Digital Media in Adult and Continuing Education in Germany
10.3280/exioa2-2022oa15075
Digital media are important elements in the didactic planning and design of provisions and programmes in adult and continuing education. Based on questionnaire and interview data from organizations and umbrella organizations active in adult and continuing education in Germany, the article examines how adult educators use digital media and what reasons they give for using them. The article distinguishes between types of digital media, digital tools, and didactically structured digital media offerings. The analysis shows that educators use digital media in settings combining micro- and macrodidactics. Overall, didactic considerations are shifting more to the macrodidactic planning level, emphasizing the role of organizations and umbrella organizations. This is accompanied by changing demands on cooperation between planning staff and instructors. Moreover, the roles of staff expand and diversify with the use of digital media.
application/pdf
2499-507X
15075
2
en
Silke Grafe
Excellence and Innovation in Learning and Teaching - Open Access
digital tools
Digital Media in Adult and Continuing Education in Germany
Text.Serial.Journal
https://journals.francoangeli.it/index.php/exioa
7
Saggi e ricerche
2022-12-20
2022-12-12
2022-12-20
2022-12-20
EXIOA
Silke Grafe
2022/12/20
10.3280/exioa2-2022oa15075
Julius-Maximilians-Universität of Würzburg (JMU)
2499-507X
2
digital tools
en
Zierock, L. (2016). Lernkulturwandel in der Erwachsenenbildung - Vom Wissensvermittler zum Lernraumgestalter und Online-Tutor. In Zentrum Bildung der EKHN (Hrsg.), Wie digitale Medien Bildung verändern: Herausforderungen, Chancen und Projektideen (pp. 10-12).
Digital Media in Adult and Continuing Education in Germany
https://journals.francoangeli.it/index.php/exioa/article/download/15075/2115
7
Saggi e ricerche

Digital Media in Adult and Continuing Education
in Germany
Lisa Breitschwerdt, Vanessa Beu, Regina Egetenmeyer, Silke Grafe*




Abstract
Digital media are important elements in the didactic planning and design of
provisions and programmes in adult and continuing education. Based on
questionnaire and interview data from organizations and umbrella
organizations active in adult and continuing education in Germany, the article
examines how adult educators use digital media and what reasons they give for
using them. The article distinguishes between types of digital media, digital
tools, and didactically structured digital media offerings. The analysis shows
that educators use digital media in settings combining micro- and
macrodidactics. Overall, didactic considerations are shifting more to the
macrodidactic planning level, emphasizing the role of organizations and
umbrella organizations. This is accompanied by changing demands on
cooperation between planning staff and instructors. Moreover, the roles of staff
expand and diversify with the use of digital media.

Keywords: Digital media, adult and continuing education, digitalization,
media education, digital tools.


Article submitted: 27/09/2022; accepted: 22/11/2022
Available online: 20/12/2022




*
    Julius-Maximilians-Universität of Würzburg (JMU).

Excellence and Innovation in Learning and Teaching (ISSNe 2499-507X), 2022, 2

Doi: 10.3280/exioa2-2022oa15075




                                    Copyright © FrancoAngeli
          This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                    No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                              please see: http://creativecommons.org
Introduction

    Digitalization and mediatization processes in society (Krotz, 2007) raise
questions about how digital media may be used in the design of teaching-
learning processes in adult and continuing education. The rapid pace at which
digital media continue to evolve and become more widely available creates ever
new possibilities of using these media in both formal teaching-learning settings
and informal learning contexts. The use of media changes the nature of
teaching-learning settings in adult and continuing education organizations
(Christ et al., 2020, p. 20), calling for modified approaches in teaching
methodology and for adult education concepts taking account of the special
qualities of digital media (Egetenmeyer et al., 2021).
    For decades – and under different names (especially “new media”) – the use
of digital media has been a widely discussed issue in adult and continuing
education (e.g., Baacke et al., 1990; Stang, 2001), including both theoretical
discourse and empirical studies (e.g., Hippel, 2007). Recent studies focus on
use-related issues and on how adult and continuing education staff rate the
effectiveness of digital media in formal teaching-learning settings (e.g., Schmid
et al., 2017; Sgier et al., 2018). What is missing in this research is a specific
analysis of the reasons that make adult educators want to use digital media in
formal teaching-learning settings. At the same time, adult and continuing
education research faces the challenge of keeping pace with the rapid
developments in digital media and their potential applications in practice –
driven, most importantly, by the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. Particularly
after the first lockdown during the Covid-19 pandemic, continuing education
programmes in Germany were converted into purely online formats (Christ et
al., 2021, 24f.). In these settings, the use of digital media can be assumed to
have increased substantially since the summer of 2020.
    In this article it is examined what types of digital media are used by staff in
adult teaching-learning settings in Germany and what reasons are given for
using them. For this purpose, the article starts with a definition following
Tulodziecki et al.’s (2021) threefold distinction of digital media (Section 2).
The research project “Digitalisation in Adult and Continuing Professional
Education” (DigiEB, 2019-2022)1 has collected questionnaire and interview
data on digitalization at adult and continuing education organizations in
Germany in two survey rounds (Section 3). Following the above typology and
applying the approach of triangulation, data on adult educators’ media use is
examined, their assessment of the effectiveness of that use, and their underlying
didactic reasoning (Section 4). In the final section, the results of the empirical

1
    More information on this project is available online: go.uniwue.de/digieb.

                                              6




                                    Copyright © FrancoAngeli
          This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                    No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                              please see: http://creativecommons.org
analyses, connect them to current discourse, and identify points of departure for
further research are discussed (Section 5).


