Category Archives: digital literacy

Digital Literacy in Quantitative Social Science Teaching

Posted on by
Reply
Digital Literacy Essay Word Cloud

I am Sandra Vucevic, a Visiting Lecturer at City, St George’s University of London, teaching introductory quantitative modules. This reflective essay, submitted for the EDM122 module of my MA in Academic Practice, explores my experiences navigating the complexities of digital literacy in the teaching of quantitative methods.

In preparing for this essay, I realised that my understanding of digital literacy, while frequently used, was perhaps incomplete. Therefore, I will begin by outlining what I consider to be the most comprehensive recent definition, as offered by Radovanovic (2024, p.2).

“Digital literacy encompasses the set of capabilities and skills and values; it is the ability to mindfully analyse, process, design, and produce information; to develop and employ critical thinking skills in the landscape of mis- and disinformation practices at digital platforms; to create, collaborate, engage, and communicate with others in a respectful and meaningful way; to understand the algorithms’ mechanisms and strategically interact with artificial intelligence and similar platforms; to use the internet in a responsible, safe, and ethical manner having in mind the data privacy and digital footprint; to be accountable and respectful for one’s actions online, and to be able to understand the consequences of one’s behaviour.”

I find this definition particularly compelling because it acknowledges the complex interplay of technical skills, critical thinking, and ethical considerations that constitute digital literacy. It moves beyond a simplistic understanding of digital literacy as mere tool-based competence and recognizes the broader social and cultural implications of technology use.

Early Encounters with the Digital Literacy Gap

Growing up surrounded by technology, I consider myself a digital native (Prensky, 2001), which perhaps led me to overestimate others’ digital fluency. My background in computer engineering and early coding experience have made many digital tasks feel intuitive, so it’s always a stark reminder of the digital divide when students struggle with what seem like basic operations. I recall a student who attempted to centre a title in Word by using the spacebar. It was a small thing, but that single incident highlighted the digital divide that I’ve come to realise is far more widespread than I initially thought, particularly within universities. It’s become clear that many students starting university lack the digital skills necessary to truly participate in a digital learning environment (Russo & Emtage, 2024).

My initial surprise at the mentee’s spacebar struggles was quickly reinforced by everyday teaching experiences. I remember one student emailing me with “Hi bro, where to find assessment instructions?” While that example was quite informal, it wasn’t entirely unusual. Many students were clearly unfamiliar with email etiquette. I also noticed how few of my 350 students had LinkedIn accounts when I suggested they connect with me there. Students often struggled with software installation, simple tasks like cropping screenshots, and formatting documents. Referencing proved a major hurdle for their assessments. I encountered numerous instances of students copying entire paragraphs without attribution, using unreliable sources (e.g., the Daily Mail) and referencing the same literature inconsistently. Formatting inconsistencies, like varying font sizes within paragraphs, were also commonplace.

Beyond these technical skills, I also observed a broader struggle with critical thinking and information evaluation. Some students couldn’t distinguish credible online information from ‘fake news’ or separate opinion from fact. Others struggled to interpret even simple graphs. These issues weren’t simply about a lack of knowledge; they reflected deeper gaps in digital literacy and, consequently, academic preparedness.

Teaching introductory quantitative modules for the past four years has been a steep learning curve. I initially assumed students possessed the necessary digital and academic skills to navigate university systems and engage with the material. I believed my role was simply to deliver the curriculum. How wrong I was! Students consistently faced digital challenges, from accessing university email and Moodle to navigating library resources. These recurring difficulties revealed a substantial digital literacy gap, especially concerning the digital tools crucial for quantitative data analysis. I quickly realised that simply explaining statistical concepts wasn’t enough; I had to explicitly teach the underlying digital skills they lacked. “Working with data is a cluster of competencies rather than a single skill” (Ruediger et al., 2022, p. 10), and my students needed support across the board, from file management and software proficiency to data wrangling, analysis, and discipline-specific methodologies. This often-consumed significant class time, frequently at the expense of core statistical content. I often felt, and still feel, torn between teaching essential software skills and core disciplinary knowledge – a tension Ruediger et al. (2022) identify as a common concern among instructors.

Challenging Assumptions About Digital Natives

The idea of the digital native (Prensky, 2001) – that young people, having grown up surrounded by technology, are inherently fluent with digital tools, unlike digital immigrants – is a widely held view. However, this concept has been criticised for its oversimplification (Riordan, Kreuz & Blair, 2018; Bennet, Maton & Kervin, 2008). Different studies have found no significant difference in digital skills or literacy between young people and older generations (Akcayir, Dundar & Akcayir, 2016; Guo, Dobson & Petrina, 2008). This prompts me to examine my own assumptions: have I, too, generalised about young people’s digital abilities based solely on age?

Moreover, young people’s apparent confidence with devices like smartphones often hides gaps in their ability to use technology effectively for academic work (Passey et al., 2018). I’ve seen this myself: many students who are constantly using their phones struggle with basic tasks like formatting documents, understanding data charts, or creating academic references. This highlights that familiarity with technology doesn’t equal competence. It reinforces the need for explicit instruction in digital literacy skills, even for students who appear tech-savvy. Research indicates that factors such as socio-economic status, education, and access to technology are far more influential determinants of digital competence than age (Kincl & Strach, 2021; Pangrazio, Godhe & Ledesma, 2020; Creighton, 2018; Selwyn, 2009). This is consistent with my own experience of observing varying levels of digital proficiency among students.

Another pervasive myth is that educators must be technical experts to support students’ digital learning. Assuming students’ inherent digital superiority can create undue pressure on academics (Radovanovic, Hogan & Lalic, 2015), as both staff and students often lack confidence using technology for education, despite personal comfort with it (Garcia et al., 2013). Levy (2018) rightly argues that educators don’t need to master every single tool; instead, they should focus on facilitating meaningful engagement with technology. This is something I encourage in my graduate teaching assistants – it’s about empowering effective use of technology, not just demonstrating button-pressing.

The myth that students inherently know how to learn effectively online is compounded by universities often taking digital literacy for granted (Murray and Perez, 2014). Many students lack the initiative to meaningfully explore educational technologies (Burton et al., 2015). The COVID-19 pandemic exposed this, highlighting the impact of the digital divide on educational equity (Summers, Higson & Moores, 2022; Bashir et al., 2021; Pentaris, Hanna & North, 2021). This divide, exacerbated by differing digital experiences, resources, and usage, disproportionately affects students from disadvantaged backgrounds. As Radovanovic (2024, p .5) argues, this digital poverty affects the entire learning ecosystem, becoming magnified during crises like COVID-19, where a lack of digital skills and access leads to digital exclusion. The pandemic underscored the urgent need to address this divide and abandon simplistic assumptions about digital fluency.

Prensky (2001) also described digital natives as adept multitaskers thriving on instant gratification. However, this is often just task-switching, which can negatively affect learning (Kirschner & De Bruyckere, 2017). I’ve certainly observed this myself; students constantly switching between tasks seem to overload their cognitive resources, hindering their ability to focus and process information effectively. While students may have preferred delivery modes or feel comfortable with certain technologies, I’ve found that establishing clear ground rules for classroom technology use is essential. It’s not about simply giving them free rein with devices, but about creating a conducive learning environment. Setting clear expectations for classroom technology use has been key to fostering a more focused and productive learning environment.

Beyond these myths, educators can develop more effective strategies by shifting from assumed competence to fostered competence. This is a continuous process requiring reflection and professional development. Having established the need to move beyond these misconceptions, it is imperative to consider how digital literacy can be effectively integrated into the curriculum.

Bridging the Gap: Integrating Digital Literacy into the Curriculum

Integrating digital literacies is challenging because they are not just technical skills but learned practices that build upon those skills (Bennet & Folley, 2018). This distinction, between the technical aspects of a tool (skills) and its purposeful application (practices), is crucial for effective digital literacy instruction.

Reflecting on my own practice, I’m now more confident that I was four years ago in understanding my students’ digital literacy needs but effectively addressing them requires a strategic approach. The most effective method is for academic teachers to take full responsibility for integrating digital literacy development directly into the core curriculum (Nicholls, 2018). Rather than relying solely on external support services (IT, librarians, academic skills teams), I have found it more effective to embed digital literacy instruction directly within my teaching. I’ve realised that small, targeted interventions can significantly improve students’ digital literacy. For example, a brief five-minute lecture introduction to online reference generators, while not ideal for teaching proper referencing, offers a practical way to reduce unattributed work in the assessments. Similarly, instead of simply marking down for poor grammar and spelling, I demonstrate how students can ethically use AI tools or Word’s Editor to identify and correct writing errors. This improves submissions and, more importantly, helps students recognise their own mistakes, something assessment feedback alone can’t always achieve. These small adjustments reinforce the importance of integrating practical, accessible, and empowering digital skills into the curriculum.

To address specific digital literacy gaps in relation to quantitative research methods that I teach, I create video tutorials or dedicate class time to demonstrating essential skills, tailoring instruction to student needs and module context. I supplement this by incorporating existing resources—library guides, IT support pages, academic misconduct policies—directly into the module’s Moodle page for easy access and increased engagement. However, simply providing links isn’t enough; many students need more structured support, such as platform-specific tutorials (e.g., Windows and iOS versions). To improve accessibility and promote collaboration, I’m developing my video tutorials into open educational resources. Finally, a bank of task-specific tutorials, organised by function (e.g., using SPSS), is available on the module’s Moodle page for easy reference.

As Seargeant & Tagg (2018) rightly emphasise, navigating online information is a learned skill, not an innate ability. Education plays a vital role in raising awareness of how information flows and influences engagement with opinions and values, including understanding the interplay of opinion and fact in online sources and how the creators’ aims influence this balance (Seargeant & Tagg, 2018). Finally, digital inclusion is complex. Micklethwaite (2018) points out that digital exclusion can be difficult to identify, as even frequent social media users may lack access to or confidence with other essential digital tools. Barriers to digital inclusion can stem from various factors, including financial constraints, lack of access to reliable internet connectivity, disabilities, and cultural or linguistic backgrounds. Furthermore, digital inclusion is not linear; individuals move in and out of engagement as they develop and refine their skills. As educators, we must recognise these barriers and create a supportive environment for all students to develop their digital competencies.

While the responsibility for addressing digital literacy gaps often falls on educators, it is important to acknowledge the crucial role of institutions in providing comprehensive support. This includes offering professional development opportunities and integrating digital skills training into the curriculum. As Secker (2018) suggests, if a digital literacy framework does not exist, universities should consider creating one, either across the institution or tailored to specific schools/departments, using perhaps the JISC (2024) model of digital capabilities as guidance.

Conclusion

While many of the practices I now use to support students’ digital literacies were developed organically through teaching over the past four years, the EDM122 module provided a structured lens through which to understand and enhance these efforts. Prior to the module, I had not engaged deeply with the literature on digital literacy, although my experiences had already highlighted its importance. Exposure to key readings, particularly Radovanovic (2024), Bennet and Folley (2018), and Secker (2018), encouraged me to reflect more critically on my assumptions and inspired new approaches. For example, I now plan to incorporate scaffolded digital literacy checkpoints into each module—short, embedded tasks that progressively develop students’ capabilities, from academic communication to data evaluation. I am also exploring ways to co-create digital learning resources with students, supporting both digital production skills and a greater sense of ownership over their learning.

My experiences have shaped my understanding of what it means to be an educator. It’s not simply about teaching content, but meeting students where they are and fostering their digital competence. As digital literacy evolves with technology, so too must our approaches. Like Radovanovic (2024), I believe future curricula must integrate these developments to equip students for a digital and data-driven workforce, empowering them to understand, navigate, create, and collaborate within the digital world of AI, augmented reality, robotics, algorithms, and virtual platforms. While moments of frustration or surprise are inevitable, I now see these moments as valuable growth opportunities for both my students and me as an educator.

This reflection on my journey as an educator aligns with Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle (1984), progressing through its four stages: concrete experience (observing students’ digital struggles), reflective observation (questioning my assumptions), abstract conceptualization (understanding digital literacy’s complexities), and active experimentation (implementing interventions). This cyclical process has shaped my teaching and fostered students’ digital competence.


This essay is published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, enabling open sharing while ensuring proper attribution. It grants the right to copy, distribute, modify, and adapt the material, including for commercial use, as long as the original author is credited and allows re-licensing of derivative works.



References

Akcayir, M., Dundar, H. and Akcayir, G. (2016). What makes you a digital native? Is it enough to be born after 1980? Computers in Human Behaviour, 60, pp.435–440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.089.

Bashir, A., Bashir, S., Rana, K., Lambert, P. and Vernallis, A. (2021). Post-COVID-19 Adaptations; the Shifts Towards Online Learning, Hybrid Course Delivery and the Implications for Biosciences Courses in the Higher Education Setting. Frontiers in Education, [online] 6(1). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.711619.  

Bennet, L. and Folley, S. (2018). D4 curriculum design workshops: a model for developing digital literacy in practice. In: K. Reedy and J. Parker, eds., Digital Literacy Unpacked. [online] Cambridge University Press, pp.111–121. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783301997.

Bennett, S., Maton, K. and Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), pp.775–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x.

Burton, L.J., Summers, J., Lawrence, J., Noble, K. and Gibbings, P. (2015). Digital Literacy in Higher Education: The Rhetoric and the Reality. In: Myths in Education, Learning and Teaching. Palgrave Macmillan London, pp.151–172. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137476982_9.

