EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

Bringing in learners’ voices

The very last point emphasises the inadequacies of educational systems and structures in paying attention
to learners’ expectations and how difficult it is for them to express their voices in ways that can really
significantly improve teaching and learning processes in general. In the particular domain of technology, it
may be claimed that there are regular national surveys, thus providing a clear indication of technology
trends among young people particularly. However, it is unusual to have these kinds of surveys in relation to
teaching and learning expectations and the corresponding degree of fulfilment.

Different ratings on the PISA scale between students with access to a computer and those without, after
allowing for the effect of different socio-economic backgrounds

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
AU A B CAN CZ DK FIN G HE HU IC IRL IT JPN KOR MEX NZ POL P SLK S CH T US
-10

-20

-30

having a computer at home having a computer at school

The next two figures provide an example of the kind of relevant information that could eventually be
gathered if the learners’ voices were taken into account. Both figures are part of a national survey carried
out by Ipsos Mori in England in 2007. They allow for a comparison between predominant teaching and
learning practices in classrooms and pupils’ expectations in secondary education.

1
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

Most common classroom activities according to English pupils aged 15

Q: Which three of the following do you do most often in class?

Copyfromtheboardor abook 52%

Listentoateacher talkingfor along time 33%
Haveaclassdiscussion 29%
Takenoteswhilemyteacher talks 25%
Workinsmall groupsto solveaproblem 22%
Spendtimethinkingquietlyonmyown 22%
Haveadrinkof water whenI need it 17%
Talkabout myworkwithateacher 16%
Workona computer 16%
Listentobackgroundmusic 10%
Learnthingsthat relatetothereal world 10%
Havesomeactivitiesthat allowmetomovearound 9%
Teachmy classmatesabout something 8%
Createpicturesor mapstohelpmeremember 7%
Haveachangeof activitytohelpfocus 7%
Havepeoplefromoutsidetohelpme learn 4%
Learnoutsideinmyschool’sgrounds 3%

Source: Ipsos Mori (2007).

Most preferred ways to learn according to English pupils aged 15

Q: In which three of the following ways do you prefer to learn?

In groups 55%

By doing practical things 39%

With friends 35%

By using computers 31%

Alone 21%

Fromteachers 19%

Fromfriends 16%

By seeing things done 14%

With your parents 12%

By practising 9%

In silence 9%

By copying 8%

At a museum or library 5%

By thinking for yourself 6%

Fromothers 3%

Other 1%

Source: Ipsos Mori (2007).

The comparison between the two figures is clear enough regarding the mismatch of current practices and
expectations. The English survey points to the fact that predominant teaching and learning practices are not
long far from matching learners’ expectations, but lag behind in terms of providing the recommended

2
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

teaching and learning practices that current educational discourses, drawing on empirical research, claim to
be most appropriate. And the point is that technology is just part of the picture and not necessarily the most
important one. This is why a project like NML should invest more effort in identifying and revealing
learners’ (boys and girls) perceptions of desirable changes in education. If research points in the same
direction and this is not matched by current practices, the NML case would prove to be an additional
leverage for educational change.

Concluding remarks

A first remark has to do with the concept of NML, or more precisely, with the issue of adopting such a title
to cover such a complex research field as that focusing on the effects of technology on learners. NML may
be a good brand to suggest that there is an urgent need to know more about these effects, but it would be
misused if it only served to draw attention to a fictitious image of empowering effects of technologies on
all children and youngsters equally. NML works well as a recognisable title for a project, but that is all.
The generational approach adopted by most analysts and essay writers cannot be sustained empirically.
Contrarily, there is enough evidence to claim that an unduly neglected issue such as the role of digital
technologies in the amplification of divides among children and young people has to be taken seriously
both by educational institutions and policy makers. Neither gender nor socio-economic status seem to be at
the forefront of current educational research on technology. But they should be, as both issues challenge
the prevailing homogeneous and comfortable assumptions regarding the positive effects of technologies
that the common policy discourse usually contains.

