Designing for Openness, Critical Digital Competence and Agency: The Development of the CoDiCri ACAD Toolkit

Linda Castañeda; Victoria I. Marin; Gemma Tur; Maria Carme Peguera-Carré; Martha Lucía Orellana-Hernández; Sara Villagrá

doi:10.65043/eurodl.179

Designing for Openness, Critical Digital Competence and Agency: The Development of the CoDiCri ACAD Toolkit

European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning

Volume 28 (2026): Issue 1

By: Linda Castañeda , Victoria I. Marin , Gemma Tur , Maria Carme Peguera-Carré , Martha Lucía Orellana-Hernández and Sara Villagrá

Open Access

|Apr 2026

Abstract

As artificial intelligence and digital technologies increasingly shape higher education, educators are required to deliberate about designing learning experiences that are both technologically enhanced and pedagogically grounded in openness, critical engagement and student agency. This article presents the CoDiCri ACAD Toolkit, an adaptation of the Activity-Centred Analysis and Design (ACAD) framework, developed within the Spanish project Critical Digital Competence: Towards Agency for Learning through Open Educational Practices. Through a qualitative, collaborative and design-based process, the toolkit integrates theoretical insights from critical digital competence (CDC), open educational practices (OEP) and learning design. It comprises a set of cards and a design canvas to support analysis and (re)design of learning activities. We report the toolkit’s development and structure, and illustrate its use for analysis and (re)design of learning activities oriented to openness, agency and CDC. The CoDiCri ACAD toolkit offers an open, adaptable resource for promoting critical and participatory digital pedagogy.