Creighton, T.B. (2018). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, Digital Learners: An International Empirical Integrative Review of the Literature. Education Leadership Review, 19(1), pp.132–140.

Garcia, E., Dungay, K., Elbeltagi, I. and Gilmour, N. (2013). An Evaluation of The Impact of Academic Staff Digital Literacy on The Use of Technology: A Case Study of UK Higher Education. In: EDULEARN13 Proceedings. pp.2042–2051.

Guo, R.X., Dobson, T. and Petrina, S. (2008). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants: An Analysis of Age and ICT Competency in Teacher Education. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(3), pp.235–254. https://doi.org/10.2190/ec.38.3.a.

Jisc (2024). Individual digital capabilities. [online] JISC. Available at: https://digitalcapability.jisc.ac.uk/what-is-digital-capability/individual-digital-capabilities/ [Accessed 5 Feb. 2025].‌

Kincl, T. and Strach, P. (2021). Born digital: Is there going to be a new culture of digital natives? Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 31(1), pp.30–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/21639159.2020.1808811.

Kirschner, P.A. and De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67(67), pp.135–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 8(4).

Levy, L. A. (2018). 11 Digital Literacy Myths, Debunked. Available at:
https://rossieronline.usc.edu/blog/digital-literacy-myths [Accessed 25 Jan. 2025].

Micklethwaite, A. (2018). Onwards! Why the movement for digital inclusion has never been more important. In: K. Reedy and J. Parker, eds., Digital Literacy Unpacked. [online] Cambridge University Press, pp.191–201. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783301997.

Murray, M.C. and Perez, J. (2014). Unravelling the Digital Literacy Paradox: How Higher Education Fails at the Fourth Literacy. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 11, pp.85-100. https://doi.org/10.28945/1982.

Nicholls, J. (2018). Unpacking digital literacy: the potential contribution of central services to enabling the development of staff and student digital literacies. In: K. Reedy and J. Parker, eds., Digital Literacy Unpacked. [online] Cambridge University Press, pp.17–28. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783301997.

Pangrazio, L., Godhe, A.-L. and Ledesma, A.G.L. (2020). What Is Digital literacy? a Comparative Review of Publications across Three Language Contexts. E-Learning and Digital Media, 17(6), pp.442–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753020946291.

Passey, D., Shonfeld, M., Appleby, L., Judge, M., Saito, T. and Smits, A. (2018). Digital Agency: Empowering Equity in and through Education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 23(3), pp.425–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9384-x .

Pentaris, P., Hanna, S. and North, G. (2021). Digital poverty in social work education during COVID-19. Advances in Social Work, 20(3), pp.x–xii. https://doi.org/10.18060/24859.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, [online] 9(5), pp.1–6. Available at: https://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf [Accessed 5 Feb. 2025].

Radovanovic, D. (2024). Digital Literacy and Inclusion. 1st ed. Springer Cham.

Radovanovic, D., Hogan, B. and Lalic, D. (2015). Overcoming digital divides in higher education: Digital literacy beyond Facebook. New Media & Society, 17(10), pp.1733–1749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815588323.

Riordan, M.A., Kreuz, R.J. and Blair, A.N. (2018). The digital divide: conveying subtlety in online communication. Journal of Computers in Education, 5(1), pp.49–66. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-018-0100-6.

Ruediger, D., Cooper, D.M., Bardeen, A., Baum, L., Ben-Gad, S., Bennett, S., Berger, K., Bonella, L., Brazell, R. … & Yatcilla, J. (2022). Fostering Data Literacy Teaching with Quantitative Data in the Social Sciences. [online] Ithaka S+R. Available at: https://sr.ithaka.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/SR-Report-Fostering-Data-Literacy-092722.pdf [Accessed 5 Feb. 2025].

Russo, K. and Emtage, N. (2024). The Digital Divide and Higher Education. In: Digital Literacy and Inclusion. Springer Cham, pp.81–97.

Seargeant, P. and  Tagg, C. (2018). Critical digital literacy education in the ‘fake news’ era. In: K. Reedy and J. Parker, eds., Digital Literacy Unpacked. [online] Cambridge University Press, pp.179–189. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783301997.

Secker, J. (2018). The Trouble with Terminology: Rehabilitating and Rethinking ‘Digital Literacy’. In: K. Reedy and J. Parker, eds., Digital Literacy Unpacked. [online] Cambridge University Press, pp.3–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783301997.

Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native – myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings, 61(4), pp.364–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530910973776.

Summers, R., Higson, H. and Moores, E. (2022). The impact of disadvantage on higher education engagement during different delivery modes: a pre- versus peri-pandemic comparison of learning analytics data. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(1), pp.1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2021.2024793.

Digital health literacies: maximising service-user equity in the digitised healthcare landscape 

Posted on by
Reply

Image licensed under Creative Commons from www.FreePic.com

About me

I am a London-based Speech and Language Therapist (SLT). After starting my clinical career in the National Health Service (NHS) nearly 2 decades ago, I moved to City St George’s in 2017 where I am currently a Senior Lecturer and Doctoral Researcher. I teach pre- and post- registration SLTs in my clinical area of head and neck oncology and voice disorders. My research focuses on improving services for people with voice and swallowing difficulties on the suspected head and neck cancer pathway. The disparate digital health literacies skills among the population I work with presents clinical challenges, with a clear anecdotal impact on health and wellbeing outcomes based on Service Users’ (SU’s) abilities and motivations to connect with others online, access health information, and to use this information to make health decisions. In research, those with higher digital literacies skills are often those who become involved with patient and public involvement groups through their confidence to join online meetings, and their knowledge of the health system and the changes they would like to see. For SUs without smart phones, without email and without access to virtual meeting platforms, it is increasingly difficult for them to engage with research activity. I have therefore chosen this topic to explore how I might increase digital literacies skills in my client group and increase participation and equity for those with lower digital literacies skills in my research. I studied module EDM122 because open practices and digital literacies are vital to healthcare education, provision, and research, and I am passionate about all 3!

Digital Literacies

The term Digital Literacy was coined by Gilster1 almost 3 decades ago to describe a person’s ability to navigate, find, use, and evaluate information from various digital sources. Digital Literacies (DL) is now preferred, recognising the breadth of skills this encapsulates which originally included the three areas of cognitive, technical and socio-emotional as defined by Ng et al. in 20122.

More recently, the JISC Digital Capabilities Framework3  model included 6 components, with Health Education England (HEE) adapting the model (Figure 1) to 7 areas of capability4. HEE’s model was designed to support health professionals to develop their DL skills, with 4 levels in each domain so that levels of proficiency can be developed and evaluated in each.  

Figure 1: HEE Digital Literacy Capability Framework (2018). Licensed under CC-BY-NC-SA.

Digital Literacies in the context of Health Literacy

While the concept of health literacy emerged in the 1970’s5, the term has evolved alongside healthcare developments. Liu et al.6 defined health literacy as having 3 main components: knowledge of health, healthcare and health systems; processing and using information in various formats in relation to health and healthcare; and ability to maintain health through self-management and working in partnerships with health providers. Better health behaviours are more common among those with higher health literacy levels, which are associated statistically with higher education level and socio-economic status7. Bujnowska-Fedak and Węgierek (2020) found in their study that a high proportion of patients adopted healthier lifestyles based on internet health information8. They also found that patients were using the internet to make informed choices about whether or not to make an appointment to see a doctor, and to select a doctor to make an appointment with. In an exponentially digitised healthcare system, it is unsurprising that health literacies and digital literacies intersect greatly, a concept known as digital health literacy (DHL)9 – sometimes e-health literacy. Moreover, digital tools are commonly proposed as the method by which the population’s health literacy may be increased, including medication reminders and virtual support groups and information sources for certain conditions10. Ban et al., defined DHL as ‘the capacity to translate health knowledge acquired from digital environments into actions7’. Norman and Skinner’s11‘Lily model’ sought to illustrate the various DL encapsulated by DHL, or e-Health Literacy (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Norman and Skinner’s Lily Model of e-Health Literacy©. Image from Gilstad, H. (2014)12. Licensed with permission to copy for personal and academic use.

The 2020 SARS-CoV-2 pandemic necessitated and drove many digital solutions to be implemented at pace13. While it was assumed these developments would be embraced and retained post-pandemic, this has not always been reality. For example, while telemedicine became commonplace during the pandemic out of necessity, more than 70% of patients still preferred a face to face consultation post-pandemic14 in a study of more than 1000 patients. Of note, the largest age group of respondents was under 25 years old, and both recruitment and the survey itself were conducted via social media platforms and online. This is a significant limitation given that SUs without knowledge of the survey or the ability to respond, i.e. those with poor digital literacy skills, were unable to share their views regarding preferences for telemedicine or face to face care. Iyanna et al.15 identified DHL as a key barrier to health technology acceptance and implementation whereby healthcare professionals reported that patients found platforms and tools difficult to understand, hard to interact with or too complicated. Older patients, and those who speak English as an additional language experienced the most difficulty, with other studies reporting lower DHL skills in older populations16 due to a variety of factors. It is therefore conceivable that an even larger percentage of patients prefer face to face care if those without DHL skills and older adults were facilitated to participate in Moulaei et al.’s survey14.

Interventions have been trialled to increase older adults’ DHL skills17  with other studies across all age groups having also shown benefits in increasing DHL skills18. The studies used a variety of assessments and frameworks to increase DHL skills, usually in the context of a training programme that included topics such as how to locate health information on the internet, how to evaluate the trustworthiness of the source and how to avoid health scams. The training programmes used a variety of pedagogical methods including classroom based approaches, individual training, and peer learning. In addition to these skills, access to resources is vital to develop DHL skills. Internet access and hardware/ device availability, affordability and compatibility were cited as key barriers for patients in utilising digital health tools16. Other studies reported data security concerns and the need for digital healthcare tools that are more culturally sensitive and adaptable19. Negative feelings towards technology including mistrust and a perception that it is a further barrier to accessing healthcare have also been documented20. People with disabilities, lower educational level and lower housing tenure have also been found to have less access to the internet21 and are therefore less able to develop and use DHL skills. HL has been shown to improve functional and mental health outcomes for people with long term conditions such as stroke22. With HL becoming increasingly dependent on DL, it may be hypothesised that patients with higher DHL may experience better health outcomes. However, a systematic review recommended that more treatment studies should measure participants’ DHL to elucidate this23.

Digital Literacies as a Social Determinant of Health (SDoH)

SDoH are defined by the World Health Organisation as ‘non-medical factors that determine health outcomes’24. With the increasing digitisation of healthcare, DL are now integrated as a key SDoH25 with a growing ‘digital divide’ in health outcomes for SUs based on their DHL26. While advancements such as access to health information on the internet are improving the health of many SU’s, there is poor equity owing to the digital divide and digital exclusion often impacting people with mental health difficulties, women, people of colour, and those in social deprivation27. Van Kessel et al.28 assert that DL is not merely an additional SDoH but a ‘super determinant’ of health owing to the pervasive nature of digital literacies and their intersections with all other SDoH.

Informing my practice

With reference to Driscoll’s reflective model29, I have identified key learning points for my practice both in clinical care and in research.   

What?

Putting patients at the centre of their care and involving them in decisions about their health are core principles of all healthcare professions30. When conducting health research, it is best practice to involve patients as co-applicants or advisors regarding key decisions that directly impact patient care31. More recently, co-design methodologies involve SUs in designing improvements to their own services32. With the increasing digitisation of the health sector, and growing opportunity to impact services, patients’ involvement and empowerment are increasingly dependent on DHL skills.

So what?

SLTs frequently increase SUs’ DL skills to support their communication difficulties33, for example to use text to speech software, to communicate with family abroad using a virtual platform, or to use a smart phone to re-order medical equipment. However, as a head and neck cancer clinician, a disease affecting a large number of people experiencing social deprivation34, I am aware that digital disadvantage and low DHL skills lead to under-representation of many of my SU population in research35. Supporting people to participate in research or improve services through increasing their DHL skills is rarely a focus of therapy itself. Some of the most under-represented voices in our society owing to communication disability and difference may be silenced further by a lack of DHL and resources to develop these. Empowering patients in their care and improving services in response to patients’ needs necessitates DHL skills to ensure all views are represented given that many patient and public consultations are conducted online and involve reading electronic meeting minutes, grant proposals, study workplans, plain language summaries and so on. When research such as mine explores how services are being configured and adapted, often involving digital solutions to increase efficiency, it is vital that people of all DHL abilities can contribute their views on service accessibility. Some studies have shown the value of including patients in research that develops technological advancements to increase patients’ DHL whilst including them in the rapid advancement of health digitisation36.

NHS England’s Framework for inclusive digital healthcare37 includes 5 domains: access & connectivity, inclusive design, building skills and capability, belief & trust, and leadership & partnerships. Wilson et al.38 proposed 3 key recommendations towards such digital inclusion that address some of the barriers outlined earlier. Firstly, providing user-friendly tools that are easy and engaging to navigate and culturally appropriate. Secondly, provision of devices, opportunities to connect, and retaining non-digital options to maximise inclusivity. Lastly, they acknowledged the important role of support and education to facilitate SUs in interacting with and using digital health tools.

Now what?