The second remark is that research in this field seems to still be in its infancy and much effort is needed to
accumulate more knowledge. There is a pressing need for more systematic research across the broad range
of topics discussed here to better understand the effects of technology on learners. Up to now, there seems
to be an important divide among researchers dealing with these issues. As it has been phrased by
Livingstone (2007), some researchers anchor their investigation by reference to an issue which is
considered problematic in nature, such as violence or lack of attention, and then ask to what extent
technologies are to blame. Their response comes after rigorous testing intended to identify causes. A
second group of researchers begin with a critique of this approach for being too focused on the negative
sides of the effects of technologies, and then proceed by way of describing how children enjoy
technologies and what they believe that children gain from them. Although it is likely the truth may lie
somewhere in the middle, unfortunately this second approach has failed to bring any conclusive empirical
findings so far.

3
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

REFERENCES

4
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

ANNEX 1: PROJECT PROGRESS UPDATE

OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

I. Overview of the project

This section provides basic information about the Project, according to the initial drafting approved
by the CERI Governing Board. The next section, on accomplished tasks and outcomes, discusses what was
actually achieved in 2007. The third section describes expected outcomes for 2008, and the final section
outlines a possible second phase.

Project background and objectives

New Millennium Learners (NML) is a broad concept that covers, first of all, the young generations
born after 1985 who may be described as having grown up in an environment surrounded by ICT, which is
considered by adult generations as being a new concept, ranging from computers and the Internet to
cellular phones, video-consoles and mp3 players. This is why they are usually called digital natives, as
opposed to digital immigrants. Secondly, there is no doubt that a growing number of adults can be said to
act also as NML, for their lives are also extremely dependent on digital technologies.

There are clear indications that the use of ICT made by NML surpasses the path and the scope that
can be usually granted at most schools and universities in OECD countries. Just to give an indication, more
than 90% of all 15 year-olds in most OECD countries can access a computer connected to the Internet,
50% connect daily at home but only less than once a week in schools.

The relevance of the NML phenomenon lies in the fact that they can also be seen as signalling an
alternative approach to the knowledge society to the one usually supported by formal educations
institutions. These rely more on a progressive adaptation of the traditional approaches to communication
and knowledge management than on the severe breakthrough that NML practices seem to announce. While
the first is more suited to the life rhythms and pace of evolution of educational institutions, the second
would represent a true revolution which will seriously contrast with the knowledge society designed not by
true digital natives, but by adults. The critical issue is whether educators and policy makers should be
paying more attention to NML or whether it should be taken for granted that they do not represent a serious
challenge for the future but just the expression of another generational conflict.

Accordingly, the objectives of the project are the following:

To synthesise research on issues related to the conceptualisation of NML and its social and educational
implications from a multidisciplinary perspective.

To compare the penetration and extension of this phenomenon in OECD countries, as well as to analyse the
factors that help to explain both cross-national and intra-national differences.

To generate empirical evidence on the effects of the emergence of NML on their

cognitive/relational/communicational skills, their cultural patterns, lifestyles and values, their concepts of

5
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

knowledge acquisition, usage and production, as well as their expectations regarding teaching and learning,
and finally their educational performance.

To explore the implications of NML for educational systems and institutions and assess their relevance.

Methodology and planning

The first phase of the project will be carried out during 2007 and 2008 with a possible extension for
two more years in the next CERI Programme of Work (2009-2010).

Three complementary strands are being developed: an analytical strand, a set of empirical
components, and a case study strand. Both the empirical components and the case studies strands are
intended to feed the analytical work. The empirical components are designed to provide comparative
evidence on NML and their views about education while the case study strand is intended to deal mainly
with the educational responses aimed at better accommodating NML competences and attitudes to
education systems.

