify a means of tackling the perennial challenge of policy development and enactment at the school and classroom level. This paper presents the findings of the first phase of analysis.

**Keywords:** policy · practice · digital technologies for learning

## 1 Introduction

As we engage in developing the next iteration of a Digital Strategy for Schools (DSS) to 2027 in Ireland, consideration needs to be taken of what has happened since the launch of the DSS in 2015 [1] and in particular if and how all the parts of an education system worked together to support the type of learning envisioned in the DSS, 2015–2020.

## 2 Context

The publication of the Digital Strategy for Schools 2015–2020 [1] in Ireland was perceived as the glue that would not only leverage existing educational policies but would also be the catalyst for enabling the move towards systemic transformation of Irish schools [2]. Underpinned by the vision “to realise the potential of digital technologies to enhance teaching, learning and assessment so that Ireland’s young people become engaged thinkers, active learners, knowledge constructors and global citizens to participate fully in society and the economy” (1, p. 5), the strategy defines embedding digital technology as ‘Moving beyond ICT integration, where digital technology is seamlessly used in all aspects of teaching, learning and assessment to enhance the learning experiences of all students’ [1, p. 15]. Four themes underpin the Digital Strategy, which specifies a set of actions under each theme:
* Theme 1: Teaching, learning and assessment using ICT

* Theme 2: Teacher professional learning

* Theme 3: Leadership, research and policy

* Theme 4: ICT infrastructure.

A Digital Learning Framework (DLF) for primary and post-primary schools was subsequently published by the Department of Education and Skills [3, 4] followed by Digital Planning Guidelines and a Planning Template. The DLF is designed as an instrument to enable schools to engage with and implement elements of the DSS [1]. It aims to guide educators to (i) reflect on their current understanding and use of digital technologies in their practice and (ii) on how to use digital technologies effectively to transform their teaching, learning and assessment practices. The DLF was adapted from the UNESCO ICT Competency Framework for Teaching [5–8], DigComp Org [9] and DigComp Edu [10], for the Irish context and is intended to be used in tandem with the Looking at Our Schools school self-evaluation framework [11, 12] which is a process that all schools are expected to engage in.

The DLF is articulated as a set of domains and standard statements across two dimensions: Teaching and Learning, and Leadership and Management. Each standard is illustrated by at least one example of effective and highly effective practice [13]. In using the DLF, schools are encouraged to engage in a process of reflection as part of the School Self-Evaluation Process [14] that culminates in action, i.e. the creation of a Digital Learning Plan (DLP) that outlines how they will enhance their existing digital learning practices over a defined period of time.

## 3 Methodology

The authors carried out an in-depth review of the implementation of the Digital Strategy for Schools (2015–2020) from multiple perspectives. It included analysis of (i) Department of Education (DE) Digital Strategy Actions Plans (2017–2019) and the draft Action Plan (2020), (ii) research evidence from published reports including those which focused on the experiences of schools in Ireland during the school closures brought about by the Covid-19 pandemic and (iii) the findings from the public consultation carried out by the DE in relation to the implementation of the DSS [1]. This included reports from the open call for submissions, the DE survey of principals, teachers and students, the DE focus group interviews with key stakeholders in education and the National Parents Council’s survey of parents. As part of the analysis, we extracted the key findings from each data source before carrying out further analysis across the three sets of findings. This led to a final set of conclusions that serve both to highlight the progress that has been made across the four themes of the DSS (2015–2020) (Teaching, Learning and Assessment using ICT; Teacher Professional Learning; Leadership, Research and Policy and ICT Infrastructure) [1] as well as to identify a number of aspects of each theme that requires further attention and development.
## 4 What We Have Learned

Findings indicate that overall, teachers are now using a wider range of digital technologies and using them more frequently in their practice [15]. Digital technologies are found to be used by teachers in lessons to creatively engage learners although they are sometimes only used by teachers [16]. A prominent use is by the teacher for lesson preparation, presenting information or giving class instruction to students although post primary teachers also use technologies to communicate with students, to support peer-to-peer assessment and learner collaboration [15, 16]. Across all levels however, digitally supported assessment remains underdeveloped; 45% of post primary teachers report no change in assessment practices while the figure was between 65% and 77% at primary level [15]. These figures are not surprising given the focus on ePortfolios for assessment at post primary level but overall, they indicate a need for a greater focus on digitally supported assessment.

