• Irēna Žogla University of Latvia, Rezekne Academy of Technologies (LV)
  • Ilga Prudnikova Rezekne Academy of Technologies (LV)
  • Olena Mykhailenko University of Ontario, Institute of Technology (CA)



transformations, digital learning, social change, pedagogical model, tertiary education, doc-toral investigation


Creating of digital models which transform learning and its outcomes, as well as the learner’s educational, developmental and educative achievements has become vital to provision of inclusion possibilities in a networked society. Researchers have produced several frameworks of using digital technologies in education, but these are generally do not appropriately incorporate socio-contextual perspectives. To explore this area and create a transformative model of teaching-learning at higher levels of education in Special pedagogy and social work an appropriate pedagogical provisions are needed to transform educational process as a system including: (a) meaningful and transforming objectives, (b) adequate for digital learning and leading to social change  pedagogical principles, (c) reflectivity with the domain of knowledge creation, (d) self-evaluation of learning and social inclusion, (e) transformations of teacher/educator activities towards social inclusion and knowledge share, as well as collaborative learning in organizational settings of emerging knowledge society.

This study, focuses on tertiary education and doctoral investigations, reviews the literature on facilitated by transitions social changes, and introduces a theoretical underpinning of digital learning within a pedagogical model. The dominating method is theoretical analysis that includes reviewing, analysing and synthesising literature on the theme “in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated” (Torraco, 2005, p. 356; Hamilton & Torraco, 2013). The article introduces the theoretical approach to the project “Implementation of Transformative Digital Learning in Doctoral Program of Pedagogical Science in Latvia” and “Gender aspects of digital readiness and development of human capital in region”.



Download data is not yet available.


Barber, W., & vanOostveen, R. (2016). Invisible Pedagogy: Developing Problem-based Learning in Digital Contexts. In R. Henderson (Ed.) Problem-Based Learning: Perspectives, Methods and Challenges. Nova Publishers. Retrieved from

Blayone, T.J.B., van Oostveen, R., Mikhailenko, O., & Barber, W. (2017). Ready for Digital Learning? A mixed-methods exploration of surveyed technology competencies and authentic performance activities. DOI.10.1007/s10639-017-9662-6

Chan, K., Cheung, G., Wan, K., Brown, I., & Luk, G. (2015). Synthesizing Technology Adoption and Learners' Approaches towards Active Learning in Higher Education. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 13(6), 431- 440.


Coombs, N. (2018). Syllabus for Barrier-free e-learning. Retrieved from

Council of the European Union, 2006. Rethinking Education Strategy.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. New York: Macmillan, p. 5.

Dwyer, D. C. (1996). The Imperative to Change our Schools. In C. Fisher, D. Dwyer & K. Yocam (Eds) (1996). Education and Technology: reflections on computing in classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Entwistle, N. J. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gallardo-Echenique, E.E., Marqués-Molías, L., Bullen, M. & Jan-Willem Strijbos, J-W. (2015). Let’s Talk about Digital Learners in the Digital Era. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. Vol 16, No 3. Retrieved from

Gibbons, S. (2007). Redefining the roles of information professionals in higher education to engage the net generation. Paper presented at EDUCAUSE, Australasia. Retrieved from be ordered)

Gibbson, I. W. (2001). At the intersection of technology and pedagogy: considering styles of learning and teaching. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10 (1-2), 37-61. DOI:10.1080/14759390100200102 Retrieved from

Glendinning, S. (2018). A New Rootedness? Education in the Technological Age. Studies in Philosophy and Education. Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 81–96). Open access.

Howie, P & Bagnall, R. (2015). A critical comparison of transformation and deep approach theories of learning International Journal of Lifelong Education, 34(3), 348–365.

Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness and personality (M. J. Hall, Trans.) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Lotz-Sisitka, H., Wals, A. EJ., Kronlid, D. & McGarry, D. (2015). Transformative, transgressive social learning: rethinking higher education pedagogy in times of systemic global dysfunction. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 16, 73-80. 2015.07.018

Mezirow, J. (2009). Transformative learning theory. In J. Mezirow & E. W. Taylor (Eds.), Transformative learning in practise: Insights from community, workplace, and higher education (pp. 18–32). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

OECD (2018). The Future of Education and Skills. Education 2030.

Penfold, S. (2016). What Are The Characteristics Of A Modern Learner? Retrieved from

Posner, M., I. & Rothbart, M., K. (2007). Educating the Human Brain. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ISBN 978-159147-381-7.

Rao, K., Edelen-Smith, P. & Wailehua, C.-U. (2015). Universal design for online courses: applying principles to pedagogy. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 30(1), 35-52. DOI: 10.1080/02680513.2014.991300

Redecker, Ch., &Johannessen, Ø. (2013).Changing Assessment —Towards a New Assessment Paradigm Using ICT.European Journal of Education, (48)1, 79-96. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Retrieved from

Rubene, Z. & Strods, R. (2017). Transformations of Digital Culture in the Doctoral Studies in Pedagogy: The Case of the University of Latvia. Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia, 38, 143-157.

Taylor, E., Cranton, P., & Associates (2012). The handbook of transformative learning: Theory, research and practise. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

The Gordon Commission. (2012). Final Repor: To Assess, To Teach, To Learn: A Vision for the Future of Assessment.

Thomson Reuters. The World in 2025: 10 Predictions of Innovation.Philadepphia.Retrieved from

Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human Resource Development Review, 4(3), 356–367.

Tuomi, I. & Miller, R. (2011). Learning And Education After the Industrial Age. A discussion paper for the Confederation of Finnish Industries EK project ‚Oivallus‘. Retrieved from

UNESCO. (2010). ICT Transforming Education. UNESCO Bangkok Asia and Pacific Regional Bureau for Education. ISBN 978-92-9223-326-6 (Electronic version)


Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Žogla I. (2017). Pedagoģija and Educational Sciences: compeeting traditions in the study of education in Latvia. In Whitty, G. & Furlong, J. (Eds). (2017). Knowledge and the Study of Education – an international exploration. Oxford studies in Comparative Education. Vol. 27 No 1, 2017. Pp. 101-121./ Symposium Books.




How to Cite

Žogla, I., Prudnikova, I., & Mykhailenko, O. (2019). PEDAGOGICAL ASSUMPTIONS OF TRANSFORMATIVE DI-GITAL MODEL FOR SOCIAL CHANGE. SOCIETY. INTEGRATION. EDUCATION. Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 1, 645-656.