Analytical strand

A first analytical strand will pilot and monitor the overall development of the activity. This will target
the conceptualisation of the NML, the development of an appropriate empirical component and the case
studies, and the analysis of the results obtained. This analytical strand is comprised of:

Detailed analysis of the 2003, 2006 and eventually 2009 PISA databases and INES upper secondary school
survey on the school and out-of-school use of ICT, as well as other OECD databases on the availability of
technological devices and services for out-of-school use.

Systematic research and literature reviews intended to synthesise research findings on the
conceptualisation or the implications of the emergence of NML on a national basis.

A series of international workshops to explore key issues (see below).

The creation of a knowledge network of experts and relevant stakeholders to engage in discussion about
the issues involved in the activity.

The empirical strand

The empirical strand is aimed at gathering evidence regarding who NML are, what the factors
explaining cross-country and intra-national differences are, and how far their views and practices regarding
knowledge challenge those held traditionally by schools. The empirical strand has three different
components:

An international survey on NML practices regarding ICT, in and outside classrooms. This survey is likely
to become part of the next PISA round (2009).

A qualitative research, carried out simultaneously in all the participating countries, on how NML deal with
real-life problems involving communication skills and knowledge management, and the role they assign to
ICT, in and outside classrooms.

An open discussion board, for teachers, pupils and parents, on the topics arising from the examination of
the results of the two components above.

6
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

The case studies

To enrich the analytical strand, the information gathered from the empirical components will be
supplemented by a series of case studies undertaken to highlight educational innovations intended to
benefit from NML ICT-related competences, needs and expectations and to integrate them into daily school
life. These will focus, for instance, on:

The adoption of typical NML technological devices and services other than computers for school activities.

New models of school organisation and ICT management that focus, for instance, on ubiquitous learning.

Innovative educational programmes and practices taking stock of how NML deal with personal
communication and knowledge acquisition, management, production and sharing.

How these innovations are being taken into account in teacher training institutions.

Outputs and Dissemination

The activity will produce a range of outputs:

Expert papers commissioned to bring a multidisciplinary perspective on NML.

A series of international workshops to explore key issues such as the conceptualisation of NML, teachers’
and pupils’ conflicting views about ICT and education, and the futures of NML technological devices and
services in education.

Background reports and systematic research and literature reviews produced by participating countries
on the state of the art of research on NML.

A report on the evidence of the emergence of NML across OECD countries and its impact on school
education drawing on the results of an international survey.

A report on the results of the qualitative research on NML approach to knowledge management in and
outside schools.

Selected case studies of innovative practices in accommodating NML potential to educational activities.

A final report with main conclusions focusing on international trends on NML, good educational practices,
and policy recommendations.

To maximise impact, ongoing dissemination of findings will be an integral part of the project. This
will involve:

A NML website, which will include tools for gathering evidence on NML, as well as a blog and discussion
boards.

A NML e-newsletter for participating countries and other relevant stakeholders.

Two international conferences to present key issues, one on the conceptualisation and the implications of
NML (beginning 2008) and another on the educational responses to the NML challenge (beginning 2009).

Active CERI participation in relevant meetings and conferences.

7
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

II. Accomplishments in 2007: Focusing on the demand side

This section describes the main tasks accomplished during 2007 and provides an indication of the
resources allocated.

It should be noted that, due to staffing constraints, the main focus of the first phase of the project
(2007-2008 biennium) has been on the demand side, i.e. examining the changes operated in learners as a
result of the widespread use of digital technologies. A proposed second phase (2009-2010 biennium) is
expected to deal basically with the supply side, i.e. how educational institutions and public policies are, or
should be, changing to cope with the new millennium learners.