Some progress has also been achieved as a result of the necessity to engage with the use of digital technologies during the two periods of school closure and remote teaching due to the Covid 19 pandemic. It has resulted in an increase in the level of collaboration, collegiality and teamwork among teachers as well as an increase in professional learning relating to the use of digital technologies for teaching and learning [17, 18]. However, it has been a challenge for many teachers, particularly for those who felt they did not have the skills required.

While these findings are encouraging in many respects, it is significant that in 45% of primary schools and 38% of post-primary schools, digital technologies were not a feature of teaching and learning [16]. In addition, many schools were and still are unaware of what (i) dimension of the DLF their school is focusing on; (ii) the supporting resources available e.g. Scoilnet/Webwise; (iii) unsure on how to access external professional learning support; and (iv) require help with procurement [15, 16, 19]. It is also the case that, although the DL planning website, while widely praised as a useful resource, is widely under-utilised [15] Indeed, as experienced worldwide the Covid crisis in Ireland exposed more keenly the weaknesses and inequities already in the education system, it also lead to an increase in the level of collaboration, collegiality and teamwork among teachers as well as an increase in professional learning relating to the use of digital technologies for teaching and learning [17, 18]. However, for the most part it did not lead to any innovative practices across the system which could be considered as central to the next iteration of the DSS to 2027. In reality, the majority of the schools are still at the Knowledge Acquisition stage with some in the Knowledge Deepening stage [8].

Policy enactment takes time and realistically the timeframe for the implementation of the DLF in schools to date has been less than three years as Covid interrupted the normal running of school systems globally. Despite this short implementation phase some interesting trends have emerged which we believe are significant “sticking points” which need to be considered when designing the next iteration of the DSS to 2027.

* Although, 60% of schools rated themselves as being mostly at levels of effective practice or higher on their chosen domain, there is a lack of understanding of what constitutes effective practice and schools tend to use multiple and mainly informal approaches to assess the level of practice within a chosen domain. This points to
a need for further guidance to promote a more uniform understanding of levels of effective and highly effective practice for monitoring purposes. In fact, a key theme emanating from the consultative process is the need for reporting on schools DLPs to ensure impact of the DLF is monitored and measured to help inform future policy, and allow for best practice to be identified, shared and supported

* The lack of awareness and underutilisation of the DL Planning website and other resources such as Webwise and Scoilnet needs to be explored in order to establish why that is the case. Nonetheless, it would appear that there is a need for all resources and supports relating to all things digital in teaching, learning and assessment, and associated issues, to be made more accessible and readily available.

* The focus in schools has generally been on dimensions of Teaching and Learning rather than Leadership and Management and that to date, the focus has generally been on providing awareness sessions for school leaders rather than on the provision of focused professional learning programmes for leaders [15, 20].

* Challenges reported in implementing the DLF related to time for staff to implement the DLP, issues concerning the fit between the aims of the DLF and the structure of the standardised assessments, and infrastructure [15, 19].

## 5 Leveraging the Key Sticking Points to Move Towards Translating Policy to Practice

As we emerge from the period of emergency remote teaching and adapt to life back in schools, policy makers need to critically reflect on the critical sticking points of translating policy into practice at the school level in Ireland. While efforts to address alignment had taken place (e.g. development of DLF, in particular the alignment with the SSE process; development of supporting resources; curriculum specifications to include the use of digital technologies), this did not appear to result in practice at the classroom level that exemplified what is characterised as “Knowledge Deepening” [5–8], which had been the original intention of the DSS of 2015.

