Reflection on Topic 1: Online participation and digital literacies

FISh model

This is the first time that I tried applying FISh model (Nerantzi & Uhlin, 2012) into a PBL case scenario and having a glimpse of how it could be put into practice while working as a group.  Upon reflection, I personally find the 4-step model helps the team to systematically walk through the process of looking into the problem. Specifically, the guiding questions discussed within the group revolving ‘Step 2: Investigate’ was very helpful:

  • What competence required?
  • What support required?
  • What kind of digital footprints they (students) have left?
  • Underlying assumptions.

Online participation and digital literacies

The topic on digital literacies has been an insightful one. Many times, from my own experience, there is a tendency to neglect this aspect when academics and academic developers work together in designing and developing online courses.

The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens, also known by its acronym DigComp (Vuorikari et al, 2016), was first published in 2013 by the European Commission has been a very useful reference for me while working on the PBL case study. The framework serves as ‘tool to improve citizens’ digital competence, help policy-makers formulate policies that support digital competence building, and plan education and training initiatives to improve the digital competence of specific target groups’ (Vuorikari et al, 2016. p.3). As an academic developer, the framework enables me to systematically identify specific knowledge and skills required by individual academics as they are embarking the journey of designing and developing blended learning modules, in other words identifying the technological, pedagogical and content knowledge (TPACK) at granular level, based on the TPACK framework developed by Mishra and Koehler (2006).

While I’ve started to learn more about the DigComp (Vuorikari et al, 2016), one question that came to mind is whether the model needs any adaptations when using it in our Asian context. In other words, would this model be applicable across various cultures? This would be an interesting area to explore further.


Vuorikari, R., Punie, Y., Carretero Gomez S. & Van den Brande, G. (2016). DigComp 2.0: The Digital Competence Framework for Citizens. Update Phase 1: The Conceptual Reference Model. Luxembourg Publication Office of the European Union. DOI:10.2791/11517.

Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge: A new framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.

Nerantzi, C., & Uhlin, L. (2012). FISh, a pedagogical design. Retrieved from