Based on this framework and the recommendations, I feel my role provides opportunities to address many of these areas. Firstly I feel able to support and educate SUs to enhance and apply their DHL skills to augment their health outcomes through both clinical practice and research. For example, I plan to work with SUs to support their access to social media sites, virtual support groups and online fora and tools relevant to their healthcare conditions as part of their therapy. To retain non-digital options and maximise participation, I will budget in my research costings to support digital and non-digital participation options for SU group members. Costing for devices, connectivity, travel and ensuring adequate infrastructure and support for hybrid options will maximise participant diversity and facilitate under-represented voices to be heard, while increasing SUs’ DHL skills wherever possible. With regards to user-friendly tools that are easy to navigate and culturally sensitive, I will support SUs to disseminate our research findings to lay audiences on open access platforms to grow their DHL skills while increasing open access information for the public about my research. Through actively inviting people with lower DHL skills to my patient advisory group wherever possible, I will also ensure that any tools and information developed in my research are accessible to those with all levels of DHL.

In conclusion, rapid technological growth is changing how healthcare and health information are delivered and accessed. Health outcome gaps are widening as result of the digital divide, posing a significant equity issue. Clinicians and health researchers are well-placed to enhance service-users’ DHL in response to the increasingly digitised health landscape. 

References

  1. Gilster, P. Digital Literacy. 1997. Wiley. ↩︎
  2. Ng, W. Empowering scientific literacy through digital literacy and multiliteracies. 2012. New York: Nova Science Publishers. ↩︎
  3. Jisc. Building digital capability. 2018. Available at: https://www.jisc.ac.uk/rd/projects/building-
    digital-capability [Accessed: 08 January 2025] ↩︎
  4. Health Education England. Digital Literacy Capability Framework. (2018). Available at: Digital-Literacy-Capability-Framework-2018 [Accessed 03 February 2025]. ↩︎
  5. Simonds SK. Health education as social policy. Health Educ Monogr. 1974; 2:1–10. ↩︎
  6. Liu, C., Wang, D., Liu, C., Jiang, J., Wang, X., Chen, H., et al., What is the meaning of health literacy? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. Family Medicine and Community Health. 2020;8:e000351. ↩︎
  7. Šulinskaitė K, Zagurskienė D, Blaževičienė A. Patients’ health literacy and health behaviour assessment in primary healthcare: evidence from a cross-sectional survey. BMC Primary Care. (2022) 23(1):223. ↩︎
  8. Bujnowska-Fedak, M.M. and Węgierek P. The Impact of Online Health Information on Patient Health Behaviours and Making Decisions Concerning Health. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020; 31;17(3):880. ↩︎
  9. Ban S, Kim Y, & Seomun G. Digital health literacy: A concept analysis. Digital Health. 2024;10. ↩︎
  10. Fitzpatrick PJ. Improving health literacy using the power of digital communications to achieve better health outcomes for patients and practitioners. Front Digit Health. 2023;17;5:1264780. ↩︎
  11. Norman C.D. & Skinner H.A. eHealth literacy: essential skills for consumer health in a networked world. J Med Internet Res. 2006;8:0. ↩︎
  12. Jaatun, E. Brooks, K.E. Berntsen, H. Gilstad, M.G. Jaatun, E.A.A. (eds.): Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop on Practical Aspects of Health Informatics (PAHI 2014), Trondheim Norway. (2013). Available at: http://ceur-ws.org [Accessed 5th January 2025]. ↩︎
  13. Budd, J., Miller, B.S., Manning, E.M. et al. Digital technologies in the public-health response to COVID-19. Nat Med. 2020; 26:1183–1192. ↩︎
  14. Moulaei, K., Sheikhtaheri, A., Fatehi, F., Shanbehzadeh, M., and Bahaadinbeigy K. Patients’ perspectives and preferences toward telemedicine versus in-person visits: a mixed-methods study on 1226 patients. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2023; 15;23(1):261. ↩︎
  15. Iyanna, S., Kaur, P., Ractham, P., Talwar, S. & Islam, A.K.M.N. Digital transformation of healthcare sector. What is impeding adoption and continued usage of technology-driven innovations by end-users?, Journal of Business Research, 2022;153:150-161. ↩︎
  16. Song, Y., Qian, C. & Pickard, S. Age-related digital divide during the COVID-19 pandemic in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:11285. ↩︎
  17. Dong Q, Liu T, Liu R, Yang H, Liu C. Effectiveness of digital health literacy interventions in older adults: single-arm meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2023;25:e48166. ↩︎
  18. Barbati, C., Maranesi, E., Giammarchi, C. et al. Effectiveness of eHealth literacy interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies. BMC Public Health. 2025; 25:288. ↩︎
  19. Alsahli, S., Hor S. & Lam M.K. Physicians’ acceptance and adoption of mobile health applications during the COVID-19 pandemic in Saudi Arabia: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology model. Health Information Management Journal. 2024;0(0). ↩︎
  20. Padalkar, T. V., Hildreth, K., Rocque, G. B., Ingram, S. A., Whitlow, O., Chu, D., et al. Understanding Multi-Level Factors Impacting Digital Health Literacy in the Deep South of the United States. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2025;22(1):41. ↩︎
  21. Ueno, A., Dennis, C., & Dafoulas, G.A. Digital exclusion and relative digital deprivation: Exploring factors and moderators of internet non-use in the UK, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2023; 197: 122935. ↩︎
  22. Flink M, Lindblom S, von Koch L, Carlsson AC, Ytterberg C. Health literacy is associated with less depression symptoms, higher perceived recovery, higher perceived participation, and walking ability one year after stroke – a cross-sectional study. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2023 Dec;30(8):865-871. ↩︎
  23. Neter, E. & Brainin, E. Association Between Health Literacy, eHealth Literacy, and Health Outcomes Among Patients With Long-Term Conditions: A Systematic Review. European Psychologist. 2019; 24(1), 68–81. ↩︎
  24. World Health Organisation. Social Determinants of Health. Available at: Social determinants of health. [Accessed 5th January 2025]. ↩︎
  25. Arias López MdP, Ong BA, Borrat Frigola X, Fernández AL, Hicklent RS, Obeles AJT, et al. Digital literacy as a new determinant of health: A scoping review. PLOS Digit Health. 2023; 2(10): e0000279. ↩︎
  26. Badr, J., Motulsky, A. & Denis J-L. Digital health technologies and inequalities: A scoping review of potential impacts and policy recommendations, Health Policy. 2024; 146:105122. ↩︎
  27. Saeed SA, Masters RM. Disparities in Health Care and the Digital Divide. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2021;23;23(9):61. ↩︎
  28. van Kessel R, Wong BLH, Clemens T, Brand H. Digital health literacy as a super determinant of health: More than simply the sum of its parts. Internet Interv. 2022 Feb 7;27:100500. ↩︎
  29. Driscoll, J. (1994). Reflective practice for practise. Senior Nurse, 14(1), 47-50. ↩︎
  30. NHS England. Involving People in Healthcare Guidance. (No date). Available at: ppp-involving-people-health-care-guidance.pdf [Accessed 03 February 2025]. ↩︎
  31. INVOLVE. Eastleigh: INVOLVE; 2012. Briefing notes for researchers: Involving the public in NHS, public health and social care research. 2012. ↩︎
  32. Francis-Auton, E., Cheek, C., Austin, E., Ransolin, N., Richardson, L., Safi, M., et al., Exploring and Understanding the ‘Experience’ in Experience-Based Codesign: A State-of-The-Art Review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2024;23. ↩︎
  33. Smith, M.M. Innovations for Supporting Communication: Opportunities and Challenges for People with Complex Communication Needs. Folia Phoniatr Logop. 2019;71(4):156-167. ↩︎
  34. Al-Dakkak, I. Socioeconomic status and head and neck cancer. Evid Based Dent. 2010;11, 57–58. ↩︎
  35. National Institute of health Research. Available at: Improving inclusion of under-served groups in clinical research: Guidance from INCLUDE project | NIHR [Accessed 03 February 2025]. ↩︎
  36. Barony Sanchez RH, Bergeron-Drolet LA, Sasseville M, Gagnon MP. Engaging patients and citizens in digital health technology development through the virtual space. Front Med Technol. 2022 Nov 25;4:958571. ↩︎
  37. NHS England. Inclusive Digital Healthcare: A Framework for NHS Action on Digital Inclusion. (2018) Available at: NHS England » Inclusive digital healthcare: a framework for NHS action on digital inclusion. [Accessed 03 February 2025]. ↩︎
  38. Wilson, S., Tolley, C., Mc Ardle, R. et al. Recommendations to advance digital health equity: a systematic review of qualitative studies. npj Digit. Med. 2024;7:173. ↩︎

Digital Games and Digital Education Tools: Transforming Digital Literacy in Engineering Education

Posted on by
Reply

This blog post was written by Maria Livada as part of the final assignment for the module EDM122: Digital Literacies and Open Practice.

As a lecturer in Engineering, I’ve spent years oscillating between excitement and anxiety about technology’s role in education. Excitement because tools like simulations and AI-driven platforms can unlock creativity in ways whiteboards never could. Anxiety, because the pace of digital change demands that we rethink how we teach – not just what we teach. Industries now demand engineers who aren’t just technically skilled but digitally literate: thinkers who can collaborate virtually, critically evaluate digital systems and innovate with tools that didn’t exist a decade ago. But how do we prepare students for this reality?

This question led me to explore digital games and educational tools – not as plain activities but as transformative bridges between theory and practice. In this post, I’ll share how these tools are reshaping my teaching, what the research says (and where it falls short), and how we can tackle the challenges of integrating them meaningfully. First, I will provide some context and valuable statistics on digital literacy.

Digital literacy consists of the ability to effectively communicate and create using digital tools and the development of skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving and collaboration (JISC, 2022).

According to the 2023/24 UK HE Students’ Digital Experience Insights Survey by JISC, although 85% of students perceived their university’s digital learning environment as above average, only 37% believed they had adequate opportunities to build digital skills needed for future employment (JISC, 2023).

When I started teaching, I focused on ensuring students were fluent with software like MATLAB and Simulink. But I soon realised this wasn’t enough. One student, for example, could model a control system in Simulink but struggled to troubleshoot why it failed under real-world constraints. At the same time, another had difficulties translating their findings into a collaborative report using shared digital platforms.

This disconnection reflects broader concerns in the literature. As Aoun (2017) and Chakrabarti et al. (2021) argue, automation and AI aren’t just changing what engineers do – they’re redefining their thinking. Technical proficiency alone won’t cut it; students need resilience, creativity, and the ability to “learn how to learn” in a digital ecosystem. For me, this means using digital tools like virtual labs and digital games not just to simulate experiments but to push students to ask: Why a system does or does not behave differently in simulation and reality? What assumptions used to build this software?

For instance, using Falstad’s circuit simulator, an MSc student a few years back helped me redesign a lab experiment – an exercise that I currently use in my Electronics I class to test students’ understanding of that concept.

But digital literacy isn’t just about tools; it’s about mindset. I’ve noticed that current students (who grow up with technology) often assume they’re “digitally literate” simply because they can navigate apps or social media. Yet, when asked to evaluate the reliability of an online source or adjust the parameters of a system designed using a digital tool according to a set of specifications, many hesitate. This aligns with Caratozzolo et al.’s (2021) observation that digital literacy requires not just technical skills but also critical thinking and adaptability.

Let’s address the elephant in the room: many of us still see games as distractions. One of my most memorable teaching moments was when I introduced Kahoot, an educational platform for designing quizzes, to my Probability and Statistics class. With Kahoot, you can experiment with gamification features, introducing social learning into your teaching practice. My main goal at the time was to validate if students had met the learning outcomes of that lecture. Hence, I introduced the game at the end of the class, and I asked them to split into teams of 3 people. A member from each team would use a smartphone to answer the questions. The game was timed, so the team that answered most of the questions in less time would be the winning team. The game allows to create a leader board and keep track of a team’s progress for quite some time. At first, students were quite hesitant with this approach, and I thought they felt that it would be a waste of their time. But I was mistaken. Students enjoyed it a lot and the attendance didn’t drop as much for the remaining teaching weeks.

Research backs this up. Educational games have been shown to strengthen specific aspects of digital literacy, including information finding, critical thinking, and social understanding (Rohmani and Pambudi, 2023). These outcomes align closely with constructivist learning principles, which emphasise the importance of active, learner-centred experiences. Likewise, Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning theory highlights how digital tools can support practical exercises, reflection, and the process of building to improvements. Games like SimCity or Bridge Constructor create “authentic” learning environments where students confront trade-offs (e.g., cost vs. safety in engineering design) that mirror real-world challenges (Udeozor et al., 2023). But here’s my critique: most studies focus on what games teach, not how they foster critical digital literacy. But it is not just that, when students are playing a digital game, they’re not just learning systems thinking – they’re also navigating the game’s interface, modding tools, and online forums. These “hidden” skills—troubleshooting, collaborating in digital spaces, and evaluating user-generated content are where true literacy develops.

Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) tools take this further. Tang et al. (2010) highlight how VR games improve decision-making under pressure, like managing a virtual disaster scenario. But in my experience, the real magic happens after the simulation. When students debrief in Microsoft Teams, sharing screenshots and debating choices, they’re practising the kind of digital collaboration they’ll need in remote engineering teams.