The problem is complex and there is a need for policy makers to visualise the system as a whole in order to pinpoint what part/s of the system need particular attention in the next iteration of the DSS in order to enable alignment and move beyond “Knowledge Acquisition”. Butler et al. [2] explored the issue of alignment (c.f. Fig. 1), noting that this required alignment of purpose, policy (including curriculum, assessment, accountability and teacher professional learning), and practice at three levels (macro/national, meso/school, and micro/teacher).

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. Alignment of purpose, policy and practice</figcaption></figure>
Twining [21] extended this analysis using a sociocultural framework and the model proposed in Twining et al. [22] provides a possible starting point for examining this problem of alignment and enabling the translation of policy into action at the school and classroom level (c.f. Fig. 2). This framework has three levels,

* The constitutive order – the broader context, including cultural norms, values and beliefs, as well as more explicit policies, rules and regulations.

* The arena – the enduring elements of the school context which are taken up from the constitutive order. For example, how policies and expectations at the national level are interpreted and enshrined in the school expectations, policies and facilities. The arena provides opportunities for action.

* The setting – the local context (e.g. the classroom) in which practice is implemented. At this level of analysis, the actors (e.g. teacher and students) perceive what is possible within the context of the school arena in the light of their identities. As illustrated by the shaded box within the setting in Fig. 2 actors ‘take up’ some of those perceived possibilities in their iterative interactions with the other people in their setting.

Achieving alignment between and within each of these levels (Constitutive Order, School Arena, and Setting) is complex.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 2. System Alignment</figcaption></figure>

Against this backdrop, it is essential to acknowledge that digital technologies do not have an independent existence and cannot be considered separately from the values that people bestow on them. Indeed, the ways digital technologies may or may not be used reflect these understandings. Research has consistently demonstrated that digital technology per se is not necessarily a driver or catalyst for change and that the introduction of digital technology into schools does not in and of itself lead to the development of innovative teaching practices or the transformation of education [e.g., 21, 23–28]. In order for digital technologies to be effectively used in teaching and learning at school level, their use has to be part of the school vision and must be supported by specific national policies [27–29].
So looking across the three levels; we can say that there are national policies which in accordance with the DSS [1], articulate a vision towards embedding the use of digital technologies in teaching, learning and assessment. What we need to consider is first, if this vision is consistent across all policy documentation related to school curriculum and assessment and second if this vision permeates and is enshrined in individual school and teacher visions (i.e. shared at the School Arena and Setting level). For example, is there consistency across the learning principles underpinning Primary and Post-Primary levels? Is there consistency in how digital technologies are used across Primary and Post-Primary schools?

**Primary level** - The view of learning as presented in the Draft Primary Curriculum Framework [30] is one where learning is viewed as an active process of enquiry, reflection and dialogue, and children are considered co-constructors of knowledge in collaboration with their peers, teachers and the wider community. This view of learning is mirrored in the DSS (2015–2020) [1] and the DLF [3, 4].

**Post-Primary level** – Eight Key Skills set out in the Framework for Junior Cycle focus on the four ‘C’s of communication, collaboration, creativity and critical thinking. These key skills are embedded into all subject specifications and are developed on an ongoing basis throughout the Junior Cycle. Students have opportunities to use these skills in their engagement with classroom-based assessments (CBAs) through conducting and analysing research, collaborating with others and presenting their work. CBAs in junior cycle also offer opportunities for the use of digital technologies for collaboration, presentations and so on as well as providing the basis for the development of digital media literacy skills particularly in relation to the safe, critical and ethical use of information found online. In addition, ePortfolios can form part of the student assessment process.

