Domesticating Everyday Technologies for Teaching
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexity of technology integration into the teaching and learning practices of higher education students and instructors is not adequately captured in technology adoption models. Technologies are shaped not only by faculty as they integrate these tools into their teaching, but by students in their learning. Studies examining technology integration tend to take the classroom as the beginning and ending point for technology integration; however, beliefs, values, expectations, and experiences of technology begin long before the classroom. This study takes these experiences into account, exploring university faculty understanding of social media for teaching through the lens of domestication theory.Domestication theory (Berker, Harmann, Punie & Ward, 2006; Haddon, 2011; Silverstone & Hirsch, 1992) draws on family studies, media consumption studies and studies of the social construction of technology to examine the confluence of the social meanings and political structures of the home as technology become integrated into domestic practices. This study uses the domestication framework to explore how values, beliefs, and experiences of social media and of teaching shape the decision-making processes of instructors as they integrate these everyday communication platforms into their courses. The domestication framework traces the trajectory of a technology from the point at which it enters the home through the social processes of domestication. The first stage is appropriation, in which the imagined uses for the technology lead someone to bring it home. The dual processes of objectification and incorporation describe the ways in which an individual or a group integrates a new technology into the physical arrangements and everyday routines of the household. It is through these negotiations that values and beliefs about everyday practice and the role of the technology become apparent. Finally, conversion, in which newfound practices and technologies are displayed, begins the process of appropriation for others.Twelve university faculty were interviewed about their decision-making and experiences as they integrated social media into their teaching practices. Participants had varying levels of experience with social media prior to their decision to use social media in their teaching.Analysis using the domestication framework suggests that the everyday experiences with technology outside the classroom affect the approach to integrating new technology into teaching. The domestication framework provided a valuable lens for teasing out the social and material beliefs inherent in the negotiation processes in which both instructors and students engage as technology is introduced into the classroom.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it