“Digital Media” in the context of adult and continuing education

    Media are intermediaries “through which potential signs are recorded or
produced and processed, transmitted, stored or reproduced or presented and
made available in communicative contexts with technical support”
(Tulodziecki et al., 2021, p. 33). They exert an influence on individuals and
society and must be seen in the “context of the technical, legal, economic,
personal, institutional, political and other social-cultural conditions of their
production and dissemination” (Tulodziecki et al., 2021, p. 33). Digital media
are defined as those media that are based on information and communication
technologies. In adult education discourse, they are also called “new media”
(e.g., Stang, 2001).
    Considering the role of new media in teaching and learning from an
empirical perspective, studies trying to demonstrate general effects of digital
media often neglect specific characteristics of digital media, the learning
process, or other dependent variables (Tulodziecki et al., 2021, p. 33).
Accordingly, these studies are of limited value for didactic decisions (ibid). In
contrast, evaluation studies, which consider the specific circumstances of the
teaching and learning process, show that using digital media can lead to higher
motivation and increased cooperation, to self-directed learning or to an
advancement of cognitive skills (for an overview, see Herzig, 2014).
    The use of digital media in adult and continuing education programmes and
offerings must be understood as a didactic issue (Hippel & Freide, 2018, pp.
974-976), which is often raised in connection with teaching methodology (e.g.
Weidenmann, 2011). The terms didactic or didactics are frequently used in the
German discourse when it comes to the design of learning opportunities.
Didactics refers to the considerations, actions and reflections to support
learning processes in the best possible way (Hippel et al., 2018). Within
didactics, it can be distinguished between microdidactic considerations of
media use in the immediate teaching and learning interactions (e.g., Hippel et
al., 2018) and macrodidactic perspectives in programme planning (e.g., Fleige
et al., 2018). Microdidactics focuses the concrete interactions between teachers
and learners. Macrodidactics addresses the design of an organisation’s total
educational offerings with regard to the organisation’s objectives.
    Following the typology provided by Tulodziecki et al. (2021), digital media
can be distinguished between digital media types, digital tools, and didactically
structured digital media offerings. This approach is helpful when analysing

                                           7




                                 Copyright © FrancoAngeli
       This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                 No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                           please see: http://creativecommons.org
digital media usage with regard to the different didactic levels (see also
Grotlüschen, 2018; Koppel, 2021).
   Digital media types refer to media as a whole (Tulodziecki et al., 2021),
such as computers/laptops or TV sets. Media type thus also includes the
hardware used. Aside from computers/laptops and projectors, relevant digital
media in adult education settings may include interactive whiteboards,
document cameras/visualizers, digital cameras, and, if applicable, screens with
smart TV functionalities or mobile devices such as smartphones or tablets.
Thus, digital media types are linked to questions of adult education spaces (e.g.
Stang et al., 2018) and the equipment installed.
   Examples of digital tools include standard software (e.g., presentation
software), programming environments, mind mapping or knowledge
management tools, and learning and content management systems. Tulodziecki
et al. (2021) compare these to analogue tools such as blackboards, flipchart
stands, or moderation walls; because the applications are immediately available
and are used to prepare content for teaching and learning settings.
   Didactically structured digital media offerings have in common that they
offer content in a (didactically) structured manner. Tulodziecki et al. (2021)
distinguish between teaching programmes, open teaching systems or
explorative learning environments, practice programmes, digital textbooks,
experimentation and simulation environments, augmented or virtual reality
applications (AR, VR), intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), learning games, and
videos. This changes the role of instructors (e.g., Schüepp, 2018; Sgier et al.,
2018) because the content has already been fully or partially pre-structured for
didactic purposes.


Methods

   The study presented here is based on data from the research project
“Digitalisation in Adult and Continuing Professional Education” (DigiEB). It
analyses data from six adult and continuing education organizations and from
two associated umbrella organizations in different regions of Germany. The
sample includes municipal organizations, denominational organizations, and
non-company-based training organizations experienced in using digital media.
Data collection in the organizations was divided into a first and a second survey
round (see Fig. 1). The aim was to observe how digitalization evolves in the
facilities2.

2
 For an insight into the overall conception of the research project as well as into the
data collected see Egetenmeyer et al. (in process).

