Educating for digital futures : what the learning strategies of digital content professionals can teach higher education

Beginning in the second half of the 20th century, ICTs transformed many societies from industrial societies in which manufacturing was the central focus, into knowledge societies in which dealing effectively with data and information has become a central element of work (Anderson, 2008). To meet the needs of the knowledge society, universities must reinvent their structures and processes, their curricula and pedagogic practices. In addition to this, of course higher education is itself subject to the sweeping influence of ICTs. But what might effective higher education look like in the 21st century? In designing higher education systems and learning experiences which are responsive to the learning needs of the future and exploit the possibilities offered by ICTs, we can learn much from the existing professional development strategies of people who are already successful in 21st century fields, such as digital media. In this study, I ask: (1) what are the learning challenges faced by digital media professionals in the 21st century? (2) what are the various roles of formal and informal education in their professional learning strategies at present? (3) how do they prefer to acquire needed capabilities? In-depth interviews were undertaken with successful Australian digital media professionals working in micro businesses and SMEs to answer these questions. The strongest thematic grouping that emerged from the interviews related to the need for continual learning and relearning because of the sheer rate of change in the digital media industries. Four dialectical relationships became apparent from the interviewees’ commentaries around the learning imperatives arising out of the immense and continual changes occurring in the digital content industries: (1) currency vs best practice (2) diversification vs specialisation of products and services (3) creative outputs vs commercial outcomes (4) more learning opportunities vs less opportunity to learn. These findings point to the importance of ‘learning how to learn’ as a 21st century capability. The interviewees were ambivalent about university courses as preparation for professional life in their fields. Higher education was described by several interviewees as having relatively little value-add beyond what one described as “really expensive credentialling services.” For all interviewees in this study, informal learning strategies were the preferred methods of acquiring the majority of knowledge and skills, both for ongoing and initial professional development. Informal learning has no ‘curriculum’ per se, and tends to be opportunistic, unstructured, pedagogically agile and far more self-directed than formal learning (Eraut, 2004). In an industry impacted by constant change, informal learning is clearly both essential and ubiquitous. Inspired by the professional development strategies of the digital media professionals in this study, I propose a 21st century model of the university as a broad, open learning ecology, which also includes industry, professionals, users, and university researchers. If created and managed appropriately, the university learning network becomes the conduit and knowledge integrator for the latest research and industry trends, which students and professionals alike can access as needed.

Gendering climate change: A feminist criminological perspective

Drawing on insights from feminist scholars and activists, this article examines the dialectical relationship between climate change and the social construction of gender. We examine in detail how gender inequalities associated with capitalism, particularly in its latest Neoliberal incarnation, help to produce global warming, as well as to produce gendered vulnerabilities and unequal impacts. After a brief review of past successes and failures to integrate gender concerns into climate change debates and policies, we suggest several criminological interventions that are compatible with a feminist perspective on climate change. We argue that a stronger criminological focus on the global political economy, particularly on the gendered inequalities it produces, is analytically essential for understanding both the etiology and harmful consequences of climate change. Simultaneously, we urge critical criminologists to employ the tools of our trade to take a more proactive role in the social construction of a just and sustainable society.

The right to a voice and the fight to be heard: The experience of being an ESL user in Australia

This paper focuses on the fundamental right to be heard, that is, the right to have one’s voice heard and listened to – to impose reception (Bourdieu, 1977). It focuses on the ways that non-mainstream English is heard and received in Australia, where despite public policy initiatives around equal opportunity, language continues to socially disadvantage people (Burridge & Mulder, 1998). English is the language of the mainstream and most people are monolingually English (Ozolins, 1993). English has no official status yet it remains dominant and its centrality is rarely challenged (Smolicz, 1995). This paper takes the position that the lack of language engagement in mainstream Australia leads to linguistic desensitisation. Writing in the US context where English is also the unofficial norm, Lippi-Green (1997) maintains that discrimination based on speech features or accent is commonly accepted and widely perceived as appropriate. In Australia, non-standard forms of English are often disparaged or devalued because they do not conform to the ‘standard’ (Burridge & Mulder, 1998). This paper argues that talk cannot be taken for granted: ‘spoken voices’ are critical tools for representing the self and negotiating and manifesting legitimacy within social groups (Miller, 2003). In multicultural, multilingual countries like Australia, the impact of the spoken voice, its message and how it is heard are critical tools for people seeking settlement, inclusion and access to facilities and services. Too often these rights are denied because of the way a person sounds. This paper reports a study conducted with a group that has been particularly vulnerable to ongoing ‘panics’ about language – international students. International education is the third largest revenue source for Australia (AEI, 2010) but has been beset by concerns from academics (Auditor-General, 2002) and the media about student language levels and falling work standards (e.g. Livingstone, 2004). Much of the focus has been high-stakes writing but with the ascendancy of project work in university assessment and the increasing emphasis on oracy, there is a call to recognise the salience of talk, especially among students using English as a second language (ESL) (Kettle & May, 2012). The study investigated the experiences of six international students in a Master of Education course at a large metropolitan university. It utilised data from student interviews, classroom observations, course materials, university policy documents and media reports to examine the ways that speaking and being heard impacted on the students’ learning and legitimacy in the course. The analysis drew on Fairclough’s (2003) model of the dialectical-relational Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to analyse the linguistic, discursive and social relations between the data texts and their conditions of production and interpretation, including the wider socio-political discourses on English, language difference, and second language use. The interests of the study were if and how discourses of marginalisation and discrimination manifested and if and how students recognised and responded to them pragmatically. Also how they juxtaposed with and/or contradicted the official rhetoric about diversity and inclusion. The underpinning rationale was that international students’ experiences can provide insights into the hidden politics and practices of being heard and afforded speaking rights as a second language speaker in Australia.