**2. Different perspectives on skills**

#### **2.1 The 3Rs—Traditional education**

There is widespread agreement among educators and the public about the importance of the traditional fundamental building blocks that underpin student learning. These skills are often referred to as the 3Rs—reading, writing and arithmetic [5]. These are important skills, but as Crockett et al. [6] have argued, for students to progress from the foundations of learning, teachers need to expand their thinking outside their 'primary focus and fixation on the Three Rs (3Rs)—beyond traditional literacy to an additional set of 21st century fluencies, skills that reflect the times we live in'.

#### **2.2 The 4Cs as common ground for 21st century skills**

The notion that the 3Rs are not sufficient when preparing students for the future is not a new idea. Broader skills are needed and have been discussed since the first half of the 20th century. One example is an informal meeting of college examiners attending the 1948 American Psychological Association Convention in Boston, which was the start of the development of the theoretical framework known as Bloom's taxonomy. This is a well-known and commonly used system of classifying the goals of the educational process beyond the 3Rs [7]. A common ground in the search for 21st century skills is by Keane, Keane and Blicbau [8] described as the 4Cs:

**57**

skills (see **Table 1**).

*Are Teacher Students' Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital…*

This understanding is based on three influential organisations associated with education, management, and industry developed definitions for 21st century learning. These organisations are the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), the American Management Association (AMA), and AT21CS, a public and private partnership among governments, educators, academics, and industries [8]. While basic skills such as numeracy and literacy remain essential building blocks for learning, higher order skills such as the 4Cs are equally vital for learning and employment in the 21st century. Keane and Blicbau [5] write that 21st century skills are about fusing the 3Rs and the 4Cs, but the contextual aspect is also of great importance because context contributes to defining and

Students in the 21st century live in a technology- and media-rich environment with access to a wide range of information, powerful digital tools, and the ability to collaborate and communicate with others. This affects what form of critical thinking is required. Fundamental to the development of 21st century skills is the importance of ICT for learning [8]. A discussion paper prepared for the European Union stated that information and communication technology (ICT) is at the core of 21st century skills. It is regarded as both an argument for the need for these skills, and a tool that can support the acquisition and assessment of them. The rapid development of ICT also requires a whole new set of competences related to ICT

Keane, Keane, and Blicbau [8] write that using these technologies in education matter because students need to be prepared this digital world, in which they require a skillset that is broader than the traditional foundations of the 3Rs. Tucker and Courts [10] claim that teachers who mainly concentrate on a fixed curriculum that focuses on learning through repetition and memorisation find it difficult to

To be effective, teachers and students need to be able to demonstrate both the 3Rs and the 4Cs in relation to an online world. Government policy has been somewhat based on the assumption that access to technology is the key to achieving success. However, simply providing students with digital technology will not lead to development of these skills. How the teacher utilises these devices in the classroom is important for improved student outcomes [5]. Dede [1] claims that we need to move from consensus about the vision of 21st century learning to a thorough understanding of and commitment to the outcomes of 21st century learning. In reality, he claims, the ability to use digital devices in no way means that students know anything about global awareness or health literacy, learning and innovation

There are new skills to master, and they must be understood intertwined with changing contextual skills. Trilling and Fadel [3] have an extended model, where the 4Cs are part of a skillset called learning and innovation skills. They propose two extended sets of skills: information, media and technology skills; and career and life

It is important to keep in mind that digital technology in itself is just a tool. Keane and Blicblau [5] state that without an understanding of learning theory, the use of transformative technology may actually be ineffectual. So, to have digital

connect new technologies to the traditional view of classroom learning.

skills, life and career skills, or even media literacy skills.

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96151*

affecting how different skills are used.

and technological literacy [9].

**2.3 Twenty-first century skills and digital technology**

• Collaboration

• Creativity


*Are Teacher Students' Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96151*


*Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World*

though, is rapidly shifting.

in size and student numbers.

**2. Different perspectives on skills**

**2.1 The 3Rs—Traditional education**

**2.2 The 4Cs as common ground for 21st century skills**

the future?

the times we live in'.