                                            8




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
Figure 1- Methodology




    To analyse digital media usage in adult and continuing education, the study
draws on questionnaire data from an online survey of the organizations’ staff
from both survey rounds. For this article, 111 data sets (survey period:
September to November 2020) and 424 data sets (survey period: September to
November 2021) are analysed on four items3. From the more extensive
questionnaire, those items are selected that provide information on respondents’
media use. The sample size provides initial insight into the situation at the
organizations surveyed, but it is not a representative sample. Participants in
both the questionnaire study and the interview study can be assumed to be
drawn towards digital media. For this article, the following presented items on
digital media use are analysed descriptively and statistically (Rasch et al.,
2014).
    The questionnaire data concerning respondents’ reasons for using digital
media are supplemented by an analysis of qualitative data from eight kick-off
interviews (survey period: March to August 2019) and 58 expert interviews
with organizational staff (survey period: September 2019 to February 2020).
The second survey round involved 53 short interviews (survey period: March
to June 2021).
    With regard to profession, the sample includes lecturers (survey period one:
20; survey period two: 17), who often work as freelancers for various
organisations, and the organisations’ permanent staff (survey period one: 37;
survey period two: 38), who are usually more responsible for organisational

3
  Over the course of the two survey rounds, the qualitative and quantitative survey of
instructors, staff, and contributors generated a comprehensive data set. For this article,
we analysed 535 data sets. Further information on the total sample can be found in the
data manual planned for publication.

                                            9




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
and planning tasks. The qualitative data were transcribed and anonymized
(Dresing & Pehl, 2018; Meyermann & Porzelt, 2014). The analysis is based on
a qualitative content analysis and a deductive-inductive approach following
explicit rules of coding (Mayring, 2015; Kuckartz, 2016)4. Applying a mixed
methods design (Creswell et al., 2003), first the digital media categories in the
questionnaire were used (e.g., “videos”) to analyse the interview data. In a
second step, inductive categories on digital media use from the material were
developed. For this purpose, the text passages on digital media use that were
assigned to the deductive categories and analysed the reasons given by the staff
for using them were revisited.


Digital media usage in adult and continuing education


   In the questionnaire survey, 93% of continuing education staff in 2020 and
92% in 2021 report using digital media in their courses. The same applies to
the results on the types of courses offered (Fig. 2).

Figure 2- Types of courses offered in adult and continuing education (multiple answers possible)


                       Types of courses offered in adult and continuing education
                                96
                 100
                  90                      80
                  80                                                                                  70
                  70                                                        61                                  57
    Types in %




                  60                                               54
                  50
                  40
                  30
                  20
                  10
                   0
                        In-person-only courses with      E-learning-only courses (learners    Blended learning (mix of in-
                       digital elements (learners must   can participate and access course   person and e-learning settings)
                        come to a specific location)      contents online at any time and
                                                                  from any place)

                                 Survey round 2020 (N=111)               Survey round 2021 (N=424)




4
  The project’s research design is based on a dialogical approach (Gómez et al., 2011;
Tulodziecki et al., 2014) which aims to achieve a beneficial interconnection of
perspectives from research and practice and to facilitate an in-depth understanding of
the research object on all sides.

                                                                  10




                                             Copyright © FrancoAngeli
                   This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                             No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                                       please see: http://creativecommons.org
    In 2020, 96% of respondents report offering face-to-face courses as well,
suggesting that responses also reflect teaching activities prior to the Covid-19
pandemic. The 2021 results, which are significantly lower (80%), suggest that
the restrictions associated with the Covid-19 pandemic led to a drop in face-to-
face teaching. For example, the share of online-only courses increased from
2020 (54%) to 2021 (61%). Blended learning formats, by contrast, were used
less frequently in 2021 (57%) than in 2020 (70%). This might have to do with
the increase of online-only courses during the Covid-19 pandemic, which led
to a decline in blended learning courses.


Digital media types

   At both survey times, the data reveal that the respondents used a wide range
of digital media types. At the same time, clear preferences for some digital
media types emerge (Fig. 3).

Figure 3 - Use of digital media types in adult and continuing education courses (multiple answers
possible)


                                  Use of digital media types in adult and
                                      continuing education courses
                                  97
                         100           91
                          90
                          80
                          70
                                            66 64
                          60
              Use in %




                                                    50 50                        49
                          50                                     43
                          40                                          34    32
                          30
                          20                                                          10 13
                          10                                                                  1 3
                          0




                               Survey round 2020 (N=111)              Survey round 2021 (N=424)




                                                            11




                                   Copyright © FrancoAngeli
         This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                   No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                             please see: http://creativecommons.org
    The most frequently used digital media type by far is computers/ laptops/
tablets (2020: 97%; 2021: 91%) and projectors. About two-thirds of
respondents use smartphones or mobile phones (2020: 66%; 2021: 64%) in
their courses. The high scores in these two categories indicate that familiarity
with digital media types in the private sphere is reflected in their professional
use. However, there are also some striking changes in the use of digital media
types between the two survey rounds. The significant decline in the use of
document cameras/visualizers (2020: 43%; 2021: 34%) could be due to a
growing shift to online-only settings. Whereas in 2020, the use of digital media
types seemed to depend fundamentally on the equipment available on the
premises (“depending on what’s in the classroom”; G_I5: 8)5 , on-site technical
equipment plays a lesser role in the online-only settings overrepresented in
2021. The issue of equipment rather shifts to the equipment of the digital
meeting room. This may also help explain the sharp increase in the use of digital
cameras (2020: 32%; 2021: 49%). It is reasonable to assume that digital
cameras – both those integrated in mobile devices and those attached externally
– were now part of the necessary basic equipment to participate in online
settings. Related to this is a growing awareness among continuing education
staff of the range of digital media types available and thoughts on how to use
them appropriately in teaching settings. Equipping rooms with digital media is
not only an issue at organizations but also at the individual level as instructors
think about professionalizing their media equipment at home: “Yes, well, I'm
also upgrading here. I bought a tablet, and a pen, and some graphic thingy, one
after another.” (G_I5a: 12).
    In addition to equipping rooms with digital media, the organizations face the
challenge of training and supporting their staff in using them: “Because if this
is supposed to work really well, you also have to train the trainers.” (H_I7a: 9).