A framework of key skills has also been developed at senior cycle. These five key skills, (information processing, being personally effective, communicating, critical and creative thinking and working with others), are integrated across the current senior cycle curriculum supporting the development of digital skills in a variety of ways. Since the launch of the DSS (2015–2020) [1] significant emphasis has been placed on the use of ePortfolios inTransition Year. Moreover, recently developed subject specifications and those in development for Leaving Certificate, place an increased emphasis on the development of digital skills. As an example, Economics students have an opportunity to explore how technology impacts on the economy and also use technology to discuss, explain and communicate research findings and analyse data. Digital technology also forms part of assessment in a number of new subject specifications with 50% of the assessment component in the new Leaving Certificate PE specification involving the use of digital technologies to record student progress. Computer Science has also been introduced as an optional subject since 2020 with the subject being made available to all interested schools. Despite this, the primary mode of assessment at Senior Cycle is the high stakes Leaving Certificate examination.

Within these contexts, we need to ask the following questions: is there an inconsistency with what is advocated at Primary level and what is considered as effective or highly effective practice as outlined in the DLF? Do the uses of digital technologies identified at Junior and Senior cycle align with the development of the key skills that are identified at Junior and Senior cycle? Can they be considered effective or highly
effective practice? Are the key skills that are identified at Junior and Senior cycle valued and assessed in any way in the current Leaving Certificate examination process. These are some of the questions that must be addressed if we are to achieve greater consistency of vision across and between the various levels in the learning eco-system.

Of paramount importance is the recognition that there is a need to work towards understanding what everyone values and what their beliefs about learning are, as this directly impacts what technologies are valued and how they are used. Taking this approach will be the starting point to moving towards a consistency of vision across and between the various levels in the learning eco-system but this will need to be supported with robust contextually and culturally relevant models of professional learning for teachers and school leaders. This approach will require a well-funded coherent, flexible and sustainable model of professional learning for teachers, that will enable continued and progressive implementation of the DLF as school work toward developing their DLP, specific to subjects, class levels, and teacher knowledge [15, 19]. In addition, as advocated by the DSS 2015–2020 [1], teacher professional learning programmes need to focus on student-centred, creative pedagogies, employ interdisciplinary approaches and project tasks to engage learners in real-world problem solving as well as how to create meaningful student-teacher connections using digital technologies [16]. In order for this to happen, teachers will need to be supported within a learning culture that encourages them to work with others to critically and purposefully use a range of digital technologies for teaching, learning and assessment.

Effective school leadership is key in enabling staff engage in a process to identify specific actions for changes in teaching, learning and assessment linked to the School Self Evaluation process (SSE) and the DLF. The focus to date, has generally been on providing awareness sessions for school leaders rather than on the provision of focused professional learning programmes for leaders [15, 20] to build capacity to develop, lead and support a learning culture which leverages critical and purposeful uses of digital technologies for teaching, learning and assessment in school communities.

Moving forward, it is vital that an emphasis on supporting school leadership to engage in developing this type of learning culture is included in the DSS to 2027. It is imperative that effective professional learning for school leaders acknowledges that schools are at different levels in embedding digital technologies into their learning eco-systems. A one size fits all approach will not suffice and a range of appropriate supports must be put in place to enable them build this learning culture. Depending on the context, school leaders may be able to develop and leverage expertise within the school community. However, this may not always be possible and school leaders need to be empowered to recognise when help is needed and be supported to draw on a range of supports, both internal and external, as required. Supporting school leadership in this way will enable effective school planning which combines school self-evaluation priorities and actions in tandem with the DLF [3, 4]. It will develop the processes required to leverage critical and purposeful uses of digital technologies for teaching, learning and assessment in school communities. Of critical importance is that teacher professional learning should then be linked to these actions. In addition, consideration of how to develop teacher competences and how to embed development of digital competences in curricula specifications also needs to be addressed [16]. It has been suggested that digital competence frameworks
for teachers/students across each level of the system should be developed [16, 19] and
appropriate professional learning opportunities put in place to support such development.
In addition, the inclusion of the development of digital skills as a core element of Initial
Teacher Education programmes [31] will contribute to a more holistic model of teacher
professional learning.