Yet, games aren’t the answer to all problems. Students can become so fixated on “winning” that they can overlook crucial features, like safety margins or certain specifications (in an engineering setting). According to Kilgore et al. (2007) gamification can sometimes prioritise competition over critical reflection. To address this, I am thinking of pairing gameplay with reflective journals. After each game, students will be asked to write about ethical dilemmas they encounter (e.g., cutting costs vs. risking safety) and how they would apply these in real engineering contexts.

Beyond games, collaborative platforms like Microsoft Teams, Miro, and Notion play a vital role in engineering education. These tools support project-based learning, enabling students to collaborate on designs, manage workflows, and communicate effectively. AI-powered systems further enhance learning by offering personalised feedback and recommendations, empowering students to take control of their progress.

Virtual labs, such as Labster, are another game-changer. For example, students can simulate fluid dynamics experiments, exploring theoretical principles without needing physical lab equipment. This not only makes learning more accessible but also ensures that students from diverse backgrounds can engage with high-quality STEM education.

But here is where I see a gap in the literature. While studies like Gilliot et al. (2010) emphasise the importance of digital tools in fostering 21st-century skills, they often overlook the emotional and social dimensions of learning. For instance, when students use Miro to brainstorm ideas, they’re not just collaborating – they’re building trust, negotiating roles, and managing conflicts. These “soft” skills are just as critical as technical ones, yet they’re rarely measured or discussed in research. Consider AI-driven feedback systems. While they can easily identify coding errors or structural flaws, they can’t replicate the mentorship of a professor who notices a student’s frustration and offers encouragement. This tension between efficiency and humanity is something I tackle with daily. As Pool et al. (2019) note, emotional intelligence is a cornerstone of adaptability – but how do we teach it in a digital-first world?

Of course, integrating these tools isn’t easy. Early on, I assumed students would naturally adapt to digital collaboration. Then I assigned a Miro whiteboard exercise – only to watch one group dominate the board while other groups waited passively. This taught me that digital literacy isn’t just about access; it’s about equity in participation.

Another problem is accessibility. While in my teaching practice I try to use lightweight tools like Falstad, not every student has reliable internet or a capable device. This aligns with Gilliot et al.’s (2010) warning that tech-heavy curricula risk excluding marginalised learners. My solution? Pair high-tech and low-tech tasks. For example, students might design a system in a virtual lab but present their findings via a video recorded on a smartphone which aligns with Frydenberg’s (2015) emphasis on creativity over specs.

Teaching staff resistance is another barrier. Instructors may feel unprepared to integrate digital tools effectively due to a lack of training or familiarity. Institutions must provide professional development programs that equip educators with the necessary skills and confidence. Peer-led workshops and open access to resources can further support staff in embracing digital tools.

Assessment is perhaps the trickiest challenge. Traditional exams often fail to capture the creativity and collaboration nurtured by digital tools. Inspired by Craifaleanu and Craifaleanu (2022), I now use “gamified group assessments” where students as part of a group solve engineering problems within simulations imitating real-world remote teamwork.

Looking ahead, I’m excited and cautious. Tools like AI-driven analytics promise personalised learning, but I worry about over-reliance on algorithms. Instead, I would like to further explore co-creation, i.e., students to build their own simulations, then evaluate each other’s designs. It’s messy, but as one student said, “Building a game taught me more about user bias than any lecture.”

I’m also hopeful for institutional support for OER. I hope that my department will adopt openly licensed textbooks. This helps to overcome barriers and guarantee that all students have access to good materials. By implementing these measures, we can make the learning environment more inclusive and efficient. This aligns with Niño and Evans’ (2015) vision of students as active knowledge producers, not passive consumers.

But perhaps the most transformative step is fostering critical pedagogy, a term associated with educational theorist Paulo Freire (Freire, 2005). It’s about acknowledging the challenges of digital inequality and algorithmic bias while empowering students to reshape the tools they inherit.

Digital literacy isn’t just about keeping up with technology – it’s about empowering students to question, adapt, and reshape the tools they’ll inherit. Games and simulations are powerful, but their true value lies in initiating conversations: Who decides what a “valid” simulation result is? How do we design inclusive digital spaces? As educators, we’re not just teaching engineers. We’re fostering citizens of a digital world. And that’s a challenge worth playing for.

I have chosen to publish this blog post under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike (CC BY-NC-SA) license. I think this kind of licence aligns with my values of openness, accessibility, collaboration, inclusivity and, finally, knowledge sharing. It enables people to share, adapt, and build on this work for non-commercial purposes if they attribute the original author and any derivative works released under the same citation. This hopefully will contribute to the discussion on digital literacy and will urge educators to use open approaches to help all students have a fair chance to learn. Digital games and digital educational tools can be great tools in transforming engineering education, enhancing digital literacy, and preparing students for a world that is increasingly dependent on technology. They offer ways of learning by doing, critical problem solving and teamwork and provide a solution to the problems of accessibility and equity. Digital literacy is not just a skill; it is a skill for life in the modern world.

References

Aoun, J.E. (2017) ‘Robot-proof’, MIT Press.

Caratozzolo, P., Alvarez-Delgado, A. & Sirkis, G. (2021) ‘Fostering digital literacy through active learning in engineering education’, 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pp. 1–6.

Chakrabarti, S. et al. (2021) ‘Preparing engineers for lifelong learning in the era of industry 4.0’, 2021 World Engineering Education Forum/Global Engineering Deans Council (WEEF/GEDC), pp. 518–523.

Craifaleanu, A. and Craifaleanu, I.G. (2022). ‘A co‐creation experiment for virtual laboratories of mechanics in engineering education’, Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 30(4), pp.991-1008.

Dacre Pool, L., Gurbutt, D. and Houston, K. (2019) ‘Developing employable, emotionally intelligent, and resilient graduate citizens of the future’, Employability via Higher Education: Sustainability as Scholarship, pp. 83–97. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-26342-3_6.

Freire, P. (2005). ‘Pedagogy Of The Oppressed: 30Th Anniversary Edition’, Trans. By Myra Bergman Ramos. Editorial: New York Continuum.

Frydenberg, M. (2015) ‘Achieving digital literacy through game development: An authentic learning experience’, Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 12, pp. 256–269.

Gilliot, J.M., Garlatti, S. & Simon, G. (2010) ‘Impact of digital literacy on the engineering curriculum’, Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEE), pp. 1–6.

JISC. (2022). Individual digital capabilities. [online] Available at: https://digitalcapability.jisc.ac.uk/what-is-digital-capability/individual-digital-capabilities/.

JISC (2023). 2023/24 UK higher education students digital experience insights survey findings. [online] Available at: https://digitalinsights.jisc.ac.uk/reports-and-briefings/our-reports/2023-24-uk-higher-education-students-digital-experience-insights-survey-findings/.

Kilgore, D. et al. (2007) ‘Creative, contextual, and engaged: Are women the engineers of 2020?’, 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings [Preprint].

Kolb, D. A. (1984) ‘Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Niño, M. & Evans, M.A. (2015) ‘Fostering 21st-century skills in constructivist engineering classrooms with digital game-based learning’, IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje, 10, pp. 143–149.

Rohmani, R. & Pambudi, N. (2023) ‘A critical review of educational games as a tool for strengthening digital literacy’, International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 4(1), pp. 23–36.

Tang, Y., Shetty, S.S. & Chen, X. (2010) ‘Empowering students with engineering literacy and problem-solving through interactive virtual reality games’, 2010 2nd International IEEE Consumer Electronics Society’s Games Innovations Conference, pp. 1–6.

Udeozor, C., Russo-Abegão, F. & Glassey, J. (2023) ‘Perceptions and factors affecting the adoption of digital games for engineering education: A mixed-method research’, International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), p. 45.

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International

Library and Digital Literacy in Indonesia: A reflective essay

Posted on by
Reply

This blog post was written by Khosyi Maulana as part of the final assignment for the module EDM122 at City, University of London and licensed under CC BY-ND-SA 

Introduction

Digital literacy is important for me as a librarian in Indonesia, particularly if we talk about today’s world, where technology continues to be more advanced, and it creates a“tsunami” of information, something that people cannot avoid. The ability to access, understand, and utilise digital information and technologies has become more crucial for individuals to survive in this era. This is particularly relevant to Indonesia because, by 2035, Indonesia is expected to benefit from a demographic bonus, as around 70% of its population will be within the working age range. According to some experts, this demographic shift can be a crucial turning point for Indonesia to emerge as a developed country. To make the most of this demographic bonus, the Indonesian government has implemented numerous strategies to enhance the quality of Indonesian people. One of the strategies is developing digital literacy skills because it can make people understand and use the information in the digital world to their benefit (Republic of Indonesia, 2020).

As a part of the Indonesian government, the National Library of Indonesia (NLI) has a significant role in promoting digital literacy in Indonesia. In the National mid-term development plan (2020-2024), the library sector is considered a social institution that drives literacy and innovation. As a social institution, it is the library’s duty to improve society through knowledge creation, and promoting digital literacy is one of the actions the library should take. Digital literacy is essential not only for library patrons but also for the librarian. It is a prerequisite competency before promoting digital literacy to the users.

Undoubtedly, digital literacy is a critical skill that people should have in this century. Digital literacy encompasses a range of skills and knowledge required to effectively use digital technologies for various purposes, including reading, writing, and critical thinking. It is not merely about the functional ability to use technology but also involves a deeper understanding and critical evaluation of digital content and environments (Secker, 2018; Bawden and Robinson, 2022). Secker also highlights the importance of digital literacy in navigating the complexities of the digital world, emphasising that it is more than just technical skills. In shorter words, digital literacy is the capability required to thrive, i.e. be effective and responsible in a digital society, and these abilities allow individuals to adjust to the ever-changing digital environment (Radovanović, 2024; Advance HE, no date). Digital literacy is also related to other literacy, such as information, media, and data literacy.

Fig.1 Digital capabilities framework: the Six Elements (JISC, 2024)

One of the digital capabilities is digital proficiency and productivity. Digital productivity is how individuals use digital skills to accomplish tasks, and it is related to how digital technology is changing practices such as the business (JISC, 2024). Libraries in Indonesia are concerned about developing these skills; for instance, Endang, a micro-entrepreneur from Ponorogo (Indonesia), attended the online business training conducted by the Ponorogo public library-bukalapak (e-commerce platform) and increased her sales and income through the social media (Alfatih, 2021). In this training, Endang learns how to create a” store” in e-commerce, use the right keywords for the products, promote her online store on social media and manage the content, which is all needed to sell products digitally. This fact proves that digital literacy could improve the quality of people’s lives. Furthermore, the impact of digital literacy on people’s income also happened in Pucheng County (China). Digital activities related to work and learning are identified as significant contributors to the increase in household wealth and field (Yao, Qin and Gao, 2022).

Digital literacy is a must-have skill for librarians to serve library users in a digital environment. In the digital age, information is not only limited to physical forms but extends to digital resources such as databases, e-books and online journals. Therefore, librarians must be proficient in navigating these digital resources to provide accurate information and support to library users (Bawden and Robinson, 2022).  As a librarian at the Center of Librarian Development, National Library of Indonesia, I did not directly serve the library users, but I was involved in ensuring the quality of librarians’ services through development programs such as training, workshops and seminars. The expected outcomes from the programs are to improve the librarians’ digital literacy skills and promote digital literacy to the patrons, as exemplified by Ponorogo Public Library.

Indonesian library community in promoting digital literacy

The library community is not a single player in developing digital literacy skills within society. In Indonesia, several institutions play a role in developing digital literacy, such as the National Library of Indonesia, the Ministry of Education and Culture, and the Ministry of Communication and Informatics. As a part of the government, the National Library of Indonesia is a leading institution in developing digital literacy through library services. A notable effort that NLI has made is to develop a digital library platform called iPusnas (https://ipusnas.id/). iPusnas enable Indonesian citizens to access digital books and comment or share their thoughts about the book.

Figure 2. iPusnas interface

Besides providing digital books, one of the NLI’s duties is to ensure the libraries in Indonesia deliver the services and meet users’ information needs. This task is carried out through several things, such as composing regulations, creating practical guides and training for librarian development. In 2022, I was involved in a team that organised online workshops about technology-based information literacy for librarians. 3,400 library staff from 34 provinces in Indonesia attended this series of workshops.

This workshop was held in partnership between NLI and the Indonesia Academic Library Association. I represented NLI in that collaboration, and my tasks included drawing up the budget, setting technical details of the event (zoom), being involved in training materials preparation, and giving a report to the Head of the Center of Librarian Development. The main focus of this workshop was to enhance information literacy skills in a digital environment by combining accessible advanced technology with five critical parts of information literacy skills: identifying information needs, finding information, evaluating sources, analysing the information and disseminating information. It will help the librarians to be agile in providing information or resources to the users in digital landscape. For instance, using Vos viewer as a tool to draw a correlation between subjects related to the users’ information needs and determine sources that have the most influence on a particular subject.

Besides NLI, various libraries, particularly public libraries, promoted digital literacy. Numerous public libraries in Indonesia have done tremendous activity in promoting digital literacy. Digital infrastructure and digital skills in Indonesia are quite varied, some regions are advanced, and others are behind. These circumstances affect the variety of digital literacy promotion. For example, Cukangkawu Village Library (West Java) provide access to the internet and trains local people to use it for their own benefit. Intan, one of the participants, used the skills that she had from the training to develop her “online shop” (Alfatih, 2021). Basic computer skills are needed to be digitally literate, so Pulang Pisau Public Library (Central Borneo) provides basic computer training for local people who have never learned computers before.