Digital tools

    At both survey times, more than half of respondents used digital tools (Tab.
1). When asked to rate the effectiveness of these digital tools, respondents
tended to give high ratings at both dates. Whereas in 2020 the high standard
deviations point to a large variance in ratings, in 2021 staff seem to be able to
rate the effectiveness of digital tools in a somewhat more focused way across
the board.

5
  The same persons were interviewed in both survey rounds. The first letter (A–H)
denotes the organization. The combination of “I” and a number is used to identify the
person interviewed at that organization (e.g., “I7”). The lower-case letter “a” marks the
second interview date.

                                            12




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
Table 1- Digital tools: Usage figures and effectiveness ratings

                                                               Effectiveness ratings
                                     Use in %           (1=not effective at all to 5 = highly
                                                                     effective)
                                  Surve    Surve
                                    y         y                                Survey round
       Digital tools                                 Survey round 2020
                                  round    round                                   2021
                                   2020     2021
                                   N=       N=
                                                            N = 111               N = 424
                                   111       424
                                                        M             SD        M           SD
    Application   software6         86       76        4,43           1,1      4,37         0,9
    Video conferencing
                                    86       83        4,18           1,1      4,32         0,9
    applications
    Learning and content
    management systems              82       69        3,88           1,2      4,05         0,9
    (LMS/CMS)
    Online survey                   66       63        3,58           1,4      3,86         1,0

    Chat programmes                 55       51        3,69           1,4      3,64         1,1

    Cloud services                  49       50        3,69           1,5      3,74         1,1


   Interestingly, comparing the 2020 and 2021 figures reveals a striking 10%
decrease in the use of application software although the effectiveness rating
remains constant (2020: M = 4.43; 2021: M = 4.37). Whereas interviewees in
the first survey mainly refer to presentation software as a basic digital tool (“we
simply use PowerPoint”; B_I6: 28), the primary focus on application software
seems to decrease somewhat at the second survey time. Application software
does not become obsolete, but rather than being the main tool it is now one
option for designing teaching-learning settings alongside a variety of other
digital tools: “[...] now there is Zoom. But the way it is now, you need additional
tools for it. It’s not enough to have PowerPoint, I also need a tool for
collaboration. I don’t know, Padlet, or something else.” (H_I3a_DO: 55)
   The high usage scores and effectiveness ratings for video conferencing apps
(2020: 86%, M = 4.18; 2021: 83%, M = 4.32) must be read against the
background of the developments starting with the Covid-19 pandemic. Prior to
the pandemic, respondents used videoconferencing apps primarily as part of
individual pilot projects (e.g., online-only or hybrid courses). At the time of the
second interview survey, they were proficient in a range of different

6
  To help respondents understand what is meant by each category, the questionnaire
included examples (e.g., PowerPoint, Excel, Trello).

                                                13




                                     Copyright © FrancoAngeli
           This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                     No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                               please see: http://creativecommons.org
videoconferencing systems (E_I2a: 18), knew of their respective advantages
and disadvantages (e.g., C_I7a: 52; C_I12a: 12; G_I1a: 10), and made more
extensive use of the additional functionalities provided by the platforms (e.g.,
breakout sessions, chat functions, integrated apps):
   And so now we already work with group rooms, these breakout rooms. [...] I also
   see that with my trainers now. They more often use screensharing, additional apps,
   additional whiteboards that maybe offer more functions than the standard ones in
   virtual classrooms. (H_I2a: 14)
    A sharp decline in usage among respondents is also evident for learning and
content management systems (LMS/CMS) provided by continuing education
organizations (2020: 82%; 2021: 69%). Their effectiveness ratings went up,
however (2020: M = 3.88; 2021: M = 4.05). On the one hand, this might indicate
that staff in 2021 were better able to choose and use LMS/CMS more
appropriately for their own purposes than they were in 2020. The interview data
show that LMS/CMS are used to support the teaching-learning process in
asynchronous phases as well. Adult and continuing education staff see a wide
range of possible applications, for instance as a knowledge documentation tool,
as a place for exchanges with and among participants, or as information sharing
platforms (e.g., F_I1: 25; C_I2a: 13; C_I13a: 44; H_I6a: 8). Usability is cited
as the most important reason for or against using LMS/CMS: respondents state
that using learning and content management systems makes sense if they are
intuitive and easy to use.
    Whereas the questionnaire only asked about online survey tools, the
interviews of 2019/2020 show the use of additional online tools in a few
isolated cases among respondents with a special interest in media education
(e.g., E_I3: 12-13); in 2021, use of additional online tools was reported much
more broadly. These tools are used to create quizzes, virtual bulletin boards,
virtual surveys, learning modules, or project management workflows. Looking
at both survey rounds, online tools are named primarily in connection with
online offerings and less in connection with face-to-face offerings.
    Chat apps (2020: 55%; 2021: 51%) and cloud computing services (2020:
49%; 2021: 50%) were used for classroom purposes by roughly half of the adult
and continuing education staff at both survey times. The respective
effectiveness ratings turn out to be relatively mediocre (2020: M = 3.69 & 3.69;
2021: M = 3.64 & 3.74), with an initially broad and then adequate standard
deviation (2020: SD = 1.4 & 1.5; 2021: SD = 1.1 & 1.1). Supplementary
analysis of the interview data shows that communicating via chat apps serves
as an alternative to in-house organizational learning and communication
platforms as a quick and easy way to manage organizational aspects of course
delivery: “Organizing a course is easier, of course, if you have a WhatsApp


