Honorary award
for the best digital educational media.
Introduction to the quality criteria of educational media related to sustainability
The quality of educational media in adult education is not only measured by the medium or the media program itself, its content, its didactic-pedagogical format or its media technological finesse in order to ensure the lasting effects of teaching and learning, but also – when viewed in the context of media cultural education – in the configuration of the values that are clearly determined in the interaction of teaching and learning: usefulness, aesthetics and ethics. None of these value categories stands alone. Media use is useful when it meets the criteria of aesthetics and ethics. The use of media in an educational context is aesthetic when normative and useful values are introduced into a cultural educational format, and such formats are ethical when they benefit a cultural-aesthetic educational format.
So it’s about a complex connection of connectivity and contextuality: Media connects – not just people, but their knowledge, experience, attitude and history. They connect worlds the way we think we can or should think. And they are needed in the individually determined context of life, lifestyles, life prospects, life horizons and, ultimately, values.
Sustainability is a value intended in this way, which can only be identified as a critical pattern (criteria) of quality if and because it determines the usefulness of intellectual and practical education (knowledge, awareness, understanding, retention). . And: if and because, as a meaningful superstructure, it conveys an ethically conceivable and culturally aesthetically actionable (practical) connection between economy and ecology as a socially organized framework for a social development aimed at existence (harmony, balance) and coherence (justice, balance, dignity). becomes.
The criteria for awarding the N-Award are based on the description of the sustainability complex as already given, as it has already been tried and tested scientifically, politically and in specialist discourse, and as it is already well secured in the international-institutional exchange of concepts. In this environment, sustainability is thought of contextually as the interaction of the values of ecology, economy and society. (Basics for assessing the contribution of digital educational media to sustainability).
The interpretive horizons of sustainability are contextual (growth, growth limits and growth opportunities of the economy and society) and transfigurative in the language model of media: a media-configured education refers to the characterization of communication, organization, culture and society as such, which are mutually used, necessary and possible are: Sustainability of natural resources as an opportunity and necessity for a socially sustainable society that understands each other in the model of sustainably oriented educational programs, increasingly realized in the context of their medialization and mediatization.
This requires the quality – first of all of content (sustainability-relevant and subject-defined knowledge, expertise, references, experience), but also requires the sustainable quality of media aestheticization (didactic use of media in role-playing teaching and learning (e.g. possibilities of internalization, motivation and sovereignty) and sustainability-effective pedagogical intention (social practice in the pattern of ethical understanding of learnable content: identification, responsibility), when educational content is sustainably characterized (media aestheticized) through its educational cultural transmission (mediatization) and its educational technologically possible mechanisms (mediatization).
The decisive factor in determining the award-worthiness of the educationally relevant quality of the educational media submitted for the award will therefore be whether and to what extent sustainability criteria are used in all or in certain categories (content, didactic-pedagogical orientation, media formats, retention and implementation values, creativity, media affinity) can be fulfilled. One perspective of evaluation will therefore (must be) sustainability as a universal educational value: The image of a sustainable world, created in thought (social-discursive, symbolic-cultural) and described in the media, is recognizable in a harmoniously coordinated relationship between knowledge, awareness and attitude towards it the natural, social, cultural, symbolic and inspirational values of the world. Understanding their meaning then means making credible their use, their appearance (aesthetics) and their value (ethics) for shaping human existence (life) in the modalities of knowledge, consciousness and attitude. All of this is implied in the universal concept of sustainability in such a way that the term can be used like a metaphor to describe connections (represented in the media): sustainability as competence (knowledge and awareness as a basis for responsibility and attitude), values, conditions, events , events and attitudes to each other in order to do justice to the character of complexity, connectivity and contextuality included in the concept of sustainability.
These characteristics just mentioned are also connoted in the criteria for assessing the quality of the educational media submitted for the Sustainability Prize.
Sustainability model for digital educational media for sustainable development (BMNA)
The sustainability model outlined below is a basis for evaluating digital educational media for sustainable development (BMNA), which are characterized below.