School libraries in Indonesia are also involved in promoting digital literacy. In Yogyakarta province, even though it was limited, elementary school librarians engaged with students in teaching specific information literacy skills. On rare occasions, classroom teachers may invite librarians to teach students internet exploration skills to find references and differentiate between trusted and untrusted websites or digital resources (Suwarto, Setiawan and Machmiyah, 2022)

Library institutions are not the only players who promote digital literacy in the library field. Information professional organizations such as the Indonesian Library and Information Science Scholars Associations (ISIPII) also promoted digital literacy through many seminars. One of the notable seminars was about the Creative Commons license, which was held in partnership with Creative Common Indonesia. The seminar successfully informed the Indonesian library community about open access and licensing in digital content.

Despite all the efforts and activities to promote digital literacy through the library, there is much room for improvement and development.

Further Improvement

I think learning digital literacy is related to learning or understanding human beings because digital literacy skills are not only about hard skills or technical skills in handling information in a digital environment. The side of digital literacy that only a few people are concerned about is the value within it. It is related to inclusivity, ethics, freedom of expression, intellectual property and data privacy or, in a single word, “humanity”. Librarians should be more concerned and efforts to address these issues, particularly in developing countries like Indonesia. Why is this important? The purpose or intention of using technology depends on the people, not the technology itself. The nature of technology is neutral, neither inherently good nor bad. Various entities, including governments, financial institutions, and parents, are responsible for determining the most ethical and sensible ways of utilising it (Schmid and Cohen, 2013).

One of the issues in finding information or resources in the digital environment is copyright. Legal and ethical considerations in using information as a core component of the digital literacy (Morrison and Secker, 2017). Moreover, Awareness of copyright and its implications is essential when creating, interacting with, or sharing content using digital technologies, making it intertwined with all critical aspects of digital literacies and capabilities, especially in the context of the ethics of sharing (Morrison, 2018). The first thing I want to develop as an Indonesian librarian is an awareness of copyright, not only for librarians but also for library patrons. It is ironic if library users use an internet connection in the library to access illegal streaming websites. Undeniably, the website owner is the bad guy, but people who access it, also violate copyright. Do they have digital literacy skills (technical skills)? There is no research about it, but some of them may have digital skills. Librarians should uphold and educate their users about copyright as professionals who work for knowledge and society. A society that upholds the copyright creates a better environment for creativity and innovation and contributes to the people involved in the works. Other than that, violating copyrights in the digital world leads users to a worse problem like online gambling, data scamming and pornography as illegal website streaming sets a lot of banners that directly to online gambling sites and pornography.

Preserving and digitising ancient manuscripts is mandatory for the National Library of Indonesia. Over the last decade, NLI has digitised many ancient manuscripts, old newspapers, and old literature, and understanding copyright and how it is implemented in those digitised files become more important. When libraries and institutions digitise copyrighted materials, they must ensure that their actions comply with copyright laws to avoid legal repercussions (Morrison and Secker, 2017). Besides that, understanding copyright is also needed in cataloguing digitised materials, the digital license of the materials must be clear.

The communication gap between generations did happen in NLI, and it started with the discussion in the WhatsApp group. Since I am in the middle of those generations, unofficially, my boss asked me to bridge the gap. I frequently communicated with senior group librarians and tried to understand what they were thinking about younger librarians and expect. The elder group knew that the younger generation had more talent and skill but needed to learn how to express their criticism and think in the right manner. Besides that, in social media like X, Instagram, and TikTok, many lecturers, teachers and HR professionals tell the story about how badly the millennial generation, Generation Z, and the next generation communicate through personal messages. For instance, they usually use “P” “P” P” at the beginning of the chat. P means Ping. In Indonesia, we usually use it to get immediate responses, but only for our peers.  That is why “Digital etiquette” in digital literacy training for librarians/library users is the other thing I want to put in. Digital etiquette might seem a little problem, but at a certain point, it will impact their (younger generation) future.

Last, when I was involved in creating workshops and training for librarians, people who were involved sometimes did not think about the habits of the librarians, especially in online learning. I will propose to the training or workshop organiser to assess librarian habits in the digital world. It can be done using David White’s visitor and resident concept. A Visitor uses the web only to get what they need, taking care to leave no trace of themselves, whilst the Resident lives a portion of their life online, leaving behind a visible form of self on the web (White, 2012). With a better understanding of librarian habits in the digital world, the organiser could choose the right methods to deliver training or materials and ensure every training participant will gain new knowledge and skills.

 

To meet the required assessment criteria, this essay will be shared on the EDM122 Blog platform under the Commons Creative Licence. This licence will grant complete copyright permission for both academic and creative work. We appreciate your cooperation and look forward to your contribution.

 

 

References

Advance HE (no date) Digital literacies | Advance HE. Available at: https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/knowledge-hub/digital-literacies.

Alfatih, M.I. (2021) Impact stories of library transformation based on social inclusion. National Library of Indonesia. Available at: https://oer.perpusnas.go.id/items/fdcb921f-7297-4d8b-8592-bd1e57159d65.

Bawden, D. and Robinson, L. (2022) Introduction to Information Science. Second Edition. London: Facet Publishing.

JISC (2024) ‘Building digital capabilities framework – the six elements’. Available at: https://repository.jisc.ac.uk/8846/1/2022_Jisc_BDC_Individual_Framework.pdf.

Morrison, C. (2018) ‘Copyright and digital literacy: rules, risk and creativity’, in K. Reedy and J. Parker (eds) Digital literacy unpacked. London: Facet Publishing.

Morrison, C. and Secker, J. (2017) ‘Understanding librarians’ experiences of copyright: Findings from a phenomenographic study of UK information professionals’, Library Management, 38(6/7), pp. 354–368. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/LM-01-2017-0011.

Radovanović, D. (ed.) (2024) Digital Literacy and Inclusion: Stories, Platforms, Communities. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30808-6.

Republic of Indonesia (2020) ‘The National medium-term development plan for 2020-2024’. Ministry of National Development Planning. Available at: https://perpustakaan.bappenas.go.id/e-library/file_upload/koleksi/migrasi-data-publikasi/file/RP_RKP/Narasi-RPJMN-2020-2024-versi-Bahasa-Inggris.pdf.

Schmid, E. and Cohen, J. (2013) The New Digital Age: Transforming Nations, Businesses, and Our Lives. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.

Secker, J. (2018) ‘The Trouble With Terminology: Rehabilitating and Rethinking “Digital Literacy”’, in K. Reedy and J. Parker (eds) Digital Literacy Unpacked. 1st edn. Facet, pp. 3–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.29085/9781783301997.003.

Suwarto, D.H., Setiawan, B. and Machmiyah, S. (2022) ‘Developing Digital Literacy Practices in Yogyakarta Elementary Schools’, Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 20(2), pp. pp101-111. Available at: https://doi.org/10.34190/ejel.20.2.2602.

White, D. (2012) ‘Visitors and residents and learner-owned literacies.pdf’, Multimedia & Information Technology, 38(1). Available at: https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=e070828a-27d5-4f97-aaa1-e7f03d40e37b%40redis.

Yao, Y., Qin, S. and Gao, Y. (2022) ‘Research on the Impact of Digital Literacy on the Overall Income of Rural Households: A Case Study of 410 Questionnaires in Pucheng County, Shaanxi Province’, Highlights in Business, Economics and Management, 1, pp. 285–292. Available at: https://doi.org/10.54097/hbem.v1i.2589.

 

Directing teaching staff towards free, openly-licensed, easily-accessed graphics and audio to enhance their educational resources

Posted on by
Reply

This post was written by Emma Guilbert as part of the final assignment for the module EDM122 at City, University of London.

As an assistant educational technologist with a focus on multimedia, I aim to teach and encourage teaching staff (referred to throughout simply as “staff”) to incorporate audio and video resources into their teaching. In this area, my job comes with two main tasks:

  1. Providing staff with the skillset and confidence required to create, edit and deliver their media to their students
    2. Directing staff towards free, openly-licensed, easily-accessed graphics and audio to enhance their open educational resources

This essay is focussing on the second task (my video assignment for EDM122 focussed on the first).

In an age where over 1bn hours of video were viewed on YouTube each day in 2023 (GMI-Blogger, 2023), and the average podcast listener consumed 6.5hrs of episodes per week in 2022 (RAJAR, 2022), it’s vital that staff are meeting their students’ expectations when it comes to engaging resources

A recent study on videos and their effect on student engagement (French, Ravn, Balcaite, & Moore, 2023) showed that 75% of students who enjoyed their chosen subject found “short weekly videos engaging”.  This may not be particularly surprising in a group who already found their subject compelling, but this pattern was still seen to be applicable to the 28% of students who did not feel engaged with the subject topic itself yet enjoyed and connected with the video resources. This is further supported by research that videos, screencasts and podcasts all reduce student drop-off rates (Angelino, Williams, & Natvig, 2007)

As a result, I aim to encourage staff in upscaling their non-multimedia resources into something more engaging to their students.

One suggestion I give staff is to review any revision materials they provide and potentially convert them into transcribed podcasts. Gunderson & Cumming (2023) found that “podcasts may best be used to extend, enrich or enhance knowledge”. Therefore if a traditional resource is a typed transcription of a conversation between a staff member and a visiting lecturer, students may find it far more engaging to hear the original conversation as a recording and using the typed transcription as a supplementary accessible resource.

Alternatively, converting their roughly scanned supporting documents for lectures into something easier to navigate and digest (such as a series of bite-sized, captioned videos) can help students not only connect better with the material but also with the presenting staff member. (French, Ravn, Balcaite, & Moore, 2023)

Or, as a final option, staff can keep their original resources and, going forward, supplement them with new pieces of multimedia.

When carrying out this move towards multimedia, it’s important that the visual content accurately represents the spoken content and any audio has high production values (eg good quality music, clear spoken tracks and suitable effects). These help resources look and sound more professional, reflecting the time and effort put into creating them.

Ideally this multimedia – and any outsourced content used within them, such as music and graphics (referred to as “elements”) – would also be openly licensed, allowing for staff to use and credit them with confidence, as well as distribute them amongst the teaching community for reuse.

In relation to elements used for educational resources, open licensing refers to them residing “in the public domain or are under copyright that have been released under an open license, that permit no-cost access, re-use, re-purpose, adaptation and redistribution by others.” (Open Educational Resources, 2021)

By including openly licensed elements in their multimedia resources, staff are reassured that they have the legal rights to be using them (particularly when updating and distributing their resources over the years, or sharing amongst academics for reuse), and are often able to edit the base media to better suit their needs. It also highlights to students that openly licensed resources can be professional looking and easy to create in their own work.

Top view of 3 metal gears isolated on a white background. Gears would not successfully rotate if activated.

From Adobe Stock, under their Educational License

When I first looked for a graphic of gears to use in a video I created, I headed straight to Adobe’s Stock repository. This provides high quality elements for use under their Educational License. However, despite Adobe being a multi-billion dollar company (Adobe, 2023), its search function immediately provided multiple images of a set of gears which were impossible: as above, they simply would not turn in reality.

Unsplash.com, a popular and free stock image site, returned an equally impossible search result. Unsplash has also historically had a seemingly complex relationship with Creative Commons licensing, referenced in a post on the Creative Commons site (Merkley, 2017), however for educational purposes it would unlikely ever be an issue.

That isn’t to say that images of workable gears weren’t available, but it did require additional effort on my part in order to find them.

Whilst this may seem like a small issue, it highlights how staff, particularly those in STEM or requiring technically oriented elements, must often dig down through pages of search results to find accurate and useful options. Time is sacrosanct for a lot of staff and “many teachers lack confidence in using multimedia technology” (Means & Simkins, 2000) which they would use to create new resources. They then don’t want to also go hunting for every element, particularly if the status quo is ultimately achieving the same outcome: providing a resource for their students, even if they’re visually outdated.

On top of this, diversity in educational resources is essential and all too often entirely overlooked. We, as educators, are not one homogenous group and neither are our students. The resources we create should therefore reflect this. Finding materials that reflect diversity in gender, race, culture, sexuality and more is key to ensuring that otherwise-engaging multimedia resources don’t immediately alienate a large percentage of students because they are under-represented or missing entirely. By creating our own resources, or adapting openly licensed elements, we can help represent a larger audience.

Staff also need to be aware of excessive use of elements, particularly ones which may be inaccessible due to complexity, or simply there for decoration or an audio flourish. They must navigate the fine line between engaging content and ensuring accessibility for all students, always including those with varying learning requirements.

Finally, when staff come up against open licensing terms such as “BY-SA”, “non-commercial” or “ShareAlike”, the various options, abbreviations, exceptions and more may hinder their ability to appropriately integrate, modify and acknowledge the openly licensed and OER content they use.

Ultimately it’s my job to empower staff to overcome those hurdles and I feel as though the primary way to do this is via imitable examples which demonstrate to staff best practices and ideal outputs.

Asking staff to spirit up an idea of an engaging yet accessible podcast, or how to go from a raw narrated screencast to a gently yet effectively edited video resource, is difficult if they have never encountered one before. If staff are dissuaded because they do not have any references for effective resources, we have killed their creativity and drive before they have even begun.