                                           14




                                 Copyright © FrancoAngeli
       This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                 No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                           please see: http://creativecommons.org
group.” (B_I10: 112). To comply with data protection regulations, chat apps
are mainly used indirectly, with participants rather than staff using them on
their own initiative as a quick communication tool. This may also explain the
relatively high standard deviation in the effectiveness ratings. At the same time,
however, it can be seen that some staff are critical of commercial chat apps for
data protection reasons (e.g., H_I2: 15; G_I3: 32).

Didactically structured digital media offerings

    Concerning the use of didactically structured digital media offerings, a
greater variety and clear differences in the effectiveness ratings at both survey
times can be seen (see Fig. 4)7. Whereas the 2020 data still show strong
variation in respondents’ assessment of the benefits of individual digital media
offerings, the connection between usage and effectiveness ratings becomes
clear in 2021. In both, the 2020 and 2021 data, educators give higher
effectiveness ratings to those digital media offerings that they have used more
frequently. Media offerings used by only a few respondents receive lower
ratings. This may indicate that certain media offerings, such as experimentation
and simulation environments or intelligent tutorial systems (ITS), are less
frequently available in the organizations. This would mean that necessary
general prerequisites for piloting and building up experience are lacking.
    Overall, it is apparent that adult educators mainly use those media offerings
that are already fully developed and can be easily used in the classroom. These
include videos, which are used in the classroom by a high share of respondents
(2020: 81%; 2021: 78%) and whose effectiveness is rated as very high (2020:
M = 4.2, SD = 1.0; 2021: M = 3.98, SD = 0.9). Supplementary analysis of the
interview material shows that fully produced videos (e.g., on platforms such as
YouTube) are readily used in course settings given their easy availability, and
because it does not matter how the course is delivered (online only, face-to-
face, or blended/hybrid):

    Showing films, for example, is something I can do quite well. [...] In the past, people
    used to sit together in the same room, watched the film and then talked about it.
    Now that is done digitally. And it works, too. (C_I8a: 16)

   It is less common for videos to be specifically designed for teaching
purposes and then made available as a digital medium to be used in the
classroom. Creating such videos involves prior didactic planning of the course

7
  To help respondents understand what is meant by each category, the questionnaire
included examples (e.g., YouTube, Media Library).

                                            15




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
setting, for example, on how to guide and support participants during
asynchronous phases of self-directed learning, as illustrated by the following
example: “blended learning, then of course we have videos [...] that are
specifically adapted to this. [...] available for them as a resource if they want to
go deeper [...].” (H_I5: 21)

Figure 4 - Use of digital media offers in seminars and effectiveness ratings of the use of digital
media offers in seminars

                     Use of digital media offers in seminars (vertical bars)
                    Effectiveness ratings of the use of digital media offers in
                                         seminars (lines)
              100                                                                                   5
              90    81 78
              80                                                                                    4
                                 67




                                                                                                        (1=not effective at all to 5=highly effective)
              70            63
                                      59




                                                                                                            Mean value of effectiveness ratings
              60                           51                                                       3
   Use in %




              50                                43 40
              40                                        36 33                                       2
                                                                31 30
              30                                                        21
                                                                             15   17        14 11
              20                                                                       13           1
              10
               0                                                                                    0




                             Survey round 2020 (N=111)
                             Survey round 2021 (N=424)
                             Mean value of effectiveness ratings survey round 2020 (N=111)
                             Mean value of effectiveness ratings survey round 2021 (N=424)



   Two-thirds of staff interviewed used digital textbooks provided to them,
with a slight increase in usage rates (2020: 63%; 2021: 67%) and in

