Læring på tværs af kontekster - læringspotentialer i mobilt medieret information og kommunikation

Formålet med artiklen er at sætte fokus på læringspotentialerne i mobilt medieret information og kommunikation. Artiklen diskuterer, hvad der er karakteristisk for mobilt medieret kommunikation og information med udgangspunkt i begreberne personalisering, stedspecifik information og kommunikation og perpetual contact. Disse begreber danner udgangspunkt for en diskussion af perspektiverne i anvendelsen af mobile teknologier og internettet i en læringssammenhæng. Endelig kobler artiklen til en række pilotforsøg på Aarhus Universitet, hvor der eksperimenteres med at indtænke mobile teknologier og internettet i undervisningen. Artiklen konkluderer, at de centrale læringspotentialer ved mobilt medieret information og kommunikation ikke knytter sig til særlige karakteristika ved teknologien eller til individets mobilitet, men snarere at den konstante og allestedsnærværende adgang til internettet formår at knytte information og kommunikation fra forskellige kontekster sammen og derved inviterer til læringsaktiviteter, der transcenderer skillelinjen mellem kontekster som eksempelvis institutionel og ikke-institutionelle

Designing Hybrid Learning Spaces in Higher Education

As Hybrid Learning Spaces move beyond distinctions between online and offline spaces, they challenge divisions between teacher/student roles, formal/informal contexts and analogue/digital communication and media. This article presents the concept of hybridity in higher education through a concrete example of a trans-national hybrid course collaboration between three teachers and thirty students at Aarhus University, Denmark and Åbo Akademi University, Finland. The course design is examined through theories on hybrid pedagogy, learning spaces and media ecology to suggest five design principles for Hybrid Learning Spaces. The paper argues that higher education has the potential of inviting students to learn in the world, with the world and for the world, in a way that cuts across traditional dichotomies and barriers

Making Sense of Facebook: A Mixed Methods Approach to Analysing Online Student Groups

The objective of this paper is to discuss a methodological design developed to analyse self-governed student Facebook groups as a part of a larger study of the use of ICT in Danish secondary schools (Mathiasen. Aaen, Dalsgaard, Degn & Thomsen, 2014). The paper will discuss how this methodological setup can help the researcher gain in-depth knowledge of the students’ use of Facebook groups, looking past the traditional dichotomy between online and offline as well as the distinction between school-related and non-school-related communication. The paper will address the potential shortcomings of the design as well as how the approach can be further developed, and suggests 1) broadening the scope of the study from the Facebook group as a singular medium to include other media used by the students and 2) extending the study to include the voice of students by engaging them as co-researchers

Making Sense of Facebook: A Mixed Methods Approach to Analysing Online Student Groups

The objective of this paper is to discuss a methodological design developed to analyse self-governed student Facebook groups as a part of a larger study of the use of ICT in Danish secondary schools (Mathiasen. Aaen, Dalsgaard, Degn & Thomsen, 2014). The paper will discuss how this methodological setup can help the researcher gain in-depth knowledge of the students’ use of Facebook groups, looking past the traditional dichotomy between online and offline as well as the distinction between school-related and non-school-related communication. The paper will address the potential shortcomings of the design as well as how the approach can be further developed, and suggests 1) broadening the scope of the study from the Facebook group as a singular medium to include other media used by the students and 2) extending the study to include the voice of students by engaging them as co-researchers

Family-based cognitive behavioural therapy versus family-based relaxation therapy for obsessive-compulsive disorder in children and adolescents: protocol for a randomised clinical trial (the TECTO trial)

BACKGROUND: Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is the recommended first-line treatment for children and adolescents with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but evidence concerning treatment-specific benefits and harms compared with other interventions is limited. Furthermore, high risk-of-bias in most trials prevent firm conclusions regarding the efficacy of CBT. We investigate the benefits and harms of family-based CBT (FCBT) versus family-based psychoeducation and relaxation training (FPRT) in youth with OCD in a trial designed to reduce risk-of-bias. METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, independently funded, single-centre, parallel group superiority randomised clinical trial (RCT). Outcome assessors, data managers, statisticians, and conclusion drawers are blinded. From child and adolescent mental health services we include patients aged 8–17 years with a primary OCD diagnosis and an entry score of ≥16 on the Children’s Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS). We exclude patients with comorbid illness contraindicating trial participation; intelligence quotient < 70; or treatment with CBT, PRT, antidepressant or antipsychotic medication within the last 6 months prior to trial entry. Participants are randomised 1:1 to the experimental intervention (FCBT) versus the control intervention (FPRT) each consisting of 14 75-min sessions. All therapists deliver both interventions. Follow-up assessments occur in week 4, 8 and 16 (end-of-treatment). The primary outcome is OCD symptom severity assessed with CY-BOCS at end-of-trial. Secondary outcomes are quality-of-life and adverse events. Based on sample size estimation, a minimum of 128 participants (64 in each intervention group) are included. DISCUSSION: In our trial design we aim to reduce risk-of-bias, enhance generalisability, and broaden the outcome measures by: 1) conducting an investigator-initiated, independently funded RCT; 2) blinding investigators; 3) investigating a representative sample of OCD patients; 3) using an active control intervention (FPRT) to tease apart general and specific therapy effects; 4) using equal dosing of interventions and therapist supervision in both intervention groups; 5) having therapists perform both interventions decided by randomisation; 6) rating fidelity of both interventions; 7) assessing a broad range of benefits and harms with repeated measures. The primary study limitations are the risk of missing data and the inability to blind participants and therapists to the intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03595098, registered July 23, 2018. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-021-03669-2