EDM122 has made me realise that these example resources may not yet exist for many staff, and I am well placed within both LEaD and as someone who helps run City’s MILL service to both create and promote them as stock pieces for inspiration. Explaining how musical opening themes might drown out speech tracks in a podcast, or how busy and bright backgrounds can visually drown out objects in the foreground of a video, may well be concepts which staff had not considered before but would vastly improve their multimedia resources.

It’s also crucial to introduce staff to (and educate them about) the various online platforms and repositories which can help with their resource creation, as well as their limitations. Places such as the Creative Commons site work not only as information hubs on licensing but also as a search engine for openly licensed visual and audio elements. It also has a specific Licence Chooser, allowing users to work through a series of questions to find the best CC licence for their work. Flickr allows users to search for Creative Commons-specific elements.

Canva, specifically created to provide an easy in-road for users not otherwise au fait with graphic design software, has proven anecdotally popular with staff who can quickly create aesthetically pleasing images. Whilst Canva does provide a range of images on its site which can subsequently be licensed under Creative Commons, there are also some which require additional fees for usage commercially, making using the site a double-edged sword.

For audio resources, whilst the Creative Commons search engine can successfully direct you to a variety of openly-licensed elements, users often need to check sites (and sometimes specific tracks) carefully to ensure that they are covered to use any audio in podcasts as well as videos. This is often down to the incidental nature that audio can take in videos (as the primary medium is visual) whereas in podcasts the audio can become inextricably linked to the identity of the content.

The licensing section of PurplePlanet, highlighting
the inclusion of podcasts in their free use policy.

It is also not well-advertised within City that staff have access to Adobe’s Stock repository, within which many elements are included either under Creative Commons licensing or Adobe’s Educational Licence. However, as mentioned above, it may still require a certain amount of digging on all of these sites to find specific elements which match all requirements.

I think it’s also necessary to ensure that staff are aware of City’s dedicated copyright librarian (Stephen Penton) and the City LibGuides Copyright microsite dedicated entirely to helping all university users (students and staff) navigate crediting, licensing and more. This is something I was not originally aware of when I first started and now use as a “cheat sheet” guide whenever I am creating a new piece of media.

It’s vital that we encourage staff to both get in touch and stay in touch with LEaD and the library when it comes to creating openly-licensed multimedia resources. I want to help establish and foster  a collaborative and supportive environment amongst staff where no multimedia question is bad; where staff can stay up to date with changes in both copyright law and the latest mod-cons when it comes to creating, adapting and distributing resources; where staff can be proud of the multimedia resources they have worked on, and confident in distributing them to a wider audience thanks to their openly licensed elements.

The more we are able to create accessible, diverse, high quality multimedia resources which can be shared on a local and global scale, the more we broaden the size of our open, collaborative, educational community.

I have chosen to attribute the CC BY-NC-SA licence to this work. Ultimately this means that:

“re-users give credit to the creator. It allows re-users to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the material in any medium or format, for non-commercial purposes only. If others modify or adapt the material, they must license the modified material under identical terms.” (Creative Commons, 2024)

I chose this option as I am happy for others to use my work to build their own pieces, however I want them to continue in the spirit of Creative Commons’ ShareAlike licensing so that others can build on their work.

Directing teaching staff towards free, openly-licensed, easily-accessed graphics and audio to enhance their educational resources © 2024 by Emma Guilbert is licensed under Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International 

The importance of digital literacy in nursing

Posted on by
Reply

This blog post is written by Teopista Ssemakula who is a Senior Practice Development Nurse and recently completed my module EDM122. Her essay on the importance of digital literacy in nursing is licensed under CC-BY. She writes……

This essay is about the importance of digital literacies within Nursing, and I shall be
focusing on information, data and media literacy aspects of digital literacy.
Stephenson, (2017) highlighted in a national publication that digital skills are
essential to delivering the best contemporary nursing care, as this enhances
collaboration between nurses and patients, and promotes patient safety, reduces
duplication in addition to preventing mistakes. In my role as a Senior Practice
Development Nurse, it is crucial to have a high level of digital literacy in order to
effectively care for patients and support the healthcare team. According to Glister
(1997), one has to understand and have the ability to use digitised information. Plus,
Secker, (2017) asserts that, digital literacy has gained widespread attention in the
wider society: For instance in education, digital literacy encompasses more than a
functional concept based on technical skills to a more critical approach. This is seen
also within the healthcare sector, due to the new and emerging roles (Stephenson,
2017).
As defined by Health Education England (HEE, 2017), digital literacy is, “the ability to
live, learn, work, participate and thrive within a digital society”. This relates to all
nurses and those aspiring to become nurses. Terry et al (2019), states that studies
regarding digital literacy are under reported in Nursing literature. Previous studies
have identified that digital literacy levels impact staff engagement with information
systems, with poor computer skills and low computer experience identified to
influence attitudes towards information systems and information and communication
technology (Kuek and Hakkennes, 2020). Making it to be one of the main barriers for
adopting Electronic Healthcare Records argues (Huryk, 2010), and given the
increasing use of technology in healthcare, it is important for nursing staff to be
digitally literate (Healthcare Business Technology, 2016).
Within the Health Education England (HEE, 2018) framework, digital literacy is
important for nurses in order to effectively navigate and utilise electronic medical
records, participate in online applications, and stay current on research and best
practices. It is also essential for effective communication, collaboration, and
participation, in the development and implementation of healthcare policies and
practices, as well as teaching, learning, and self-development, plus information, data
and media literacies. All of which make up the different aspects of digital literacy in
this framework.
Historically, Nurses, used books and journals for evidence-based research, but now
search engines have made it easier to access such information (Pravikoff, 2006).
There is currently an increasing number of people who have access to healthcare
information online, so nurses are obligated to empower patients with knowledge of
how to evaluate the quality of that information (Theron et al, 2017), but how can this
be if they are not digitally literate, or not trained or supported?
Therefore, one has to have the ability to access online tools to search for evidence
for best practice, and knowledge of accessing the most reliable sources (Terry et al,
2019).
HEE, (2017) stresses that it matters to have a workforce that is entirely capable,
competent and confident in digital literacy within the workplace. Hence, the need to
develop a digitally literate health and care workforce.
As such, the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) included digital literacy within the
2018 Standards for Pre-Registration Nursing Programmes and Standards of
Proficiency for Registered Nurses (NMC, 2018). This not only facilitates engagement
with effective decision-making, problem solving and research, but also enables
nurses to take responsibility for continued learning in areas of personal or
professional interest as well as facilitating evidence-based practice (Terry et al,
2019). According to Pravikoff (2006), developing and maintaining digital literacy is a
lifelong professional obligation which is as imperative as evidence-based practice.
Moreover, a digitally literate person can use technology strategically to find and
evaluate information, connect and collaborate with others, produce and share
original content, and use the Internet and technology tools to achieve many
academic, professional and personal goals’ (Grech, 2014, p.79, cited by Terry et al,
2019).
However, frustration and lack of confidence is seen among nurses trying to grasp
unfamiliar technology (Stephenson, 2017), given that healthcare has always been
slow in adoption of new digital tools and technologies due to inadequate technology
and information technology systems (Pearce, 2017).
Furthermore, the lack of time allocated for nurses to complete their online g
adds to the barriers, not to mention policy restrictions in some areas where nurses
are not allowed to use personal smartphones to complete their learning, plus issues
with the WI-FI which at times fails or cannot be accessed (Stephenson, 2017).
It has been identified to date that investment in training, assessment of the user’s
skill level, and targeted learning should all be encouraged, as well as the provision of
different modes of instruction to meet the user’s needs (Kuek and Hakkennes, 2020).
The guidance produced by the Royal College of Nursing and Health Education
England aims to inform policies directed at improving the digital capabilities of all
healthcare staff (RCN and HEE, 2017).
In terms of training new staff, which is a major part of my role, I have learnt not to
assume that everyone is good at information technology. It has become a popular
concept in certain areas of policy and practice (Helsper and Eynon, 2010) to follow the
concept of the digital native (Prensky, 2001), which is regarded as a cause of the wide
shifts in how we engage with technology. In spite of this, many see the ‘residents and visitors’ (White and Le Cornu, 2011) typology as a more useful way of observing
people’s interaction with online spaces.
In my own context as a Practice Development Nurse, it is important to stay up-to-date on the latest research and best practices in my field. I have found digital literacy
to be critical in finding and accessing relevant information online as well as using it to
improve my practice whilst educating others (Nwagwu and Oshiname, 2009). An
example is seen recently when I was asked to teach a session on how to safely
transfer patients from the ward to theatres and from the recovery room back to the
ward, to our surgical rotational nurses. Having prior knowledge about what happens,
I still had to utilise not only our local policies, but also accessed online evidence based literature as reference to support our current practices, including having the
capability in using PowerPoint presentation. Digital literacy is therefore an essential
skill in today’s digital age, as technology plays a significant role in almost every
aspect of our lives.
Just like other healthcare organisations, our hospital has adopted Electronic Medical
Record systems to store and manage patient information. An example is the move
away from the use of paper drug charts and instead staff are trained to use
electronic drug charts for medicines management via WeConnect, which is the
Trust’s approved digital program (Barts Health, 2023). Moreover, as a Practice
Development Nurse, you are responsible for training staff in nursing electronic
documentation, entering and retrieving data, in order to track patient progress and communicate with other healthcare professionals.
All new starters are supported by our practice development team in accessing
Information and Communication Technology portals such as Cerner Millenium, the
Trust’s core information technology system, so that they can be trained on how they
will document patient processes intraoperatively via Surginet (Barts Health, 2023).
Digital literacy is therefore, essential for navigating and utilising these systems
efficiently and effectively (Healthcare Business Technology, 2016).
The COVID-19 pandemic led to a significant increase in the use of digital tools.
Meetings or study days previously held face to face such as our accredited In-House
Nurse Anaesthetic module or Lead mentor meetings with universities, had to be and
many still hold online, via Zoom Application (Serhan, 2020, Mouton, 2023) or
Microsoft Teams (Poston et al, 2020). As a Practice Development Nurse, you may
be responsible for assisting with facilitating or conducting these sessions, which
requires a strong understanding of how to use these technologies.
It should therefore be noted that information, data, and media literacies are not only
important aspects of the HEE framework within nursing as a whole (HEE, 2018) but
are strongly relevant to my practice. These skills allow me and other nurses to
effectively find, evaluate, and use information and data to support our practice and
make informed decisions (HEE, 2018).
Information literacy: Nurses must be able to effectively locate and access relevant
information in order to stay up-to-date on the latest research and best practices in
their field (Nwagwu and Oshiname, 2009, Wilson, 2019). This includes being able to
use search engines such as PubMed, databases such as CINAHL Plus, and other
online resources to find information and evaluate its quality and relevance. In my
role, I support staff and students to develop the skills to interpret, analyse, and
present digital information in diverse contexts for academic and professional
purposes whilst observing copyright rules in line with the (Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988), and open alternatives, such as Creative Commons (Creative
Commons, 2022). Thereby, referencing digital works appropriately in different
contexts.
Data literacy: Nurses often work with large amounts of data, such as patient records and audit results.
A nurse’s ability to collect, analyse, and interpret patient data is crucial in order to
make an informed decision regarding patient care (Glassman, 2017). As a Practice
Development Nurse, you ought to have the capability for collating, managing,
accessing, analysing, and reporting on digital data in spreadsheets, databases, and
other formats (JISC, 2023). Securing personal data is an important practice. That is,
having an understanding of how data is used in professional and public life; being
familiar with legal, ethical, and security guidelines including understanding how
algorithms work and how data may be collected and used (JISC, 2023).
Media literacy: Nurses also need to be able to effectively use and evaluate various
forms of media, including video, audio, and written materials (RCN, 2023).
Communication with patients and colleagues using these media, as well as
evaluating their accuracy and reliability, are all part of the job (HEE, 2018). One
needs the ability to critically receive and respond to messages in text, graphics,
video, animation, and audio, and to curate, edit, and repurpose media while giving
due credit to its original creators as well as critically evaluating the purpose and
provenance of media messages (JISC, 2023). Furthermore, having a broad
understanding of digital media as a social, political, and educational tool, and the
technical aspects of digital media production is important (JISC, 2023).
In conclusion, despite the minimal research conducted regarding the digital literacy
of healthcare staff, with studies demonstrating poor levels of digital literacy among
the staff (Kuek and Hakkennes, 2020), it is imperative that staff are trained and
supported especially in the area of learning and acquiring skills in information, data
and media literacy aspects of digital literacy including all other aspects of digital
literacy prior mentioned within the (HEE 2018) framework. I noticed that our current
NMAHP educational newsletter in our hospital, sign posts links for staff to utilise and
develop their digital literacy skills (Barts Health, 2023): Such support in gaining free
access to such links is advantageous for nurses especially when these skills are
gained. In that nurses should then have the confidence to engage in innovative
practices, plus effectively care for patients and support the healthcare team in
today’s digital age (Glassman, 2017). Attending this module has helped me better
understand the need and importance of digital literacy and how this can be
embedded in one’s personal and continuous professional development.
For instance, this will be my first time to post on a blog platform both personally and
professionally, meeting a goal I had set from one of my previous modules
Professional and Personal Development Planning Module. Reflectively, I can see
that I now understand the theory and digital skills used or we needed in the work I
did earlier in producing an infographic poster during the module Student Support and
Personal Tutoring. My video creation skills have so enhanced and going forward, I
shall be able to use this for my teaching role, but also support staff and students who
might be novices in that area.
As per the required assessment criteria, this essay shall be posted and openly
published on the EDM122 Blog platform under the Commons Creative Licence.
This will grant copyright permission for creative and academic work; whist ensuring
proper attribution; where others are allowed to copy, distribute, and make use of this
work. Out of the licences, I have chosen to use CC BY which ensures that the
original work is credited, allows commercial use and allows modifications and
adaptations as well as changing the licence as per one’s adaptations.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

