Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education
-
Upload
peter-albion -
Category
Education
-
view
98 -
download
2
Transcript of Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education
Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education: Understanding past practice and future possibilities
Peter Albion, David Jones, Janice JonesUniversity of Southern Queensland, AustraliaChris CampbellGriffith University, Australia
Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education 2017Austin, TX
Introduction
Setting the scene
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Is open the new educational black?
Learning objects & repositoriesOpenCourseWare
Open Education Consortium
Open Educational Resources (OER)
Open Educational Resources University (OERu)
Open Educational Practices (OEP)
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Open = ?• Wiley (2010; 2014)– Objects that are shared and can be
• Retained• Reused• Redistributed• Revised• Remixed
– No sharing = no education• Sharing is fundamental to advancing education
– Historic effect of print = lower cost of sharing– Online sharing lowers cost toward zero
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Unrealised promise of OER• Developing world– Scale of educational demand is huge• Building & staffing is impossible• Online using OER offers solution
• Uptake of OER is limited– Described as first phase• Developing basic functions
– Second phase• Open Education Practices (OEP)
– Application of OER
OER & OEP in teacher educationExploring the value of OER & OEP in teacher education
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Professional engagement• Becker & Riel (2000)– Professional engagement = interest beyond
class– Higher levels associated with• Constructivist views & computer use
– Contrasted with ‘private practice’• Berry et al. (2010)– Engagement reduced teacher wastage– 20% of value for students from shared
expertise– 90% of teachers thought networking
improved teaching
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Teachers and open practice• Lortie (1975)– Teachers are often isolated• Fall back on experience in schools
• Hargreaves (2010)– School culture restricts collaborative
improvement• Belland (2009)– Teachers replicate experience through habitus
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Moving teachers to OER & OEP• Liable to be challenging– For reasons discussed– Teacher engagement invisible to others• Perception of classroom only activity
• Conventional education is product focused– Assessment of individual outputs– Collaboration discouraged or resented
• Teacher education needs to encourage OEP
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Curating resources• Teachers collect teaching resources–Multiple & varied sources– Tools - Pinterest, Scoop.it, etc.
• Preservice teachers– Curation activity develops skills– Professional contribution
• Curation may offer a path to OEP
Frameworks for OER & OEPMaking sense of the relationship
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
What is open?• Pomerantz & Peek (2016)– 50 shades of open– A ‘fashionable’ marker• Openwashing = describing non-open things as
open• Open Educational Quality Initiative
(2011)– Despite availability of OER uptake is limited– Requires movement beyond access• Learning as construction & sharing• Culture change
–Matrix linking OER & OEP
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Elements of OEP (Ehlers, 2011)
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Continuum of open practice (Stagg, 2014)
• Seeks to evaluate progress toward OEP• Begins with consumption• Progresses to co-creation with learner• Some doubt about sequence
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Matrix & continuum overlaid
Tracking progress with OER & OEPSome illustrations of our open(ish) practice in teacher preparation
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Rambling on learning paths• 3rd year ICT pedagogy course– 400 students, 60% online
• Weekly learning paths– Series of resources & activities including
OER– Students post reactions to blogs• Become part of ramble for subsequent students
– LMS prevents open sharing– Students are setting objectives, sharing
reactions, & modifying paths– A or B
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Digging into Diigo• LMS is safe & reliable– Limits outside access & sharing
• Sidestep using outside services• Diigo used for webpage annotation– Readings assigned & student notes shared
via Diigo– Residue of experience is passed on = B or E
• Diigo & Twitter used to share OER into LMS– Simple sharing = A
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Blogging as co-creation• Driven by LMS limitations• Aggregator & Moodle module– Share student blogs in LMS–Within & between offers– Student reactions overlay & co-create
rambles– Interaction is in the open but rambles in
LMS– B or E + element of co-creation (Stage 5)
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Student creators & sharers• Relate-create-donate– Students create/share resources– Collections openly available
• Seek-sense-share– Curated collections of existing resources
• Students create & share with class & beyond– Peer review in class for quality assurance– Choice about content & form– C & Stage 5
Lessons from experience
What we have learned
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Reality is messier than models• Both models were helpful• Neither was a neat fit– Activities were often ambiguous– Crossed over categories
• Other researchers responded similarly• Useful as guides to evaluating practice
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
PST responses• Account based on recollections, no
formal data• Activities required unfamiliar software– PSTs were stretched
• Being open posed challenges– Unfamiliar with software and sharing– Schooling prefers tidy products over
process– Open collaborative practice is discouraged
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Collaborative creation challenges• Creating & sharing resources– Seen as relevant and valuable–Wanted tight specifications vs open process
• Sharing work in progress– Fear of misappropriation
• Peer review– Appreciated as source of ideas and
feedback• Use of ‘special’ sites suggests lack of
presence for professional practice
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Open = 5 Rs• Retain, reuse, redistribute, revise, remix• Courses address questions of use• Should encourage explicit CC licences– Need for additional work
A path forward
Some small steps we could take
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
OEP in teacher education• Little evidence of persistent
collaboration• Piecemeal adoption of OEP is not
enough
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Steps ahead• Program-wide approach to OEP–Move habitus away from ‘private practice’
• De-emphasise grading of products– Attend more to process and visible
collaboration• Facilitate at institutional level– Encourage coherent professional presence
• Integrate with profession– Engage PSTs with profession
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
Dreaming for a moment• Focus on teacher planning• Develop support system with OEP– Templates & tools– Linked to support networks– Facilitate comment & reuse
• Graduate teachers enculturated in OEP
SITE 2017 Austin, TX
[email protected]@[email protected]@griffith.edu.au