Accomplished outcomes

Expert meetings

Three international expert meetings were conveyed during this year:

a. On the concept of NML in Florence (Italy, March 2007), sponsored by INDIRE. This was the first
expert meeting and was intended to provide an overview of the ongoing research in this domain as
well as possible directions for future work. Not surprisingly, all experts agreed on the importance of
NML as an emerging phenomenon all over OECD countries and its relevance for educational policy
making and practice. But as a matter of fact, there is little evidence supporting some commonly agreed
beliefs, as for instance that this is exclusively a generational phenomenon and that all teenagers are
equally NML. As a result, irrespective of how attractive and fancy the concept of NML may seem to
be, there is a need to better define it, exploring not only the most salient elements that are more
appealing but drawing on what evidence is telling us. As a result the following areas for future work
were identified:

educational performance

videogames

gender

teacher training

socio-economic status

b. On ICT and educational performance in Jeju Island (South Korea, October 2007), sponsored by
KERIS. Four messages emerged from this meeting:

There is a risk of developing two policy discourses. The first one claims that the real
educational benefits of using ICTs are to be seen in domains such as team working, creativity,
problem-solving and the like. The problem with this is that they are hardly assessed in
national examinations. The second discourse focuses on what are the factors that really boost
performance as measured in current national and international surveys. For the former,
investing more in ICTs is a must; for the latter, there is not enough evidence.

In fact there is no conclusive evidence about the benefits of ICT in school performance, but
this can be due to the fact the research methodologies used so far are either weak or
inappropriate, because they do not ask the right questions. These should be not whether ICTs

8
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

are worth using or not, but rather how to use them to improve the quality and the results of
education.

In this particular area more emphasis should be put on randomized trials.

Far clearer is the picture emerging from the analysis of ICTs out-of-school usage and its
impact on educational performance which research shows to be clearly positive and
incremental provided that the risk of addiction is avoided.

c. On videogames and education in Santiago (Chile, October 2007), sponsored by ENLACES. The
main messages arising from this seminar are four:

There is a lot to learn from the concept of flow, which is crucial in the design and playability
of a videogame, in order to improve the attractiveness of learning and this does not imply that
learning has to become edutainment.

The bestselling videogames do have a negative impact on social attitudes towards violence
and sexual harassment, by lowering the threshold of tolerability –unfortunately there is scarce
evidence regarding the possible positive effects of videogames, probably because researchers
are not interested in them.

Videogames can effectively be used in learning even in institutional settings as schools and
universities.

The industries of videogames have a social responsibility and, at least in Europe, they are
ready to cooperate with governments to help both teachers and parents to accompany young
videogame players in and educational way.

On the whole 46 experts from 18 OECD countries have participated in these meetings. In all three,
they were joined by a number of national experts.

The corresponding agendas, background and expert papers, as well as the meeting reports and minutes
can be downloaded from the project website at www.oecd.org/edu/nml. All of these constitute the basis for
three OECD reports currently under preparation (see below).

Research reviews

Six research reviews have been commissioned in 2007 and will be ready by early 2008 (one more to
be added). The purpose of these multi-national, multi-lingual literature reviews is to answer the following
questions:

a. A summary of the most recent national statistical surveys regarding:

Spread of the use of digital technologies according to age, gender, and SES

Spread of use in teaching at schools and universities.

b. A detailed literature review (of what has been published in the corresponding language,
irrespective of the nationality of the authors) of what research shows regarding the following
questions:

Does the use of digital technologies have any impact of cognitive skills development?

9
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

Does this use have an influence on attitudes and social values? A particular issue here is that of
videogames.

Does it have an effect on educational outcomes, in the broadest sense (including traditional academic
results, and nontraditional educational objectives).

The research team leaders and countries covered are the following:

English speaking countries (Canada, United States, United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia): Prof.
Richard Andrews, University of London Institute of Education (UK).

French speaking countries (France, Belgium, Canada, Switzerland, Luxembourg): Prof. Georges-Louis
Baron, Université Paris V-La Sorbonne (France).

Nordic countries (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland): Prof. Morten Soby, ITU-University of
Oslo (Norway).