References:
Barts Health (2023) Millenium. Available at:
https://weshare.bartshealth.nhs.uk/accessing-one-millenium (Accessed on
06/01/2023).
Barts Health (2023) WeConnect. Available at:
https://weshare.bartshealth.nhs.uk/downloads.cfm?ver=34049 (Accessed on
06/01/2023).
Barts Health NMAHP (2023) Digital links. Available at:
https://www.learnmyway.com/courses/introduction-to-office-programs/ (Accessed on
26/01/2023).
About The Licenses – Creative Commons https://creativecommons.org/licenses/
(Accessed 28/01/2023).
Copyright, Designs and Patent Act (1988). Available at: Copyright, Designs and
Patents Act 1988 – Consolidated (publishing.service.gov.uk) (Accessed 28/01/2023)
Glassman, K.S. (2017) Practice Matters: Using Data in Nursing Practice. American
Nurse Today, Vol 12(11) p.45-47. Available at:
https://www.myamericannurse.com/using-data-nursingpractice/#:~:text=Nurses%2C%20as%20largest%20group%20of%20healthcareprofe
ssionals%2C,need%20toknow%20how%20to%20interpret%20that%20data
(Accessed on 06/01/2023).
Gilster, P. (1997) Digital Literacy. New York: Wiley.
Health Education England (2018). A Health and Care Digital Capabilities Framework.
Available at:
https://www.hee.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Digital%20Literacy%20Capabili
ty%20Framework%202018.pdf (Accessed on 06/01/2023).
Health Education England (2017). Improving digital literacy. RCN publication code:
006 129.
Retrieved from:
https://hee.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Improving%20Digital%20Literacy%2
0-%20HEE%20and%20RCN%20report.pdf (2017) Google Scholar (Accessed
23/10/22)
Health Care Business and Technology (2016). Medical technology. Available
at: www.healthcarebusinesstech.com/medical-technology/ (Accessed 23/10/22).
Helsper, E.J., and Eynon. R. (2010) Digital natives: Where is the evidence? British
Educational Research Journal, Vol. 36(3) pp. 503 – 520.
Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902989227 (Accessed 23/10/2022).
Huryk, L.A. (2010) Factors influencing nurses’ attitudes towards healthcare
information technology. Journal Nursing Management, Vol. 18(5) pp. 606–612.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2834.2010.01084.x (Accessed
23/10/2022).
JISC. (2023). Building digital capabilities: The six elements defined. Available at:
https://repository.jisc.ac.uk/6611/1/JFL0066F_DIGIGAP_MOD_IND_FRAME.PDF
(Accessed 28/01/2023)
Kuek, A., and Hakkennes, S. (2020). Healthcare staff digital literacy levels and their
attitudes towards information systems. Health Informatics Journal, Vol. 26(1) pp.
592-612. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1460458219839613 (Accessed
23/10/22).
Martzoukou, K., Fulton, C., Kostagiolas, P and Lavranos, C. (2020), “A study of
higher education students’ self-perceived digital competencies for learning and
everyday life online participation”, Journal of Documentation, Vol. 76 (6), pp. 1413-
1458. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2020-0041 (Accessed 28/01/2023).
Mouton, M. (2023) Technology Tools for Teaching in Higher Education. The Practical
Handbook Series. Available at:
https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/techtoolsforteaching/chapter/2-using-zoomto-teach-synchronously-online/ (Accessed 06/01/2023).
Nursing and Midwifery Council (2018) Future nurse: standards of proficiency for
registered nurses. Available at:
https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/education-standards/futurenurse-proficiencies.pdf (Accessed 23/10/22).
Nwagwu, W.E., and Oshiname, R. (2009) “Information needs and seeking behaviour
of nurses at the University College Hospital, Ibadan, Nigeria”. African Journal of
library, archives and information science, Vol. 19(1) pp. 25-38. Available at:
https://web.s.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=1c622d1e-88fe4e46-a16a-ef3410ef6d4d%40redis (Accessed 06/01/2023).
Pearce, L. (2017). “Digital Literacy”, Nursing Standard, Vol. 31(48), pp. 18 – 20.
Available at: https://journals.rcni.com/doi/pdf/10.7748/ns.31.48.18.s22 (Accessed
06/01/2023).
Poston, J., Apostel, S., and Richardson, K. (2020) “Using Microsoft Teams to
Enhance Engagement and Learning with Any Class: It’s Fun and Easy”.
Pedagogicon Conference Proceedings. 6. Available at:
https://encompass.eku.edu/pedagogicon/2019/guidinggrading/6 Accessed
06/01/2023.
Pravikoff, D.S. (2006). “Mission critical: A culture of evidence-based practice and information literacy”. Nursing Outlook, 54 (4) pp. 254-255 Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2006.05.013 (Accessed 06/01/23).
Prensky, M. (2001) Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants.
On the Horizon (MCB University Press, Vol. 9(5).
Available at:
https://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20Digital%20Natives%20Digital%20I
mmigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf (Accessed 23/10/2022).
Royal College of Nursing (2023) Information, data and media literacies. Available at:
https://www.rcn.org.uk/clinical-topics/ehealth/digital-skills/digital-skills-info-datamedia (Accessed 23/10/22).
Royal College of Nursing and Health Education England. (2017) Improving digital
literacy. RCN/HEE, London. Available at:
https://www.rcn.org.uk/-/media/royal-college-of-nursing/documents/clinicaltopics/improving-digital
literacy.pdf?la=enandhash=7C7B84357CCC3F1EAA3297442C6103A5519CCA3F
(Accessed 23/10/22).
Secker, J. (2017). The trouble with terminology: rehabilitating and rethinking ‘Digital
Literacy’. In: Reedy, K. and Parker, J. (Eds.), Digital Literacy Unpacked. (pp. 3-16).
London: Facet Publishing. ISBN 178330197X (Accessed 23/10/22).
Serhan, D. (2020). Transitioning from face-to-face to remote learning: Students’
attitudes and perceptions of using Zoom during COVID-19 pandemic. International
Journal of Technology in Education and Science (IJTES), 4(4), pp. 335-342.
Stephenson, J. (2017). Call for Nurses to improve digital skills to boost care. Available
at: https://www.nursingtimes.net/news/technology/call-for-nurses-to-improve-digitalskills-to-boost-care-03-07-2017/ (Accessed 23/10/2022).
Terry, J., Davies, A., Williams, C., Tait, S., and Condon, L. (2019) Improving the
digital literacy competence of nursing and midwifery students: A qualitative study of
the experiences of NICE student champions. Nurse Education in Practice, Vol. 34,
pp. 192 – 198. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2018.11.016 (Accessed
23/10/2022).
Theron, M., Borycki, E.M., and Redmond, A. (2017) Chapter 8 – developing digital
literacies in undergraduate nursing studies: from research to the classroom.
Shachak, A., Borycki, E.M., and Reis, S.P. (Eds.), Health Professionals’ Education in
the Age of Clinical Information Systems, Mobile Computing and Social
Networks, Academic Press/Elsevier, London. Google Scholar
(Accessed 23/10/22).
White, D., and Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: a new typology for online
engagement. First Monday, 16(9). Available at:
https://firstmonday.org/article/view/3171/304 (Accessed 23/10/2022).
Wison, B. (2019) 7 Benefits of Continuing Education for Nurses. Available at:
https://thenerdynurse.com/7-benefits-of-continuing-education-for-nurses/ (Accessed 06/01/2023).

Developing Digital Literacy Among Nurses in Critical Care Unit

Posted on by
Reply

This post is written by Reena Antony Samy who is a Practice Development Nurse and nurse educator who recently completed the module EDM122. Her essay is licensed under CC-BY NC SA and she writes about digital literacy in critical care: 

Introduction

The use of Digital Health Technologies in the healthcare sector is rapidly increasing, and the expectation is to keep up the pace, adapt and maintain a high level of Digital Literacy. Technology was thought to be more confined to technically proficient people in the past. However, now everyone must have sufficient digital literacy to perform their jobs. Moreover, since the Covid 19 pandemic, technology-enhanced learning has become integral to teaching and learning.

I work as a Practice Development Nurse (PDN) / Nurse Educator at Adult Critical Care Unit, teaching the novice staff appointed to the critical care unit. Working in the Critical Care Unit for more than 15 years, I have come across many changes both in nursing education and the clinical care aspect, the most important one being Digitalisation. Replacing paper-based documentation with the Electronic Health Record Service (EHRS) is a significant transformation to the healthcare system. As a result, nurses are expected to be digitally proficient in using Information Systems and Digital Technology. Part of my job is to ensure the Electronic Health Record Service is safely implemented in the unit by ensuring that the nurses are confident and competent in using the new system. Health Education England (HEE, 2018) emphasises that every healthcare professional should have sound digital capabilities grounded in knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviours that will enable them to provide the utmost effective and high standard of compassionate care.

Digital Capabilities and Digital Literacies.

HEE (2018) proposed a Digital capability framework. However, there needed to be more clarity between Digital Capabilities and Digital Literacy. Secker J (2017) says that Digital Literacy is sometimes called Digital Capabilities. The author further argues that the term capabilities may result partly in acknowledging the problem related to digital literacy. HEE (2018) defines Digital Literacies are capabilities that fit someone for living, learning, working, participating, and thriving in a digital society. As technology evolves, the health and social care workforce should aim to be fully competent, confident, and capable of using the technology so that technology related incidents can be prevented.

Barriers

Implementation of the EHRS faced many challenges in the unit. The main barrier whilst implementing the EHRS was the human factor. Staff’s behaviours and attitudes around digital literacy posed a significant challenge in implementing this project. Lack of confidence, the fear of using the technology and unwillingness to learn can prevent or slow the technology’s pace. The staff’s current digital literacy level impacted the staff engagement in adapting to the new system. The confident and proficient staff in social and digital media embraced this change much more quicker and easier. HEE (2018) states that staff with better digital literacy tend to have more positive attitudes and behaviours in adopting new technology. Moreover, the attitude of the staff towards changes also has an impact on the staff engagement levels, which in turn can affect the safety and quality of patient care (Kuek and Hakkennes, 2020). HEE (2018) declares that organisational policy can sometimes create barriers. Like the employer’s unwillingness to use personal phones and learning devices in the workplace. Sometimes Wi-Fi and appropriate internet speed within the organisation may hinder access to digital facilities. For example, though the unit agreed for staff to use their devices, the speed of the internet posed a significant challenge, which affected the staff’s learning experience in adopting the new system.

Healthcare is said to be traditionally slow in adopting new digital tools and technologies, with some staff feeling nervous and sceptical about the digital revolution (Pearce, 2017) and sometimes due to technical factors in the organisation. It is essential to develop and improve the digital literacies of an individual and the organisation to transform how healthcare professional’s practise.

Role of the nurse educator in digital literacy

-Curriculum Change

The nurses must use technology effectively in the clinical setting to provide a high standard of patient care and decrease clinical errors. With the growing need for nurses to develop these digital skills, it is imperative to embed digital literacy in the nursing curriculum. One of the four aspects of developing digital literacies in practice (JISC, 2014) is ‘Curriculum Change’. The development of digital literacy must start with the pre-registration students. The nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) have included digital literacy in the 2018 Standards for Pre-Registration Nursing programmes and standards of Proficiency for Registered Nurses. Even though the main challenge is to overcome the financial implications (Peltonen et al ., 2019), Lokmic- Tomkins et al. (2022) emphasise targeted digital literacy education to improve nursing students’ baseline digital literacy before clinical placements. This must be scaffolded across the program to ensure a smooth transition to nursing practice. Even though most nursing curricula worldwide have endeavoured to incorporate the subject, adopting recommended curriculum change has needed to be faster (Cummings et al., 2016).

Further, Kennedy and Yaldren (2017) argue that curriculum modifications do not necessarily reflect the needs of workplace digital literacy. Therefore, in addition to the pre-registration education, continuing professional development and on-site training are needed to build the knowledge further. Brown et al. (2020) state that digitally literate nurses can better embrace and use new technology in various ways in clinical settings. The Adult Critical Care Unit’s staff ranged from brand-new graduates to well-experienced nurses. Though the newly qualified nurses with some digital literacy adopted the changes readily, others have trouble grasping the EHRS technological changes.

 

-Supporting the staff.

User engagement and training are vital in successfully implementing electronic health record services. It was evident that complex digital skills were necessary for this digitally-driven work environment. It was necessary to know the staff’s digital literacy level and attitude towards new technology to tailor training to the need (Jobst et al., 2020). Paul Gilster (1997), in the use of the term digital literacy, said it is about ‘mastering ideas – not keystrokes’. Being digitally literate is an ongoing process, and becoming more confident and proficient over time. The learning literacies and development framework (JISC, 2014) adapted from Sharpe and Beetham (2010) emphasise the development of digital literacies from access and functional skills to higher-level capabilities and identity.

