Digital learning ecosystems.
Subjects, spaces, practices and relations in the post-digital school
Parole chiave:
Ecosistemi formativi digitali, Mixed Methods, Educazione post-digitaleAbstract
Digital learning ecosystem offers an interpretive framework capable of capturing the complexity of teaching-learning processes, understood as the dynamic interplay of heterogeneous variables: subjects, mediators, technologies, spatial and temporal dimensions, relational patterns and socio-cultural contexts. Drawing on an enactive, sociomaterial and post-digital theoretical perspective, this study investigates digital learning ecosystems, with particular attention to the integration of technology into instructional planning. A Mixed Methods Convergent Design was employed, combining Collaborative Research, including video-recording and co-explication interviews with N=11 teachers with a questionnaire collected from N=99 teachers of the host school and N=1023 Italian teachers. Data were analysed through thematic analysis, thematic narrative analysis, quantitative content analysis and bivariate statistics. Findings reveal that the ecosystem is structured around four interaction modes between teachers, students and devices and around multiple variables, visible and invisible, related to the digital learning processes. Despite sustained public investment in school digitalization, approximately 25% of the large sample never or rarely uses technology in teaching, citing difficulties in managing the ecosystem’s multiple variables. The study proposes a framework to support teachers in designing intentional, situated and productive digital learning ecosystems.
Riferimenti bibliografici
Acton, R. (2017). Place–people–practice–process: Using sociomateriality in university physical spaces research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(14), 1441–1451. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2017.1309635
Altet, M., Charlier, E., Paquay, L., & Perrenoud, P. (2006). Formare gli insegnanti professionisti? Armando Editore.
Ardizzi, M. (2025). L’algoritmo bipede. L’avvincente storia di come mente, corpo e tecnologia evolvono insieme. Egea.
Bateson, G. (1976). Verso un’ecologia della mente. Adelphi.
Benanti, P. (2023). Human in the loop. Decisioni umane e intelligenze artificiali. Mondadori Università.
Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Thematic analysis: A practical guide. SAGE Publications.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecologia dello sviluppo umano. Il Mulino.
Capra, F. (2014). La rete della vita. Una nuova visione della natura e della scienza. Rizzoli.
Chiaratti, M. (2021). Incoscienza artificiale. Come fanno le macchine a prevedere per noi. Luiss University Press.
Cioci, G. (2025a). Progettare percorsi di didattica digitale: indagine su 1000 docenti italiani. Nuova Secondaria Ricerca, XLI(6), 272–292.
Cioci, G. (2025b). AI in the class: Uses, doubts, challenges and perceptions of a sample of teachers from different nationalities. Education Sciences & Society - Open Access, 15(2). https://doi.org/10.3280/ess2-2024oa18439
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE Publica-tions.
Daly, H. E. (1992). Elements of environmental macroeconomics. In R. Costanza (Ed.), Ecological economics: The science and management of sustainability. Columbia University Press.
Damiano, E. (2006). La nuova alleanza. Temi, problemi e prospettive della nuova ricerca didattica. Editrice La Scuola SEI.
Desgangé, S. (1997). Le concept de recherche collaborative: L’idée d’un rapprochement entre chercheurs univer-sitaires et praticiens enseignants. Revue des sciences de l’éducation, 23(2), 371–393.
Dozza, L. (2022). Ecologia e formazione. Formazione & Insegnamento, 20(3), 013–028.
Eugeni, R. (2015). La condizione postmediale. Scolé.
Flessner, R. (2014). Revisiting reflection: Utilizing third spaces in teacher education. Scholarship and Professional Work – Education, 37(2), 1–18.
Floridi, L. (2015). The onlife manifesto: Being human in a hyperconnected era (p. 264). Springer nature.
Floridi, L. (2017). La quarta rivoluzione. Come l’infosfera sta trasformando il mondo. Raffaello Cortina.
Haraway, D. (1991). A cyborg manifesto: Science, technology, and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century. In Simians, cyborgs and women: The reinvention of nature (pp. 149–181). Routledge.
Hitchcock, J. H., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2020). Developing mixed methods crossover analysis approaches. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(1), 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689818819173
Holling, C. S. (2001). Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems. Ecosystems, 4, 390–405.
Hughes, J., Thomas, R., & Scharber, C. (2006). Assessing technology integration: The RAT - Replacement, am-plification, and transformation -framework. In Proceedings of SITE 2006 (pp. 1616–1620). AACE.
Jandrĭc, P., & Hayes, S. (2020). Postdigital we-learn. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 39(3), 285–297.
Joo, Y. J., Park, S., & Lim, E. (2018). Factors influencing preservice teachers’ intention to use technology: TPACK, teacher self-efficacy, and technology acceptance model. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 48–59.