References

Agbo, F. J., Oyelere, S. S., Suhonen, J., & Laine, T. H. (2021). Co-design of mini games for learning computational thinking in an online environment. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 5815–5849. 10.1007/s10639-021-10515-1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. C. (2008). Design-based research and educational technology: Rethinking technology and the research agenda. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29–40.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bali, M., Cronin, C., & Jhangiani, R. S. (2020). Framing open educational practices from a social justice perspective. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2020(1), 1–12. 10.5334/jime.565
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1–14. 10.1207/s15327809jls1301_1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Biesta, G. J. J. (2013). Giving teaching back to education: Responding to the disappearance of the teacher. Phenomenology & Practice, 6(2), 35. 10.29173/pandpr19860
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Biesta, G., & Tedder, M. (2007). Agency and learning in the lifecourse: Towards an ecological perspective. Studies in the Education of Adults, 39(2), 132–149. 10.1080/02660830.2007.11661545
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Boulord, C., Le Borgne, Y.-A., & Corieri, P. (2024). Informal education practices for human–AI creative pedagogy for accessibility and inclusivity. In A. Urmeneta & M. Romero (Eds.), Creative applications of artificial intelligence in education (pp. 89–99). Springer Nature. 10.1007/978-3-031-55272-4_7
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Bower, M., & Vlachopoulos, P. (2018). A critical analysis of technology-enhanced learning design frameworks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(6), 981–997. 10.1111/bjet.12668
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carvalho, L., Castañeda, L., & Yeoman, P. (2023). The ‘birth of doubt’ and ‘the existence of other possibilities’: Exploring how the ACAD toolkit supports design for learning. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 12(2), Article 2. 10.7821/naer.2023.7.1494
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carvalho, L., Czerniewicz, L., & Lamb, J. (2024). Positive, postdigital spaces for learning. Postdigital Science and Education, 6(4), 1334–1349. 10.1007/s42438-024-00523-y
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (2018). Design, learning networks and service innovation. Design Studies, 55, 27–53. 10.1016/j.destud.2017.09.003
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Carvalho, L., & Yeoman, P. (2019). Connecting the dots: Theorizing and mapping learning entanglement through archaeology and design. British Journal of Educational Technology. 10.1111/bjet.12761
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Castañeda, L., Arnab, S., Tur, G., Klykken, F., Wasson, B., Haba-Ortuño, I., Maloszek, R., & Benito-Crosetti, B. D. (2024). Co-creating pedagogically informed games for data literacy. Revista de Educación, 1, 39–69. 10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2024-405-627
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Castañeda, L., & Selwyn, N. (2018). More than tools? Making sense of the ongoing digitizations of higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15, 22. 10.1186/s41239-018-0109-y
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Castañeda, L., & Williamson, B. (2021). Assembling new toolboxes of methods and theories for innovative critical research on educational technology. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), Article 1. 10.7821/naer.2021.1.703
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Chan, K., & Stacey, P. (2022). Desirable difficulties and student-faculty partnership. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 59(3), 242–252. 10.1080/14703297.2020.1861964
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Conole, G. (2008). The role of mediating artefacts in learning design. In L. Lockyer, S. Bennett, S. Agostinho, & B. Harper (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning design and learning objects: Issues, applications and technologies (pp. 108–208). Information Science Reference. 10.4018/978-1-59904-861-1.ch008
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cook-Sather, A. (2020). Respecting voices: How the co-creation of teaching and learning can support academic staff, underrepresented students, and equitable practices. Higher Education, 79(5), 885–901. 10.1007/s10734-019-00445-w
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Council Recommendation on Improving the Provision of Digital Skills and Competences in Education and Training. (C/2024/1030). (2023). https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/1030/oj/eng
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cronin, C. (2020). Open education: Walking a critical path. In D. Conrad & P. Prinsloo (Eds.), Open(ing) education: theory and practice (pp. 9–25). Brill. https://brill.com/view/title/56897
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Cronin, C., & MacLaren, I. (2018). Conceptualising OEP: A review of theoretical and empirical literature in open educational practices. Open Praxis, 10(2), 127–143. 10.5944/openpraxis.10.2.825
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Esteve-Mon, F. M., Postigo-Fuentes, A. Y., & Castañeda, L. (2023). A strategic approach of the crucial elements for the implementation of digital tools and processes in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 77(3), 558–573. 10.1111/hequ.12411
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fawns, T. (2022). An entangled pedagogy: Looking beyond the pedagogy—Technology dichotomy. Postdigital Science and Education. 10.1007/s42438-022-00302-7
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gartner, J., & Wagner, I. (1996). Mapping actors and agendas: Political frameworks of systems design and participation. Human–Computer Interaction, 11(3), 187–214. 10.1207/s15327051hci1103_1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goodyear, P., Carvalho, L., & Yeoman, P. (2021). Activity-centred analysis and design (ACAD): Core purposes, distinctive qualities and current developments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(2), 445–464. 10.1007/s11423-020-09926-7
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Goodyear, P., Carvalho, L., Yeoman, P., Castañeda, L., & Adell, J. (2021). Una herramienta tangible para facilitar procesos de diseño y análisis didáctico: Traducción y adaptación transcultural del Toolkit ACAD. Píxel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 60, 7–28. 10.12795/pixelbit.84457
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gourlay, L. (2021). There is no ‘virtual learning’: The materiality of digital education. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), 1–10. 10.7821/naer.2021.1.649
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gourlay, L. (2023). Postdigital/more-than-digital: Ephemerality, seclusion, and copresence in the university. In P. Jandrić, A. MacKenzie, & J. Knox (Eds.), Postdigital Research: Genealogies, Challenges, and Future Perspectives (pp. 51–68). Springer Nature. 10.1007/978-3-031-31299-1_4
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Knox, J., Williamson, B., & Bayne, S. (2020). Machine behaviourism: Future visions of ‘learnification’ and ‘datafication’ across humans and digital technologies. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(1), 31–45. 10.1080/17439884.2019.1623251
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Lewin, C., Cranmer, S., & McNicol, S. (2018). Developing digital pedagogy through learning design: An activity theory perspective. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(6), 1131–1144. 10.1111/bjet.12705
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marín, V. I., & Castañeda, L. (2023). Developing digital literacy for teaching and learning. In O. Zawacki-Richter & I. Jung (Eds.), Handbook of open, distance and digital education (pp. 1089–1108). Springer Nature. 10.1007/978-981-19-2080-6_64
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marín, V. I., Tur, G., Castañeda, L., Peguera-Carré, M. C., Orellana, M. L., Villagrá, S., & Carrera, X. (2025). Agencia y aprendizaje en la Educación Superior: Una revisión sistemática. UTE Teaching & Technology (Universitas Tarraconensis), 1, Article 1. 10.17345/ute.2025.4035
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Miao, F., & Cukurova, M. (2024). AI competency framework for teachers. UNESCO. 10.54675/ZJTE2084
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Mor, Y., Cook, J., Santos, P., Treasure-Jones, T., Elferink, R., Holley, D., & Griffin, J. (2015). Patterns of practice and design: Towards an agile methodology for educational design research. In G. Conole, T. Klobučar, C. Rensing, J. Konert, & E. Lavoué (Eds.), Design for teaching and learning in a networked world (pp. 605–608). Springer International Publishing. 10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_69
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Oliver, M. (2016). What is technology. In N. Rushby & D. Surry (Eds.), Wiley handbook of learning technology (Edición: 1). Wiley Handbooks in Education. 10.1002/9781118736494.ch3
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Olney, T., & Wood, C. (2023). Using the theory of practice architectures to establish what it means to “do” learning design, and the arrangements that enable and constrain practice. Frontiers in Education, 8. 10.3389/feduc.2023.1291032
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peters, M. A., Besley, T., & Jandrić, P. (2018). Postdigital knowledge cultures and their politics. ECNU Review of Education, 1(2), 23–43. 10.30926/ecnuroe2018010202
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Peters, M. A., & Green, B. J. (2024). Wisdom in the age of AI education. Postdigital Science and Education, 6(4), 1173–1195. 10.1007/s42438-024-00460-w
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pötzsch, H. (2019). Critical digital literacy: Technology in education beyond issues of user competence and labour-market qualifications. tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 17(2), 221–240. 10.31269/triplec.v17i2.1093
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schön, D. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Selwyn, N. (2022). The future of AI and education: Some cautionary notes. European Journal of Education, 57(4), Article 4. 10.1111/ejed.12532
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stenalt, M. H., & Lassesen, B. (2022). Does student agency benefit student learning? A systematic review of higher education research. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 47(5), 653–669. 10.1080/02602938.2021.1967874
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Thomas, J., Graziosi, S., Brunton, J., Ghouze, Z., O’Driscoll, P., & Bond, M. (2020). EPPI-Reviewer: Advanced software for systematic reviews, maps and evidence synthesis. EPPI-Centre Software. UCL Social Research Institute. https://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default.aspx?tabid=2914
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.65043/eurodl.179 | Journal eISSN: 1027-5207

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 6 - 6

Submitted on: Oct 27, 2025

Accepted on: Mar 23, 2026

Published on: Apr 24, 2026

Published by: EDEN Digital Learning Europe

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Keywords:

learning design,

open educational practices,

critical digital competence,

student agency,

design-based research,

higher education

© 2026 Linda Castañeda, Victoria I. Marin, Gemma Tur, Maria Carme Peguera-Carré, Martha Lucía Orellana-Hernández, Sara Villagrá, published by EDEN Digital Learning Europe
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 28 (2026): Issue 1