                                                         16




                                          Copyright © FrancoAngeli
                This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                          No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                                    please see: http://creativecommons.org
effectiveness ratings (2020: M = 3.77; 2021: M = 3.92). The interviews show
that whether or not instructors use digital textbooks depends, among other
things, on their being available at the organization or on their being purchased
via umbrella organizations or external providers, such as publishers (e.g., B_I2:
4; F_I6: 48).
    For all other digital media offerings, there is a decline in usage by the second
survey round. This is also reflected in the interviews, in which respondents talk
less about more complex media offerings. One possible explanation for this
might be the nationwide switch to online settings, which forced organizations
and staff to devote most of their attention to this effort and to concentrate many
resources on creating the necessary infrastructures, installing the required
hardware, and developing suitable teaching concepts.
    A more detailed look at practice programmes enabling learners to practice
and consolidate learning content shows that 43% (2020) and 40% (2021) of
respondents use them in their courses. In 2021, around half of the respondents
(51%) still used digital tests, examinations, and learning progress assessments
in their courses. The use of digital tests, particularly in continuing vocational
training, is closely linked to the curricular structures of the specific training
programme for which they are developed (e.g., G_GD: 21). Moreover, they are
used when they are provided by the organizations. Usually these are practice
programmes for learners to use on their own.
    Digital learning games (2020: 36%; 2021: 33%) and open teaching systems
or explorative learning environments and teaching programmes (2020: 31%;
2021: 30%) are used less frequently by respondents8. One respondent talks
about an open learning environment elaborately created by the organization
(F_GD: 28). This indicates that the organization must provide extensive
resources for its development. At the same time, such learning environments
change the role of teachers: the content and suitable teaching approaches have
already been prepared by the organization, leaving teachers to serve more as
facilitators supporting the learning process.
    The questionnaire data show less usage of experimental and simulation
environments (2020: 21%; 2021: 15%), intelligent tutorial systems (ITS) (2020:
17%; 2021: 13%), which adapt to learners’ knowledge and skills, and
augmented or virtual reality applications (AR, VR) (2020: 14%; 2021: 11%).
This suggests there are hardly any offerings available for use in adult education
settings and that developing such offerings is considered to be very time-
consuming. Again, we see that educators tend to use media that are already fully

8
  Open teaching systems or explorative learning environments provide content in a
hypermedia format and in a manner suitable for teaching. Teaching programmes also
offer didactic guidance to help learners navigate the learning process.

                                           17




                                 Copyright © FrancoAngeli
       This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                 No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                           please see: http://creativecommons.org
developed and can be used quickly and easily. Development and usage require
extensive time and financial resources; moreover, the organization must
provide the necessary infrastructure.

Digitalized data repositories as another type

   Based on our analysis of the interview material, the original typology of
digital media can be expanded to include the area of digitalized data
repositories. These include, for example, digital legal texts, subject-specific
databases, digital translation tools, vocabulary databases, or platforms
providing video material on various topics. These data repositories, which are
available online for the most part, are used by staff to prepare and conduct
teaching-learning settings. This type of digital material is not specifically
prepared to be used for teaching; rather, instructors use it based on their didactic
planning and implementation of teaching-learning settings.


Conclusion

    Breaking digital media down into digital media types, digital tools, and
didactically structured digital media offerings provides a detailed insight into
how digital media are used by adult and continuing education staff. With
respect to media types, one the one hand, their usage is a macrodidactic question
of room planning and media availability linked to the framework conditions in
the organizations. On the other hand, the shift of teaching-learning settings into
digital space means that questions of media usage are increasingly
individualized, with individual instructors incorporating microdidactic
considerations into their work. The strongest development is evident in the use
of digital tools. Adult educators can become familiar with a wide range of
digital tools and they are quickly and directly available, as well as easy to use.
Adult education organizations and umbrella organizations have resolved
licensing issues and established the digital infrastructure (e.g., hardware,
bandwidth, power supply) and provide a stable and reliable framework for
implementation. To some extent, this is also true of didactically structured
digital media offerings. The latter often involve an elaborate development
process or require costly licenses. It can be assumed that efforts in this direction
have been put on hold at many organizations given the challenging situation of
the past two years. The addition of a fourth type – digital data repositories –
points to current and future dynamics and trends in the use of digital media. In
summary, it is possible to draw some conclusions that are likely to be relevant
to the use of digital media in adult and continuing education.

                                           18




                                 Copyright © FrancoAngeli
       This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                 No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                           please see: http://creativecommons.org
Key role of organizations and umbrella organizations in making digital
media available

    It is important to emphasize the key role of organizations and umbrella
organizations. They play a major role in purchasing digital media and making
them available for use (e.g., hardware, development of more comprehensive
concepts, licenses for using tools). In this effort, they must engage in
macrodidactic-level reflections not only about content planning but also about
marketing their own educational programmes, for instance via social media
(Grotlüschen, 2018). This perspective also includes recruiting, hiring, and
professionalizing staff. The results suggest that it is not enough to just make
digital media available; staff and instructors must be taught how to use them,
for instance through suitable staff development measures and training
programmes (Breitschwerdt & Egetenmeyer, 2021). Likewise, it is crucial to
provide informal opportunities to try out digital media in the facility. The
interview material points to the need for an organizational culture that is
supportive and open in dealing with uncertainties in the use of digital media to
motivate staff. In summary this illustrates, on the one hand, the value of
focusing more on organizations in research, for instance regarding a culture
conducive to digitalization. On the other hand, it reveals essential aspects for
the organization themselves that appear relevant for digitization-related
organizational development, such as personnel development that enables both
formal and informal opportunities for professionalization. With regard to the
umbrella organizations, the results also point to their importance in creating
structures in negotiation with political actors, for instance concerning funding
and the legal framework of digital media use.