• Critical thinking

• Communication

The digital revolution is part of the change making 21st century skills different from those learned in schooling through the 20th century. ICT is changing the nature of perennial skills that are valuable in the modern world, as well as creating new contextual skills necessary for digital societies [1]. The world has changed fundamentally in the last few decades, and in effect, the role of learning and education has changed. Many of the skills needed in past centuries, such as critical thinking and problem solving, are, according to Trilling and Fadel [3], even more relevant today. How these skills are learned and practiced in everyday life in the 21st century

This chapter presents a critical perspective on how learners' information, media and technology skills can be understood, and how they are connected to learning and innovation skills. Data for this chapter is based on qualitative in-depth interviews of ten teaching educators at the University of Waikato in New Zealand and ten teaching educators from UiT, the Arctic University of Norway. Both countries are facing similar educational challenges when teaching in digital environments, as both must educate teaching students in digital-rich environments with high access to various ICTs and educational resources at home [4]. The universities are similar

This comparative study of Norwegian and New Zealand teaching education has led us to question how we educate students to meet the future and whether the educational systems are adapting sufficiently to new digital learning contexts. Is teaching students' deep learning and critical thinking at risk of being limited in digital learning environments? In short, are students sufficiently prepared for

There is widespread agreement among educators and the public about the importance of the traditional fundamental building blocks that underpin student learning. These skills are often referred to as the 3Rs—reading, writing and arithmetic [5]. These are important skills, but as Crockett et al. [6] have argued, for students to progress from the foundations of learning, teachers need to expand their thinking outside their 'primary focus and fixation on the Three Rs (3Rs)—beyond traditional literacy to an additional set of 21st century fluencies, skills that reflect

The notion that the 3Rs are not sufficient when preparing students for the future is not a new idea. Broader skills are needed and have been discussed since the first half of the 20th century. One example is an informal meeting of college examiners attending the 1948 American Psychological Association Convention in Boston, which was the start of the development of the theoretical framework known as Bloom's taxonomy. This is a well-known and commonly used system of classifying the goals of the educational process beyond the 3Rs [7]. A common ground in the search for 21st century skills is by Keane, Keane and Blicbau [8] described as the 4Cs:

**56**

This understanding is based on three influential organisations associated with education, management, and industry developed definitions for 21st century learning. These organisations are the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), the American Management Association (AMA), and AT21CS, a public and private partnership among governments, educators, academics, and industries [8]. While basic skills such as numeracy and literacy remain essential building blocks for learning, higher order skills such as the 4Cs are equally vital for learning and employment in the 21st century. Keane and Blicbau [5] write that 21st century skills are about fusing the 3Rs and the 4Cs, but the contextual aspect is also of great importance because context contributes to defining and affecting how different skills are used.

#### **2.3 Twenty-first century skills and digital technology**

Students in the 21st century live in a technology- and media-rich environment with access to a wide range of information, powerful digital tools, and the ability to collaborate and communicate with others. This affects what form of critical thinking is required. Fundamental to the development of 21st century skills is the importance of ICT for learning [8]. A discussion paper prepared for the European Union stated that information and communication technology (ICT) is at the core of 21st century skills. It is regarded as both an argument for the need for these skills, and a tool that can support the acquisition and assessment of them. The rapid development of ICT also requires a whole new set of competences related to ICT and technological literacy [9].

Keane, Keane, and Blicbau [8] write that using these technologies in education matter because students need to be prepared this digital world, in which they require a skillset that is broader than the traditional foundations of the 3Rs. Tucker and Courts [10] claim that teachers who mainly concentrate on a fixed curriculum that focuses on learning through repetition and memorisation find it difficult to connect new technologies to the traditional view of classroom learning.

To be effective, teachers and students need to be able to demonstrate both the 3Rs and the 4Cs in relation to an online world. Government policy has been somewhat based on the assumption that access to technology is the key to achieving success. However, simply providing students with digital technology will not lead to development of these skills. How the teacher utilises these devices in the classroom is important for improved student outcomes [5]. Dede [1] claims that we need to move from consensus about the vision of 21st century learning to a thorough understanding of and commitment to the outcomes of 21st century learning. In reality, he claims, the ability to use digital devices in no way means that students know anything about global awareness or health literacy, learning and innovation skills, life and career skills, or even media literacy skills.