## 6 Conclusion

To conclude, it is only when we engage the whole system that educational transformation
can occur [32] and this involves the complex interaction of a range of contextual factors
including national and regional policy, cultural norms and values, leadership, teacher
attitudes and skills, and student characteristics [33]. Fullan [34] refers to this connect-
edness of factors as ‘permeable connectivity’ and stresses the need to pursue “strategies
that promote mutual interaction and influence within and across the three levels” (p. 11)
(Macro/Meso/Micro). In summary; national goals, approaches, and priorities must align
with the contexts and values of local school communities. However, alignment cannot
be achieved unilaterally; it requires careful consideration and engagement by groups and
individuals who influence education policy, resources, and decisions within the school
community [35].

Finally, while the introduction and use of the UNESCO framework [7] for the con-
ceptualisation and design of DSS [1] and DLF [3, 4], enabled policy makers to identify
the interconnectedness of the aspects of the learning eco-system, and helped them to
understand the deliberate links that needed to be made between policy and practice in
order for systemic change to emerge, this was only the first step. An understanding of the
interconnectedness between the three levels of the system (Constitutive Order, School
Arena, and Setting) (See Fig. 2) and the importance of ensuring a consistency of shared
vision is required. The appreciation and understanding of the importance of context at
the school and classroom levels cannot be emphasised enough as policy is translated
into different school and classroom settings.

## References

1. Department of Education and Skills (DES). The digital strategy for schools 2015–2020 (2015). https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Policy-Reports/Digital-Strategy-for-Schools-2015-2020.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

2. Butler, D., et al.: Education systems in the digital age: the need for alignment. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 23(3), 473–494 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9388-6

3. Department of Education and Skills (DES). Digital learning framework for primary schools. Department of Education and Skills, Dublin (2017). https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Information-Communications-Technology-ICT-in-Schools/digital-learning-framework-primary.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

4. Department of Education and Skills (DES). Digital learning framework for post-primary schools. Department of Education and Skills, Dublin (2017). https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Information-Communications-Technology-ICT-in-Schools/digital-learning-framework-post-primary.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023
5. UNESCO. ICT competency standards for teachers: competency standards modules. UNESCO, Paris (2008). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001562/156207e.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

6. UNESCO. ICT competency standards for teachers: policy framework. UNESCO, Paris (2008). http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001562/156210E.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

7. UNESCO. ICT competency standards for teachers: policy framework. UNESCO, Paris (2011). http://iite.unesco.org/pics/publications/en/files/3214694.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

8. UNESCO. ICT competency standards for teachers: policy framework. UNESCO, Paris (2018)

9. Carretero, S., Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y.: The digital competence framework for citizens. Publications Office of the European Union (2017)

10. Redecker, C.: European framework for the digital competence of educators: DigCompEdu (No. JRC107466). Joint Research Centre (Seville site) (2017)

11. Department of Education and Skills (DES). Looking at Our School 2016 A Quality Framework for Primary Schools. Inspectorate, Department of Education and Skills, Dublin (2016). https://assets.gov.ie/25260/4a47d32bf7194c9987ed42cd898e612d.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

12. Department of Education and Skills (DES). Looking at Our School 2016 A Quality Framework for Post-Primary Schools. Inspectorate, Department of Education and Skills, Dublin (2016). https://assets.gov.ie/25261/c97d1cc531f249c9a050a9b3b4a0f62b.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

13. Butler, D., Hallissy, M., Hurley, J.: The digital learning framework: what digital learning can look like in practice, an Irish perspective. In: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, pp. 1339–1346. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) (2018)

14. Department of Education and Skills. An introduction to school self-evaluation of teaching and learning in primary schools. Inspectorate guidelines for schools. Inspectorate, Department of Education and Skills, Dublin (2012). https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Inspection-Reports-Publications/Evaluation-Reports-Guidelines/School-Self-Evaluation-Guidelines-2016-2020-Primary.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