Distinction between micro- and macrodidactic considerations

    Overall, the results show that digital media are already widely used in the
organizations surveyed. At the same time, this clearly changes the role of the
organizations. Aside from shifting the content-related and didactic management
of programmes and offerings involving digital media to the macrodidactic
level, this affects organizational and staff development processes that address
these digitalization-related changes and establish an organizational culture that
leads to a joint development of adequate concepts of digital media usage. This
clearly illustrates that using digital media requires didactic considerations at the
macrodidactic planning level (Fleige et al., 2018; Fleige et al., 2018; Hippel et
al., 2018). A framework must be established at the organizational level to
address questions about equipping rooms with digital media types (e.g.,
interactive whiteboards), making digital tools available (e.g.,

                                           19




                                 Copyright © FrancoAngeli
       This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                 No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                           please see: http://creativecommons.org
videoconferencing apps, learning and content management systems), and
establishing didactically structured digital media offerings (e.g., digital
textbooks, open teaching systems). Developing more complex media offerings
requires cooperation with the instructors to create a didactically meaningful
framework for using digital media. This calls for establishing basic
collaborative strategies between teaching and planning staff. More detailed
research is needed, especially regarding the planning staff, who will in the
future be increasingly involved in didactic questions in the planning phase.

Changing staff roles

    The use of digital media changes not only the requirements for the didactic
actions of staff involved in programme planning but also the role of instructors,
who increasingly become learning facilitators supporting teaching-learning
processes (e.g., Schüepp, 2018; Sgier et al., 2018). Furthermore, new roles are
emerging that are responsible for providing technical support to teaching-
learning settings, for example (e.g., Zierock, 2016). The challenge here is that
these new roles are not necessarily performed by additional staff, but rather
become an additional responsibility of instructors themselves. Organizations
provide a media framework in terms of digital media, which is not only
provided for the participants but also guides the didactic options of the
instructors. In the future, adult education will have to deal with how to address
the demands on teaching and learning settings, which are becoming more
complex with the increasing use of digital media. This raises basic didactical
questions, including ways of implementing these didactic concerns in the
organisational culture, for example, how to involve and support participants in
their media use or how to facilitate cooperation between different actors (e.g.,
facilitator, technical support, etc.) around the design of teaching and learning
settings.

Notes: This article emerged from the project “Digitalisation in Adult and Continuing
Professional Education” (2019-2022), which is funded by the German Federal Ministry
of Education and Research as part of the funding line “Digitisation in education:
fundamental questions and conditions for success” (Funding ID: 01JD1805).
This paper is a further developed version which is refering to Breitschwerdt, L., Thees,
A.,       Egetenmeyer,       R.     (2022):      Digitale       Median       in      der
Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung.         Magazin      erwachsenenbildung.at.       Das
Fachmedium für Forschung, Praxis und Diskurs, 16(44-45). URL:
https://erwachsenenbildung.at/magazin/22-
44u45/11_breitschwerdt_thees_egetenmeyer.pdf. Print version: Books on Demand
GmbH: Norderstedt.



                                            20




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
References

Baacke, D., Schäfer, E., Treumann, K. P., & Volkmer, I. (1990). Neue Medien und
    Erwachsenenbildung. Walter de Gruyter.
Breitschwerdt, L., & Egetenmeyer, R. (2021). Professionalisierung im Kontext von
    Digitalisierung und Mediatisierung: Zu Fortbildungsformaten für das Personal in
    der Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung. In M. Schemmann (Hrsg.),
    Internationales Jahrbuch der Erwachsenenbildung: Band 44. Optimierung in der
    Weiterbildung (pp. 55-74). wbv.
Christ, J., Koscheck, S. & Martin, A. (2021). Auswirkungen der Coronapandemie auf
    Weiterbildungsanbieter: Ergebnisse der wbmonitor Umfrage 2020. wbmonitor.
    BIBB.
Christ, J., Koscheck, S., Martin, A., Ohly, H., & Widany, S. (2020). Digitalisierung:
    Ergebnisse der wbmonitor Umfrage 2019. Verlag Barbara Budrich.
Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003).
    Advanced mixed methods research design. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.),
    Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 209-240). Sage
    Publ.
Dresing, T., & Pehl, T. (Hrsg.) (2018). Praxisbuch Interview, Transkription & Analyse:
    Anleitungen und Regelsysteme für qualitativ Forschende (8. Auflage). Dr. Dresing
    und Pehl GmbH.
Egetenmeyer, R., Grafe, S., Beu, V., Breitschwerdt, L., Büttner, L., Kröner, S.,
    Lechner, R., Thees, A., Treusch, N. (in process). Datenmanual für das Projekt
    Digitalisierung in der Erwachsenen- und Weiterbildung (DigiEB), 2019-2022.
Egetenmeyer, R., Kröner, S., & Thees, A. (2021). Digitalisierung in Angeboten der
    Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung. Zeitschrift für Weiterbildungsforschung,
    44(2), 115-132. Doi: 10.1007/s40955-021-00185-4.
Ernst, H., Schmidt, J., & Beneken, G. H. (2016). Grundkurs Informatik: Grundlagen
    und Konzepte für die erfolgreiche IT-Praxis - Eine umfassende, praxisorientierte
    Einführung (6. Aufl.). Springer eBook Collection. Springer Vieweg. Doi:
    10.1007/978-3-658-14634-4.
Fleige, M., Gieseke, W., Hippel, A. von, Käpplinger, B., & Robak, S. (Hrsg.) (2018).
    Programm- und Angebotsentwicklung in der Erwachsenen- und Weiterbildung.
    wbv Publikation.
Gómez, A., Puigvert, L., & Flecha, R. (2011). Critical Communicative Methodology:
    Informing Real Social Transformation Through Research. Qualitative Inquiry,
    17(3), 235-245. Doi: 10.1177/1077800410397802.
Grotlüschen, A. (2018). Erwachsenenbildung und Medienpädagogik: LinkedIn &
    Lynda, XING und Google als Bildungsanbieter. MedienPädagogik - Zeitschrift Für
    Theorie Und Praxis Der Medienbildung, (30), 92-113.
Herzig, B. (2014). Wie wirksam sind digitale Medien im Unterricht?. Bertelsmann
    Stiftung.
Hippel, A. von (2007). Medienpädagogische Erwachsenenbildung: Eine Analyse von
    pädagogischem Auftrag, gesellschaftlichem Bedarf und Teilnehmendeninteressen.
    Schriftenreihe der Landesmedienanstalt Saarland: Vol. 14. LMS.