Digital educational media for sustainable development (BMNA)
are carriers of information about objects and processes and means of communication between all those involved.
They are pedagogically or didactically structured, designed for use in teaching and learning processes, especially for sustainable development, and are available on various electronic and digital data carriers (Internet, USB, hybrid products, etc.).
Further principles for evaluating educational media are derived from the following goals and messages for sustainable development:
- Sustainability triangle:
- Ecology – Goals of the ecological dimension of sustainability,
- Economics – Goals of the economic dimension of sustainability,
- Social – Goals of the social dimension of sustainability.
- FiveKey messages of the BMZ’s 2030 Agenda (“5 Ps”):
- Protect the planet (Planet)
Limit climate change, preserve natural resources - Promoting prosperity for all
Making globalization fair - The focus is on human dignity (People)
A world without poverty and hunger is possible - Promote peace (Peace)
Human rights and good governance - Building global partnerships (Partnership)
- Moving forward together globally
- 17 sustainability goals (SDGs):
- Take immediate action to combat climate change and its impacts.
- Preserve and use oceans, seas and marine resources sustainably for the purposes of sustainable development.
- Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, manage forests sustainably, combat desertification, halt and reverse soil degradation and halt biodiversity loss.
- Strengthen means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.
- Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.
- Ensuring access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and contemporary energy for everyone.
- Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all.
- Build a resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and support innovation.
- Reduce inequality within and between states.
- Making cities and settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.
- Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns.
- End poverty in all forms, everywhere.
- End hunger, achieve food security and better nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.
- Ensuring a healthy life for all people of all ages and promoting their well-being.
- Ensure inclusive, equitable and quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all.
- Achieve gender equality and self-determination for all women and girls.
- Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.
Based on this, the following criteria areas were derived and for evaluation with quality criteria for educational media designed for sustainable development:
Criteria areas overview
Criteria area 1:
Quality criteria for sustainability:
Ecology, economy, social issues; (sustainability triangle)
Criteria area 2:
– Quality criteria
– Sustainable educational media
– Educational media for sustainability
Other criteria areas:
– Quality criteria for education, skills, didactics
– Quality criteria for design, layout
– Quality criteria for technology, handling, application, innovation
are evaluated in the Comenius Award in the following media categories:
- DDM – Didactic digital media
- DMB – Digital media with educational potential
3. SDB – Game-based digital educational media
4. BLEP – Blended-Learnig-Programme
5. LMS – Teaching and learning management systems. - EBM – European social educational media
Criteria Area 1 table
| Criteria area 1 Quality criteria for sustainability: ecology, economy, social issues; (sustainability triangle) |
||
| Quality criteria | Testing aspects | Point scoring |
|
1. ENVIRONMENT
|
At the level of the ecological dimension, the product promotes:
|
(0-10) |
|
2. ECONOMICS
Promote prosperity for all (Prosperity) Making globalization fair |
At the level of the economic dimension, the product promotes:
|
(0-10) |
|
3. SOCIAL
The focus is on human dignity (People) A world without poverty and hunger is possible
Promote peace (Peace) Human rights and good governance
Building global partnerships (Partnership) Moving forward together globally |
At the level of the social dimension, the product promotes:
|
(0-10) |
| Points | Sum of points (max. 30 points) | |
| In total | Criteria area 1 Total points divided by number of quality criteria / arithmetic mean, 1 decimal place (max. 10 points) |
|
Criteria Area 2 table
|
Criteria area 2: Quality criteria
Sustainability is a normative construct of economically, socially and politically relevant, but ecologically conceived values, which arise from the critical perception of the complex connections, the socially determined connections and the resulting contradictions between public and private, between individual and social, as well from political and ideological understanding (discourse) about the demands of lifestyle.