Spanish speaking countries (Spain, Mexico, Chile): Magdalena Claro, independent consultant
(Switzerland).

German speaking countries (Austria, Germany, Switzerland): Prof. Rudi Tippelt, University of Munich
(Germany).

Korea: Dr. Jeonghee Seo, KERIS (South Korea).

Japan: to be determined, but possibly Prof. Shimizu Yasutaka, from NIME (Japan).

Dissemination activities

Participation in international conferences or national events to present the project in Norway, France,
Spain, Mexico, Italy, Belgium, Germany, Chile, South Korea, United States, Turkey and United Kingdom.

Publications (in press):

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy

Revista Iberoamericana de Educación (with Francisco Benavides)

III. Activities for 2008: closing the circle

This section provides an overview of the expected outcomes during 2008 and the resources allocated
to that end.

Expected outcomes

Publication of reports

The first three publications of the project will be published in 2008. The provisional titles and
contents are the following:

10
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

Connected minds: the emerging concept of new millennium learners. This publication (manuscript due
June 2008) is intended to summarize research evidence on the NML from a comparative perspective based
on the commissioned research reviews, the expert papers presented in the Florence meeting, and internal
work.

Looking for the invisible? ICTs and educational performance. This is based mostly on the Jeju meeting,
with substantial input, currently under development, by a dedicated Korean research team (manuscript due
June 2008).

Serious playing: videogames and education. This comes as a result from the Santiago meeting and will
substantially expand the background document already prepared for that meeting (manuscript also due
June 2008).

Also, it is worth mentioning that there is a commitment with the PISA team to publish a revised
edition of the report entitled Are students ready for a technology-rich world? The revision, with a
substantial contribution from the Norwegian Ministry of Education, will be based on the 2006 PISA
results, recently issued. This publication should be issued before the summer of 2008.

Expert meetings

Three expert meetings are planned for 2008, as to cover the rest of issues initially suggested (at the
Florence meeting):

a. Gender, technology and education. Thanks to a financial contribution from the Norwegian
Ministry of Education this expert meeting is going to be held in Paris on 10 April 2008. Cathrine
Tømte, a Norwegian expert, has been seconded to work for the preparation of the background
paper for this meeting.

b. The use of technology in initial teacher training. This work would entail a comparative study
among OECD countries. A substantial financial contribution from the Swedish Knowledge
Foundation will allow a Swedish expert to work extensively on the background paper for this
meeting, to be held in Sweden in autumn 2008. The US Federal Office of Technology in
Education has expressed interest in this activity and there are conversations regarding possible
cooperation in this particular area.

c. Socio-economic status, technology and education. No sponsor has been found for this meeting
yet, which would be the last one organised in 2008.

As an outcome of these expert meetings, three more publications could possibly see the light in 2009.

Dissemination activities

Irrespective of the invitations to participate in national or international conferences that are likely to
emerge, particularly after the abovementioned publications have been issued, the OECD has planned three
major conferences that will be instrumental for dissemination and networking purposes:

The OECD Global Forum on Education (Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, March 3-5), where a three
day workshop will be dealing with teacher effectiveness and technologies in the context of the NML
Project.

The CERI 40th anniversary Conference on Learning (Paris, May), with a section devoted to the New
Millennium Learners.

11
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

Main international conference on New Millennium Learners and ICT in spring 2009.

IV. Directions for the second phase: the supply side

Policy background

Policy interest in the educational implications of new technologies waxes and wanes. Such
implications can be overstated, and require critical analysis. The NML project investigates how far we are
witnessing the emergence of an alternative approach to communication and knowledge management to the
one usually found in formal education institutions. But also, it has to answer questions regarding the supply
side: How do the rhythms and pace of evolution of educational institutions match with the spread of true
digital natives, and what could be the response in terms of curriculum, pedagogy and school organisation?

The critical issue for this possible second phase of the project is whether educators and policy makers
should be paying more attention to NML, or it should be taken for granted that they do not represent a
serious challenge for the future, but just the expression of another generational conflict.