There are new skills to master, and they must be understood intertwined with changing contextual skills. Trilling and Fadel [3] have an extended model, where the 4Cs are part of a skillset called learning and innovation skills. They propose two extended sets of skills: information, media and technology skills; and career and life skills (see **Table 1**).

It is important to keep in mind that digital technology in itself is just a tool. Keane and Blicblau [5] state that without an understanding of learning theory, the use of transformative technology may actually be ineffectual. So, to have digital


**Table 1.**

*Three components of 21st century skills [3].*

competence for learning, technological skills must be understood intertwined with other sets of skills and knowledge, like learning and innovation skills (the 4Cs).

#### **2.4 Twenty-first century skills in today's education—are we there yet?**

This has been an ongoing discussion for centuries, and yet it seems like educational practices and systems are having trouble adapting to the espoused learning theories, required formal policy, and understanding of the need for these skills [11]. Keane and Blicbau [5] criticise education for using technology in schools at the enhancement rather than the transformative stage, meaning that tasks could be completed satisfactorily without using technology, and without really changing the task. They claim we need to better provide the appropriate situations that will allow students to develop skills using the 4Cs. Lund [12] claims that schools either lack a view of technology or operate with a view of technology that is at best reductionist. A central control and management mechanism in schools is a standardised test. These tests provide some insight into students' learning outcomes, but if used unilaterally, may also risk the development of a limited dynamic practice. As Resnick [13] writes, when preparing children for the future, how learning outcomes are assessed must be reconsidered. We need to focus on what is most important for children to learn, not what is easiest to measure and evaluate. The same concern is expressed when discussing digital technology and education. If we are only concerned with measuring the effects of the use of technology, instead of examining how digital technology changes the school culture, we risk cultivating a reductionist approach and ignoring possibilities for innovation [12]. These challenges are not exclusively related to digital practices, as school traditions for learning have in general been criticised for being pacifying. Jordet [14] writes that Norwegian schools are characterised by sedentary activities where the students are placed in the role of passive recipients of handed down knowledge. Such educational practices give students few opportunities to unfold their relational, meaning-seeking, creative, exploratory, and intentional natures. He states that for schools to be able to contribute to children mastering their lives and becoming participants in work and society, the schools' traditions, thinking, and practices must be changed to better support students' self-realising and active natures. Oostveen, Oshawa, and Goodman [15] found that meaningful learning is far more likely if new technologies are recognised as providing transformative opportunities.

#### **2.5 Digital natives and digital immigrants**

Elstad [16] claims that young people born after 1980 have digital capabilities and are therefore regarded as digital natives, in contrast to older teachers who are

**59**

*Are Teacher Students' Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital…*

described as digital immigrants when born earlier than 1980 [17]. Digital immigrants are in governing positions in education, both as policymakers and educators. Could important stakeholders' lack of digital technology be the reason education is not keeping up to date with new learning theories? Most teaching students referenced in this study were born in 1980 or later and are considered digital natives. Prensky describes digital natives as 'native speakers of technology, fluent in the digital language of computers, video games, and the internet' [18]. In this chapter, we present teaching educators' evaluations of their students and their learning processes. In other words, so-called digital immigrants are evaluating digital natives, but it is not merely their technological skills being evaluated. As mentioned, these skills must be understood as intertwined. Students' learning and innovation skills, like critical thinking, are intertwined with their information, media, and technology skills, and both sets of skills must be trained. Combined, it creates the need for new contextual skills. Keane, Keane, and Blicblau [8] write that simply using technology does not guarantee that deep learning will occur. The use of technology needs to align and adapt with our knowledge of learning to be able to operate in a

A study of teaching students and their educators showed that teaching educators scored higher on professional digital competence than their students, but were more critical towards the technology in educational contexts than their students [2]. The differences between teaching educators and teaching students in this study were mostly unrelated to being digital immigrants or natives. They were connected to the complex competence gained through professional practice, regarding the interaction of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological

Knowledge of technology is only one critical component of teachers' use of technology in their practice; they also need to know how to use it for successful integration in teaching and student learning. Being critical is not necessarily about being behind and not up to date, but about taking steps aside to gain a deeper perspective. Successful teaching is not only about finding the right technology, but also the values, norms, and attitudes that reside within the academic staff in teacher

One group of digital natives is defined as Generation Z. Tucker and Courts describe Generation Z as those who were born after 1990 [10]. This generation is described as 'technically savvy, well adapted at communicating via the internet, and used to instant action due to the internet technology they have always known'. The traditional education model has, according to Tucker and Courts [10], been slow to adapt to the learning styles of these students, and researchers across the globe seem to agree on this. What seems more unclear is an understanding of what form of adaptation is needed, and how we get there. How do Generation Z's learning styles

Deep learning involves paying attention to underlying meaning. It is associated with the use of analytic skills, cross-referencing, imaginative reconstruction, and independent thinking. In contrast, surface learning strategies typically place more emphasis on rote learning and simple descriptions [20]. Deep approaches differ from surface approaches, where reproducing knowledge and syllabus-bounded practices is central. A third approach is the strategic approach, which is based on a competitive form of motivation and attempts to maximise academic achievement with minimum effort [21]. One tool for understanding deep learning is Biggs and Collis' [22] developed structure of observed learning outcomes (SOLO), which

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96151*

transformative space.

knowledge [19].

training organisations [2].

and strategies affect learning processes in education?

**2.6 Deep learning and critical thinking**

#### *Are Teacher Students' Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96151*

described as digital immigrants when born earlier than 1980 [17]. Digital immigrants are in governing positions in education, both as policymakers and educators. Could important stakeholders' lack of digital technology be the reason education is not keeping up to date with new learning theories? Most teaching students referenced in this study were born in 1980 or later and are considered digital natives. Prensky describes digital natives as 'native speakers of technology, fluent in the digital language of computers, video games, and the internet' [18]. In this chapter, we present teaching educators' evaluations of their students and their learning processes. In other words, so-called digital immigrants are evaluating digital natives, but it is not merely their technological skills being evaluated. As mentioned, these skills must be understood as intertwined. Students' learning and innovation skills, like critical thinking, are intertwined with their information, media, and technology skills, and both sets of skills must be trained. Combined, it creates the need for new contextual skills. Keane, Keane, and Blicblau [8] write that simply using technology does not guarantee that deep learning will occur. The use of technology needs to align and adapt with our knowledge of learning to be able to operate in a transformative space.

A study of teaching students and their educators showed that teaching educators scored higher on professional digital competence than their students, but were more critical towards the technology in educational contexts than their students [2]. The differences between teaching educators and teaching students in this study were mostly unrelated to being digital immigrants or natives. They were connected to the complex competence gained through professional practice, regarding the interaction of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge [19].

Knowledge of technology is only one critical component of teachers' use of technology in their practice; they also need to know how to use it for successful integration in teaching and student learning. Being critical is not necessarily about being behind and not up to date, but about taking steps aside to gain a deeper perspective. Successful teaching is not only about finding the right technology, but also the values, norms, and attitudes that reside within the academic staff in teacher training organisations [2].

One group of digital natives is defined as Generation Z. Tucker and Courts describe Generation Z as those who were born after 1990 [10]. This generation is described as 'technically savvy, well adapted at communicating via the internet, and used to instant action due to the internet technology they have always known'. The traditional education model has, according to Tucker and Courts [10], been slow to adapt to the learning styles of these students, and researchers across the globe seem to agree on this. What seems more unclear is an understanding of what form of adaptation is needed, and how we get there. How do Generation Z's learning styles and strategies affect learning processes in education?

#### **2.6 Deep learning and critical thinking**

Deep learning involves paying attention to underlying meaning. It is associated with the use of analytic skills, cross-referencing, imaginative reconstruction, and independent thinking. In contrast, surface learning strategies typically place more emphasis on rote learning and simple descriptions [20]. Deep approaches differ from surface approaches, where reproducing knowledge and syllabus-bounded practices is central. A third approach is the strategic approach, which is based on a competitive form of motivation and attempts to maximise academic achievement with minimum effort [21]. One tool for understanding deep learning is Biggs and Collis' [22] developed structure of observed learning outcomes (SOLO), which

*Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World*

**1. Learning and innovation skills 2. Information, media, and** 

• Critical thinking • Communication and collaboration

**Table 1.**

• Creativity and innovation

*Three components of 21st century skills [3].*

competence for learning, technological skills must be understood intertwined with other sets of skills and knowledge, like learning and innovation skills (the 4Cs).