Media, especially those that are used in the public or private context of education, are assessed here in the context of assessing their quality not only in terms of their usefulness (sustainable technology), their clarity or pleasantness (sustainable aesthetics), but also in terms of their inherent value (sustainable ethics): how they are used or which patterns of individual and/or social use (mediality) are suggested or recommended in the context of education (knowledge, awareness, attitude).
Education, especially in the broad horizon of increasing medialization (cultural) and mediatization (structural) of the patterns of public and personal understanding about knowledge and what is worth knowing, is not only to be understood as a didactically arranged transfer of content from teachers to learners, but also gains the value of knowledge and awareness and competence in the context of communication between people who are socially and institutionally integrated in roles with assigned (personal and social) expectations of teaching and learning. But this happens in the social media environment, which increasingly intervenes in the institutional processes and the institutional understanding of education (social media, AI). On the one hand, this requires an open and discursive concept of education, acceptance of diversity, and on the other hand, a critical perception of the possibilities and suggestions for the sustainable use of resources and sources: literacy, resilience, competence are the relevant keywords here, which represent the (new, emancipatory (culturally and discursively conceived) distribution of skills, abilities, motivation and responsibility for a meaningful and lastingly relevant value for (social and personal) life.
For this reason, the following quality criteria should be considered for the testing and evaluation of educational media:
|
||
| Quality criteria | Testing aspects | Point scoring |
| 1. Complexity |
The project justifies and explains:
|
(0-5) |
| 2. Contextuality |
The project justifies:
|
(0-5) |
| 3.Mediality |
The product promotes:
|
(0-5) |
| 4. Discursivity |
The product offers:
|
(0-5) |
| 5. Education |
The product offers:
|
(0-5) |
| 6. Media Quality |
The product offers suggestions for:
|
(0-5) |
| 7. Empathy |
The product motivates to:
|
(0-5) |
| 8. Sustainability Literacy |
The product increases interest in:
|
(0-5) |
| 9. Responsibility |
The project explains:
|
(0-5) |
| 10. Company Policy |
The product addresses:
|
|
| Points | Sum of points (max. 50 points) | |
| In total | Criteria area 2 Total points divided by number of quality criteria / arithmetic mean, 1 decimal place (max. 5 points) |
|
| Total points |
Addition of points
max. 15 points |
Annotation:
| Interpretation of the total score | ||
| 14.0 – 15.0 points | Exemplary Media production |
Very good |
| 12.0 – 14.9 points | Recommended Media production |
Good |
| 9.0 -11.9 points | Suitable Media production |
Satisfactory |
| 5.0 – 8.9 points | Usable Media production |
Sufficient |
| ≤ 4.9 points | Not recommended Media production |
Inadequate |
Literature
Bauer, Thomas A. (2014): Communication scientific thinking. Perspectives of a contextual theory of social understanding. Vienna (Böhlau)
Bauer, Thomas A. (2017): Understanding knowledge in media society. Theoretical sketches on the mediology of social learning. IN: Bauer, Thomas A. (Mikuszeit, Bernd H. (ed.): Teaching and learning with educational media. Basics – Projects – Perspectives – Practice. Brussels – New York (P.Lang)
Bauer, Thomas A. (2023): Performative Mediality – Hermeneutical Notes Observing Challenges and Chances of Media Change. IN: Metaverse and future communications. Istanbul, Commerce University Publication No. 69, p. 6 – 18
Bourdieu, Pierre (1993): The field of cultural production. Stanford (University Press)
Habermas, Jürgen (1980): Theory of communicative action (2Bde). Frankfurt (Suhrkamp)
Luhmann, Niklas (1974): Social systems. Outline of a general theory. Frankfurt (Suhrkmp)
Mead, George Herbert (1972): Mind, Identity and Society. From the perspective of social behaviorism. Frankfurt (Suhrkamp)
Schmidt, Siegfried J. (2003): Stories and discourses. Farewell to constructivism. Frankfurt (Fischer TB)
Schütz, Alfred / Luckmann, Thomas (1973 ): The Structures of Life-World. London (University Press)