15. Feerick, E., Cosgrove, J., Moran, E.: Digital Learning Framework (DLF) national evaluation: one year on – wave 1 report. Educational Research Centre, Dublin (2021). https://www.erc.ie/2018/05/16/publications-2020/. Accessed 08 June 2023

16. DE Inspectorate. Digital learning 2020: reporting on practice in early learning and care, primary and post-primary contexts. Inspectorate, Department of Education and Skills, Dublin (2020). https://www.education.ie/en/Publications/Inspection-Reports-Publications/Evaluation-Reports-Guidelines/digital-learning-2020.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

17. Devitt, A., Bray, A., Banks, J., Ni Chorcora, E.: Teaching and learning during school closures: lessons learned. Irish second-level teacher perspective. Trinity, Dublin (2020). https://www.tcd.ie/Education/research/covid19/teaching-and-learning-resources/. Accessed 08 June 2023

18. Burke, J., Dempsey, M.: COVID-19 practice in primary schools in Ireland report, Maynooth, Ireland (2020)

19. Department of Education. Reports on consultation process. https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/69fb88-digital-strategy-for-schools/#reports-on-consultation-process. Accessed 08 June 2023

20. Cosgrove, J., Moran, E., Feerick, E., Duggan, A.: Digital Learning Framework (DLF) national evaluation: starting off – baseline report. Educational Research Centre, Dublin (2019). https://www.erc.ie/2019/02/20/publications-2019/. Accessed 08 June 2023

21. Twining, P.: Educational alignment (and sociocultural theory). Halfbaked Education Blog (2018). https://halfbaked.education/educational-alignment-and-sociocultural-theory/. Accessed 08 June 2023
22. Twining, P., et al.: Developing a quality curriculum in a technological era. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. **69**, 2285–2308 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09857-3

23. European Schoolnet and University of Liège. Survey of schools: ICT in education. Benchmarking access, use and attitudes to technology in Europe's schools. Final report (ESSIE). European Union, Brussels (2013). http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/KK-31-13-401-EN-N.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

24. Kozma, R. (ed.): Technology, Innovation, and Educational Change: A Global Perspective. International Society for Educational Technology, Eugene (2003)

25. Law, N., Pelgrum, J., Plomp, T.: Pedagogy and ICT use in schools around the world: findings from the IEA SITES 2006 study. The Comparative Education Research Centre, Hong Kong (2008)

26. OECD. Students, computers and learning: making the connection. OECD Publishing, Paris (2015). https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264239555-en. Accessed 08 June 2023

27. Shear, L., et al.: The Microsoft innovative schools program year 2 evaluation report. Microsoft, Redmond (2010). http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=9791. Accessed 08 June 2023

28. Shear, L., Gallagher, L., Patel, D.: ITL research 2011 findings: evolving educational ecosystems. Microsoft, Redmond (2011)

29. Plomp, T., Law, N., Pelgrum, J. (eds.): Cross-National Information and Communication Technology. Policies and Practices in Education. Information Age, Charlotte (2009)

30. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. Draft primary curriculum framework: for consultation (2020). https://ncca.ie/media/4456/ncca-primary-curriculum-framework-2020.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

31. Teaching Council (TE) Céim: Standards for Initial Teacher Education (2020). https://www.teachingcouncil.ie/en/news-events/latest-news/ceim-standards-for-initial-teacher-education.pdf. Accessed 08 June 2023

32. Fullan, M.: Stratosphere: integrating technology, pedagogy, and change knowledge. Pearson, Canada (2013)

33. Owston, R.: School context, sustainability, and transferability of innovation. In: Kozma, R. (ed.) Technology, Innovation, and Educational Change: A Global Perspective. International Society for Educational Technology, Eugene (2003)

34. Fullan, M.: Change theory. In: Seminar Series. A Force for School Improvement (2006)

35. Russell, C.: System supports for 21st century competencies. Asia Society: Centre for Global Studies (2016). https://asiasociety.org/files/system-supports-for-21st-century-competencies-2016_0.pdf