Suggested objectives

By 2008 the NML concept will have been fully elaborated, from a demand-side perspective. This next
phase will include analysis from the next PISA round (2009), together with case studies of innovative
practices in accommodating NML potential to educational activities and, accordingly, shifting the emphasis
from the demand side to the supply side.

The work in this biennium could comprise:

A detailed analysis of the quantitative data indicated above and the exploration of possible indicators for
regular data collection;

A set of case studies of ICT-based educational innovations designed to test in depth hypotheses deriving
from the previous work; and

An analysis of possible policy initiatives to address the main issues in relation to ICTs and particularly the
second digital divide, such as one-to-one computing or the OLPC initiative.

Methodology

In this second phase, the NML will be focusing more intensely on the supply side, by a series of case
studies undertaken to highlight educational innovations intended to benefit from NML ICT-related
competences, needs and expectations and to integrate them into daily school life. These will focus on:

the adoption of typical NML technological devices and services other than computers for school activities
as well as new areas of innovation involving one-to-one computing initiatives, such as the OLPC;

new models of school organisation and ICT management that focus, for instance, on ubiquitous learning;

innovative educational programmes and practices taking stock of how NML deal with personal
communication and knowledge acquisition, management, production and sharing; and

second generation ICT policies in education, less focused on access and increasingly on the issues related
to educating pupils for an appropriate use and transforming educational institutions in ICT-based
knowledge institutions.

12
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

The proposal of a new CERI Project intended to deal with Alternative Models of Learning for the
2009-2010 biennium provides a good opportunity for synergies. Although not all alternative models are
likely to be technology-intensive, it is reasonable to expect that a number of educational innovations will
be at the same time addressing the needs and expectations of the New Millennium Learners and
representative a true alternative to mainstream education.

13
EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

ANNEX 2:

ASSESSMENT OF THE NML PROJECT AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY ITS ADVISORY

COMMITTEE

The Advisory Board of the NML Project is constituted by:

Georges-Louis Baron, Université Paris V (France)

Giovanni Biondi, INDIRE (Italy)

Dough Brown, Department of Education (UK)

Oystein Johannessen, Ministry of Education (Norway)

Yngve Wallin, Knowledge Foundation (Sweden)

The text of their assessment and recommendations follows:

“The Advisory Board (AB) of the OECD New Millenium Learners Project met in Paris on the 17th of
December 2007. The Board discussed the activities and achievements during the first year of the study and
the proposed activities for 2008.

On the basis of the meeting the Advisory Board would like to give the following recommendations:

1. The Advisory Board is satisfied with the overall progress and the achievements of the project
after its first year.

2. In 2007, the Secretariat has put a considerable emphasis on dissemination activities through
external meetings, seminars and conferences. This has been an important part of the start-up of
the project.

3. The current framework and themes of the project form a good basis for meetings, analysis and
reports from the project. Further topics should not be included in the project, as this would
weaken the focus of it.

4. The transition from 2007 to 2008 represents the transition from start-up to production. It is
important that the project is able to produce and disseminate the first reports during the first six
months of 2008.

5. A qualitative research component should be added in 2008. This is important to integrate the
voice of the learners in the project. If such a research component is not feasible due to time and
methodological constraints, a panel or a focus group of learners should be formed in order to
compensate for the failing qualitative research component.

14
 EDU/CERI/CD(2008)4/REV1

6. It is vital that CERI and the OECD at large ensures that the NML Project has sufficient analytical
capacity in order to operate the project in a smooth way.

7. A collaboration with the project “Alternative Models for Learning” is encouraged. The Advisory
Board suggests that a joint meeting at advisory board level is held in 2008.

8. A prolongation of the NML project for the biennium 2009-2010 is recommended.

Representatives from trade and industry should be invited to convey their views on the NML
challenge(s).”

15