Lamb, J., & Carvalho, L. (2024). Introduction: Exploring Postdigital Spaces for Learning. In J. Lamb, & L. Carvalho (Eds.), Postdigital Learning Spaces: Towards Convivial, Equitable, and Sustainable Spaces for Learning (1 ed., pp. xiii-xxiv). (Postdigital Science and Education). Springer.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford university press.
Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy and heterogeneity. Systems Practice, 5, 379–393.
Losito, G. (2007). L’analisi del contenuto nella ricerca sociale. Franco Angeli.
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
Maturana, H. R., & Varela, F. J. (1985). Autopoiesi e cognizione. La realizzazione del vivente. Marsilio.
MIM, (2021). Principali dati della scuola – Avvio Anno Scolastico 2021/2022, available at https://miur.gov.it/pubblicazioni/-/asset_publisher/6Ya1FS4E4QJw/content/focus-principali-dati-della-scuola-avvio-anno-scolastico-2021-2022--1, accessed 23/03/2023.
Mollick, E. (2025). L’intelligenza condivisa. Vivere e lavorare insieme all’AI. Luiss University Press.
Moriggi, S. (Ed.). (2023). Postmedialià, società ed educazione. Edizioni Libreria Cortina.
Oddone, F. (2015). L’autoefficacia come booster dell’innovazione didattica: Teachers peer training and self-efficacy levels. In Conferenza EM&M Italia: E-learning, media education & moodlemoot (pp. 1–10). https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1090.4405
Ortalda, F. (2022). Metodi misti di ricerca. Carocci.
Papert, S. (2001). Change and resistance to change in education: Taking a deeper look at why school hasn’t changed. In Novo conhecimento, nova aprendizagem (pp. 61–81). Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
Pentucci, M. (2018). I formati pedagogici nelle pratiche degli insegnanti. Franco Angeli.
Pentucci, M. (2020). Centralità del compito nella didattica online: Un dispositivo per la mobilitazione delle com-petenze e per la realizzazione del feedback tra studente e docente. QTimes, XII(3), 328–340.
Pentucci, M., Magnoler, P., Capolla, L., & Rossi, P. G. (2023). Managing the unexpected and unforeseen in edu-cational situations: Emergency as new normal. Journal of Educational Research and Reviews, 11(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.33495/jerr_v11i1.22.148
Pickett, S. T. A., & Cadenasso, M. L. (2002). The ecosystem as a multidimensional concept: Meaning, model, and metaphor. Ecosystems, 5(1), 1–10.
Potter, J., & McDougall, J. (2017). Digital media, culture and education: Theorising third space literacies. Palgrave Macmillan.
Puentedura, R. R. (2003). The SAMR model. http://www.hippasus.com/resources/matrixmodel/index.html
Riessman, C. K. (2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences. SAGE Publications.
Rivoltella, P. C., & Rossi, P. G. (2019). Il corpo e la macchina. Tecnologia, cultura, educazione. Scholé.
Rossi, P. G. (2010). Tecnologia e costruzione di mondi. Post-costruttivismo, linguaggi e ambienti di apprendimento. Armando.
Rossi, P. G. (2011). Didattica enattiva: Complessità, teorie dell’azione, professionalità docente. Franco Angeli.
Rossi, P. G., & Pentucci, M. (2021). Progettazione come azione simulata. Didattica dei processi e degli eco-sistemi. Franco Angeli.
Sibilio, M. (2013). La didattica semplessa. Liguori.
Sibilio, M. (2020). L’interazione didattica. Scolé.
Topping, K. J. (1996). The effectiveness of peer tutoring in further and higher education: A typology and review of the literature. Higher Education, 32(3), 321–345.
Tosa, L. (2019) (Ed.) Fare didattica in spazi flessibili. Progettare, allestire e utilizzare ambienti di apprendimento. Giunti Scuola.
Vermersch, P. (2005). Descrivere il lavoro. Nuovi strumenti per la formazione e la ricerca: L’intervista di esplicitazione. Carocci.
Vinatier, I. (2013a). La recherche collaborative: Enjeux et fondements théoriques. In J.-Y. Robin & I. Vinatier (Eds.), Conseiller et accompagner. Un défi pour la formation des enseignants (pp. 45–60). L’Harmattan.
Vinatier, I. (2013b). Le travail de l’enseignant: Une approche par la didactique professionnelle. De Boeck.
Weyland, B., Stadler-Altmann, U., Galletti, A., & Prey, K. (Eds.). (2019). Scuole in movimento: Progettare insieme tra pedagogia, architettura e design. Franco Angeli.
##submission.downloads##
Pubblicato
Come citare
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2026 Giovanna Cioci
Questo lavoro è fornito con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 4.0 Internazionale.