Though the readiness assessment was carried out to identify the barriers and facilitate the successful adoption of EHRS, an individual’s self-assessment to assess the level of digital literacy should have been performed. Therefore, identifying the staff’s digital literacy level and customising the training according to the need was challenging. However, generalised training was provided for all the staff prior to the introduction of EHRS. As a result, some staff could accept it effortlessly while others had difficulty adapting to the new system.

It is not about introducing a new change to the system; as a nurse educator, my role was to incorporate and facilitate the changes in the best possible way and develop the staff to be more proficient. Familiarisation with the new system beforehand was initialised, which acted as an icebreaker. This enhanced the individual’s willingness, self-efficacy, and positive attitude towards the changes. Those already exposed to technology will be more confident using it than those new to digital technologies (Jobst et al., 2022). Moreover, raising awareness and engaging stakeholders in discussion is essential to develop shared understanding and goals. JISC (2013) gives a key message, ‘Involve Students’, as this will help focus on developing the technology, making the system more usable, and meeting the end user needs.

The most significant factor in achieving digital literacy and effectively implementing the EHRS is to identify digital champions who will support and develop the digital skills of the front-line staff. Digital champions were mainly enthusiastic volunteers willing to take up this role. Pearce, L. (2017) says that healthcare needs staff who are enthusiastic about technology and willing to embrace the changes. Digital champions acted as a bridge, provided feedback information, and enabled two-way conversation.

This project enhanced the digital literacy skills of the nurses. Digital literacy is a multi-layered, dynamic set of knowledge, skills and attitudes which shifts according to individual goals (HEE, 2018) that will enable them to improve the quality of care. Health Education England (2018) categorised digital literacy under the following domains.

  • Communication, collaboration and participation.
  • Teaching, learning and self-development
  • Information data and media literacies.
  • Creation, innovation and scholarship
  • Technical Proficiency
  • Digital identity and well being

Nurses are vital in introducing and implementing technology in clinical practices, such as using patient-related sensors and monitoring equipment. Though these are widely used in the critical care unit, using technology to input patient data is new. The expectation of the staff to use the technology effectively to ensure quality, safety and efficiency in health care services (Gonen et al., 2016). Therefore, technological literacy is crucial in the nursing world. The staff were exposed to a wide range of technologies like wristband scanners and were trained to use and troubleshoot when needed. Nes et al., 2021, emphasise that nurses should learn to use the technology and actively participate in developing it.

Another significant learning curve for the nurses in implementing the EHRS  is information and data literacy. The nurses are to input the patient’s data, collate, and analyse the information and formulate a nursing care plan for the patient. Bergren and Maughan (2020) argue that nurses should be able to use computers and information systems and apply data and evidence to inform practice. Though the staff are so used to the paper system, this project paved the way to acquire the knowledge to collect and analyse the data digitally. Furthermore, Li et al. (2022) state that Information literacy is an essential foundation for evidence-based nursing, which is imperative in health and social care to provide the best possible patient outcome.

In addition, implementing the EHRS enabled the nurses to communicate and collaborate with many people using the digital platform. Therefore nurses should also be able to recognise and act on situations that might compromise personal, professional and organisational security. HEE (2018) states that nurses must develop the ability to develop, promote and safeguard appropriate digital identities to support both personal and organisational reputations. Digital identity is one of the aspects nurses should take on as they enter into this digital age.

Moreover, nurse educators must be digitally competent and confident to impart knowledge to learners. The competencies nurse educators must impart to their students are highly significant, and the nurse educator should remain abreast of this new technology. Developing the clinical educator’s digital literacy is equally important so that they can support students more effectively. In implementing this project, the nurse educators were given the ‘Train the Trainer’ (TTT) sessions, so that nurse educators would act as a champion in promoting the new technology. HEE (2018) recommends that digital champions must be able to teach confidently and proficiently, coach, mentor, and train using different technologies.

Commencing on this Digital Literacy and Open Practice module revealed the importance of being digitally literate. It empowered me to implement EHRS in our critical care unit, which enhanced my digital literacy skills. I learnt to use different types of technologies to train the staff. We were constantly participating in online meetings and discussion forums, sharing files, and sometimes working online with others.  Though the TTT was thoughtfully arranged, some nurse educators needed more help acquiring the knowledge and skills. Jobst et al. (2022) state that nurse educators must be digitally competent to promote learning among nurses. This project served as a base to scaffold digital literacy not only for the nurses but also for the nurse educators at different levels of digital literacy.

 

Conclusion

Implementing Electronic Health Record service is a significant aspect of the digital health and social care transformation. The necessity for current and future nurses to be digitally literate is eminent. This essay explored the importance of nurses’ digital literacy in safely caring for patients using different technologies. It also identifies that equally; nurse educators must be competent to embed the knowledge among the nurses. Assessing the digital literacy knowledge among the staff before the training is crucial so the training can be customised to the need. Therefore, a self-assessment tool and a comprehensive digital Literacy training programme for the nurses are highly recommended as the way forward for the safer implementation of EHRS.

 

Reference

 

Bergren, M.D. and Maughan, E.D. (2020) ‘Data and Information Literacy- A fundamental Nursing Competency’, NASN School Nurse, 35(3), pp: 140.

 

Brown, J., Pope, N., Bosc,A.M., Mason,J. and Morgan, A. (2020) ‘Issues affecting nurses’ capability to use digital technology at work : An integrative review’, Journal of Clinical Nursing,  29, pp: 2801- 2819.

 

Cummings, E., Shin, E., Mather, C.,  and  Hovenga, E. (2016) ‘Embedding nursing informatics education into an Australian undergraduate nursing degree’, Studies in Health Technology and Informatics, 225, pp: 329–333.

 

Developing Digital Literacies (2014) https://www.jisc.ac.uk/guides/developing-digital-literacies

accessed on 07/01/2023

 

Gilster, P. (1997) Digital Literacy. New York,NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

 

Gonen,A., Sharon,D., Offir,A. and Lev-Ari, L. (2014) ‘How to enhance nursing students’ intention to use information technology: The first step before integrating it in nursing curriculum’, Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 32 (6), pp. 286-293.

 

Health Education England (2018) ‘Digital literacy Capability Framework’, https://www.hee.nhs.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Digital%20Literacy%20Capability%20Framework%202018.pdf Accessed on 8/1/2023

 

Jobst,S., Lindwedel,U., Marx, H., Pazouki, R, Ziegler, S., Konig,P., Kugler, C and Feuchtinger, J. (2022) ‘Competencies and needs of nurse educators and clinical mentors for teaching in the digital age – a multi-institutional, cross-sectional study’ BMC Nursing, 21(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-22-01018-6   Accessed on 10/01/2023

 

Kennedy, S., and  Yaldren, J. (2017) ‘A look at digital literacy in health and social care’, British Journal of Cardiac Nursing, 12(9), pp. 428–432.

 

Kuek,A . and Hakkennes, S. (2020), ‘Healthcare staff digital literacy levels and their attitudes towards information systems’ Health Informatics Journal, 26(1), pp: 592-612.

 

Li,X., Zhang,J., Zheng,Y., Wang,Y and Hao,W. (2022) ‘Factors associated with information literacy of nursing undergraduates in China’, BMC Nursing, 21:81. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-022-00855-9 Accessed on 15/01/2023

 

Nes, A.A.G., Steindal, S.A., Larsen, M.H., Heer, H.C.,Laerum-Onsager, E. and Gjevjon,E.R. (2021) ‘ Technology Literacy in Nursing education’,  Journal of professional Nursing, 37(2), pp: 320 -334 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.01.008  Accessed on 15/01/2023

 

NMC (2018) ‘Standards framework for nursing and midwifery education’ https://www.nmc.org.uk/globalassets/sitedocuments/standards-of-proficiency/standards-framework-for-nursing-and-midwifery-education/education-framework.pdf

Accessed on 10/01/2023

 

Pearce L. (2017), ‘Digital Literacy’, Nursing Standard, 31(48), pp: 18-20.

 

Peltonen,L.M., Nibber,R., Lewis,A., Block,L., Pruinelli,L., Topaz,M., Perezmitre,E.L. and Ronquillo, C. (2019) ‘Emerging professionals’ observations of opportunities and challenges in nursing informatics’ Nurse Leadership , 32, pp. 8-18.

 

Secker, J. (2017) ‘The trouble with terminology: Rehabilitating and Rethinking Digital Literacy’. In Reedy, K. & Parker, J. (eds.) Digital Literacy Unpacked. London: Facet Publishing, pp. 3-16.

 

Sharpe, R. & Beetham, H. (2010) ‘ Understanding students’ uses of technology for learning: Towards creative appropriation’. In Sharpe,R., Beetham,H.  and de Freitas,S. (eds.), Rethinking learning for a digital age: how learners shape their experiences. Routledge Falmer, London and New York, pp. 85-99.

 

 

This essay is published under common creative licence ‘Attribution- NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0).

Sharing my student assignments openly!

Posted on by
3

Copyright literacy cakes

This year for the first time I modified the assessment for the module EDM122 to require students to publish their final assignment openly on a blog. Over the next few days I will release most of these assignments in a series of blog posts from the 2022/23 cohort. It was also a requirement to add an open licence to the work and to explain why they’d chosen the licence they did. This change has really helped students engage more fully with developing their digital literacies but also thinking about how open licensing works.

I’m so delighted that they agreed to do this and I really hope you enjoy reading about different aspects of digital literacy and open practice and how it relates to their practice.

I also hope to be starting some further research into staff attitudes towards digital literacy and open practice over the coming months.

Digital Literacies and Open Practice webinars 2022/23

Posted on by
Reply

Photo of Jane Secker, woman with blond hair wearing a black jacket

Dr Jane Secker, Module Tutor, EDM122

I can’t believe the term is going so quickly and EDM122 is now half way through! This post is a little later than planned as I recently took over as Programme Director for City’s Masters in Academic Practice, as well as the module lead for EDM122 Digital Literacies and Open Practice. I am teaching this course again with my colleague, Dr Julie Voce who is Head of Digital Education at City.

There have been some changes to the module, including an additional teaching day has been adding. The four teaching days are supplemented by webinars which includes an amazing line up of guest speakers who are all experts in their field. This year the webinars mainly take place during the teaching days and so guests are welcome to watch the recordings, but can’t join these sessions live. A couple of the sessions have also been pre-recorded. Our experience in previous years was a relatively small number of people wanted to join live, however please drop us a line if you have any questions or are very keen to join a session.

The schedule for webinars for 2022/2023 is as follows:

  • 12th October 2022 – Chris Morrison, Copyright and Licensing Specialist, Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, Digital literacy, copyright and open practices.
  • 2nd November 2022 – Jenny Scoles, Academic Developer (Learning & Teaching Enhancement), Institute for Academic Development, The University of Edinburgh. Blogging as Academic Practice.
  • 2nd November 2022 – Lauren Regan, Digital capability and City students & Geraldine Foley, Digital Capability and City staff.
  • 23rd November 2022 – Lorna Campbell, University of Edinburgh and Catherine Cronin, Open Education Practices.
  • December 20223 – Claire Wotherspoon and Catriona. Embedding Digital literacy in the curriculum.

So far we have got four recordings available and I will be adding the recordings and slides to the webinar page in due course and keeping this up to date. It’s hard to believe, but this is the fifth year of running the module and we have the largest cohort yet taking the course in 2022/23.

Welcome to EDM122 2022/23

Posted on by
Reply

Come in we are open sign

Photo by Leyre Labarga on Unsplash

Welcome to the new academic year and the fifth time I’ve run this module (yes it’s hard to believe I know but I started this module in October 2018 when the world was a different place). I’ve also made some changes to the module this year to reflect a few issues that have arisen from previous cohorts. The assignments have been slightly modified. Students now have to tackle both topic (digital literacies and open practice) in their 2 assignments. So if they choose to make a video about digital literacy then they need to write their essay on open practices. Or visa versa. I’ve also integrated the webinars far more into the teaching days. And there are now 4 teaching days including 3 online and one on campus. Finally the second assignment, the essay, now needs to be published with an appropriate open licence on it. So you may well start to see these appearing on this blog, or on another platform chosen by the students.

As ever I am delighted to have guests joining us for the webinars. If you would like to attend one of these sessions then please do drop me a line. Further details of the speakers are below but all the sessions are going to be recorded:

  • Wednesday 12th October 2022: Chris Morrison, Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, Digital literacy, copyright and open practices.​
  • Pre-recorded video: Lauren Regan, Geraldine Foley and Elisabetta Lando, LEaD, Insights into City staff and student digital experiences. ​
  • Wednesday 2nd November 2022: Jenny Scoles, Academic Developer (Learning & Teaching Enhancement), Institute for Academic Development, The University of Edinburgh. Blogging as Academic Practice. ​
  • Wednesday 23rd November 2022: Lorna Campbell, University of Edinburgh and Catherine Cronin, National Forum for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education in Ireland, Open Education Practices.​
  • Tuesday 2nd December 2022: Claire Wotherspoon, Catriona and Jen, Open University, Embedding Digital literacy in the curriculum.​

Happy new term!