**technology skills**

• Information literacy • Media literacy • ICT literacy

**3. Career and life skills**

interaction • Productivity and accountability

• Flexibility and adaptability • Initiative and self-direction • Social and cross-cultural

• Leadership and responsibility

This has been an ongoing discussion for centuries, and yet it seems like educational practices and systems are having trouble adapting to the espoused learning theories, required formal policy, and understanding of the need for these skills [11]. Keane and Blicbau [5] criticise education for using technology in schools at the enhancement rather than the transformative stage, meaning that tasks could be completed satisfactorily without using technology, and without really changing the task. They claim we need to better provide the appropriate situations that will allow students to develop skills using the 4Cs. Lund [12] claims that schools either lack a view of technology or operate with a view of technology that is at best reductionist. A central control and management mechanism in schools is a standardised test. These tests provide some insight into students' learning outcomes, but if used unilaterally, may also risk the development of a limited dynamic practice. As Resnick [13] writes, when preparing children for the future, how learning outcomes are assessed must be reconsidered. We need to focus on what is most important for children to learn, not what is easiest to measure and evaluate. The same concern is expressed when discussing digital technology and education. If we are only concerned with measuring the effects of the use of technology, instead of examining how digital technology changes the school culture, we risk cultivating a reductionist approach and ignoring possibilities for innovation [12]. These challenges are not exclusively related to digital practices, as school traditions for learning have in general been criticised for being pacifying. Jordet [14] writes that Norwegian schools are characterised by sedentary activities where the students are placed in the role of passive recipients of handed down knowledge. Such educational practices give students few opportunities to unfold their relational, meaning-seeking, creative, exploratory, and intentional natures. He states that for schools to be able to contribute to children mastering their lives and becoming participants in work and society, the schools' traditions, thinking, and practices must be changed to better support students' self-realising and active natures. Oostveen, Oshawa, and Goodman [15] found that meaningful learning is far more likely if new technologies are recognised

Elstad [16] claims that young people born after 1980 have digital capabilities and are therefore regarded as digital natives, in contrast to older teachers who are

**2.4 Twenty-first century skills in today's education—are we there yet?**

**58**

as providing transformative opportunities.

**2.5 Digital natives and digital immigrants**

form the basis of the SOLO taxonomy. The SOLO taxonomy focuses on the development of surface understanding to deep understanding, with a continuum of complexity and response to learning across the hierarchy of its levels of understanding. The SOLO taxonomy illustrates different levels of understanding:


The higher the levels of understanding in the SOLO taxonomy, the higher the level of critical thinking, creativity, and communication. Critical thinking is the discipline of actively and skilfully conceptualising, applying, analysing, synthesising, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication [5, 8]. All these aspects are central for 21st century skills and deep learning.

When teaching educators are asked about students' learning processes, there is great concern regarding their ability to apply deep learning approaches. This is a complex field with a range of perceptions and understandings. Many of the teaching educators expressed conflicting views, where they addressed challenges and described how digital technology was fostering learning. In this chapter, we focus on the challenges of teaching with digital technology, and not so much on the benefits, which are many.

#### **3. Method**

#### **3.1 First phase: the survey**

This study is based on an explanatory sequential design, in which a conducted survey comprises the first phase of a sequence of methods. It is a comparative study involving 64 Norwegian participants from UiT, the Arctic University of Troms, and 44 New Zealand participants from the University of Waikato, with a response rate of 83.8% and 73.4%, respectively. The survey builds on Argyris and Schön's theory of action [23] and consists of three main constructs: professional digital competence, professional attitudes towards digital technology in education, and professional application of digital tools.

Based on their results, ten participants from each university were invited to participate in an in-depth qualitative interview.