                                            21




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
Hippel, A. von, & Freide, S. (2018). Erwachsenenbildung und Medien. In R. Tippelt &
   A. von Hippel (Eds.), Handbuch Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung (6. Aufl., pp.
   973-999). Springer VS.
Hippel, A. von, Kulmus, C., & Stimm, M. (2018). Didaktik der Erwachsenen- und
   Weiterbildung. Verlag Ferdinand Schöningh.
Koppel, I. (2021). Gelingensbedingungen für den Einsatz digitaler Medien.
   MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift Für Theorie Und Praxis Der Medienbildung, 51-78.
   Doi: 10.21240/mpaed/jb16/2021.01.12.X.
Krotz, F. (2007). Mediatisierung: Fallstudien zum Wandel von Kommunikation. VS
   Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Kuckartz,     U.    (2016).    Qualitative    Inhaltsanalyse.    Methoden,     Praxis,
   Computerunterstützung (3., überarbeitete Aufl.). Beltz.
Mayring, P. (2015). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (12. Aufl.).
   Beltz.
Meyermann, A., & Porzelt, M. (2014). Hinweise zur Anonymisierung von qualitativen
   Daten. Forschungsdatenzentrum (FDZ) Bildung am DIPF. Forschungsdaten-
   Bildung. https://www.forschungsdaten-bildung.de/files/fdb-informiert-nr-1.pdf.
Rasch, B., Friese, M., Hofmann, W., & Naumann, E. (2014). Quantitative Methoden 1:
   Einführung in die Statistik für Psychologen und Sozialwissenschaftler (4., überarb.
   Aufl.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Schmid, U., Goertz, L., & Behrens, J. (2017). Monitor Digitale Bildung: Die
   Weiterbildung im digitalen Zeitalter. Bertelsmann Stiftung.
Schüepp, P. (2018). Digitalisierung in der Weiterbildung: Die Sicht der Ausbildenden:
   Ergebnisse einer Befragung von Inhaberinnen und Inhabern des eidg.
   Fachausweises Ausbilder/in. PH Zürich.
Sgier, I., Haberzeth, E., & Schüepp, P. (2018). Digitalisierung in der Weiterbildung:
   Ergebnisse der jährlichen Umfrage bei Weiterbildungsanbietern. SVEB & PHZH.
Stang, R. (2001). Neue Medien in der Erwachsenenbildung: Positionspapier des DIE.
   https://www.die-bonn.de/esprid/dokumente/doc-2001/projektgruppe-neue-
   medien01_01.pdf.
Stang, R., Bernhard, C., Kraus, K., & Schreiber-Barsch, S. (2018). Lernräume in der
   Erwachsenenbildung. In R. Tippelt & A. von Hippel (Hrsg.), Handbuch
   Erwachsenenbildung/Weiterbildung (6. Aufl., pp. 643-658). Springer VS.
Tulodziecki, G., Herzig, B., & Grafe, S. (2014). Gestaltungs- und
   entwicklungsorientierte Bildungsforschung (Enzyklopädie Erziehungswissenschaft
   Online EEO). Beltz Juventa.
Tulodziecki, G., Herzig, B., & Grafe, S. (2021). Medienbildung in Schule und
   Unterricht: Grundlagen und Beispiele (3., durchgesehene und aktualisierte
   Auflage). Verlag Julius Klinkhardt.
Weidenmann, B. (2011). Erfolgreiche Kurse und Seminare: Professionelles Lernen mit
   Erwachsenen (8., vollständig überarbeitete Aufl.). Beltz.
Zierock, L. (2016). Lernkulturwandel in der Erwachsenenbildung - Vom
   Wissensvermittler zum Lernraumgestalter und Online-Tutor. In Zentrum Bildung
   der EKHN (Hrsg.), Wie digitale Medien Bildung verändern: Herausforderungen,
   Chancen und Projektideen (pp. 10-12).


                                            22




                                  Copyright © FrancoAngeli
        This work is released under Creative Commons Attribution - Non-Commercial –
                  No Derivatives License. For terms and conditions of usage
                            please see: http://creativecommons.org