#### **3.2 Second phase: the interview**

The first step in strategically selecting interview participants was to ensure that all participants had *high digital competence*, with the aim of gathering informed opinions regarding the use of technology in educational contexts. The second step

**61**

**Figure 2.**

**Figure 1.**

*Selection of Norwegian teaching educators.*

*Selection of New Zealand teaching educators.*

*Are Teacher Students' Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital…*

was to select participants within this group of digitally skilled teaching educators based on maximum variation sampling. Maximum variation sampling is a purposeful selection of participants with different perspectives on a phenomenon [24]. As Creswell [24] explains, the maximum variation sampling strategy requires defining a category that produces different responses to paint a varied picture of the participants. The category *attitudes towards digital technology* was used to select five participants who responded more critically and five participants who responded more positively towards digital technology within each country (**Figures 1** and **2**). A total of 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand and elaborate upon the results of the survey. The transcribed interviews were subsequently analysed using NVivo. One must consider the uncertainty arising when

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96151*

*Are Teacher Students' Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96151*

was to select participants within this group of digitally skilled teaching educators based on maximum variation sampling. Maximum variation sampling is a purposeful selection of participants with different perspectives on a phenomenon [24]. As Creswell [24] explains, the maximum variation sampling strategy requires defining a category that produces different responses to paint a varied picture of the participants. The category *attitudes towards digital technology* was used to select five participants who responded more critically and five participants who responded more positively towards digital technology within each country (**Figures 1** and **2**).

A total of 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand and elaborate upon the results of the survey. The transcribed interviews were subsequently analysed using NVivo. One must consider the uncertainty arising when

**Figure 1.** *Selection of Norwegian teaching educators.*

**Figure 2.** *Selection of New Zealand teaching educators.*

*Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World*

The SOLO taxonomy illustrates different levels of understanding:

1.Prestructural understanding is described as incompetence.

central for 21st century skills and deep learning.

benefits, which are many.

**3.1 First phase: the survey**

sional application of digital tools.

**3.2 Second phase: the interview**

participate in an in-depth qualitative interview.

**3. Method**

2.Unistructural understanding where relevant aspects can be identified.

3.Multistructural understanding where aspects are combined and described.

4.Relational understanding integrated in multistructural understandings. Being able to analyse, apply, argue, and compare aspects of one's understanding.

5.Extended abstract is when the learner is able to create, formulate, generate, hypothesise, reflect, and theorise based on a relational understanding.

The higher the levels of understanding in the SOLO taxonomy, the higher the level of critical thinking, creativity, and communication. Critical thinking is the discipline of actively and skilfully conceptualising, applying, analysing, synthesising, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication [5, 8]. All these aspects are

When teaching educators are asked about students' learning processes, there is great concern regarding their ability to apply deep learning approaches. This is a complex field with a range of perceptions and understandings. Many of the teaching educators expressed conflicting views, where they addressed challenges and described how digital technology was fostering learning. In this chapter, we focus on the challenges of teaching with digital technology, and not so much on the

This study is based on an explanatory sequential design, in which a conducted survey comprises the first phase of a sequence of methods. It is a comparative study involving 64 Norwegian participants from UiT, the Arctic University of Troms, and 44 New Zealand participants from the University of Waikato, with a response rate of 83.8% and 73.4%, respectively. The survey builds on Argyris and Schön's theory of action [23] and consists of three main constructs: professional digital competence, professional attitudes towards digital technology in education, and profes-

Based on their results, ten participants from each university were invited to

The first step in strategically selecting interview participants was to ensure that all participants had *high digital competence*, with the aim of gathering informed opinions regarding the use of technology in educational contexts. The second step

form the basis of the SOLO taxonomy. The SOLO taxonomy focuses on the development of surface understanding to deep understanding, with a continuum of complexity and response to learning across the hierarchy of its levels of understanding.

**60**

translating from one language to another. The survey, interview guide, and participant statements were translated from Norwegian to English. There are nuances when translating and analysing that may be lost, and these could have influenced the results. An ongoing collaboration with New Zealand researchers throughout the process was very helpful in concept- and language-related clarifications.
