Transcript
Page 1: 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

Page 2: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

Introduction

Setting the scene

Page 3: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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)

Page 4: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 5: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 6: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

OER & OEP in teacher educationExploring the value of OER & OEP in teacher education

Page 7: Open Educational Practice and Preservice 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

Page 8: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 9: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 10: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 11: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

Frameworks for OER & OEPMaking sense of the relationship

Page 12: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 13: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Elements of OEP (Ehlers, 2011)

Page 14: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 15: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Matrix & continuum overlaid

Page 16: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

Tracking progress with OER & OEPSome illustrations of our open(ish) practice in teacher preparation

Page 17: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 18: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 19: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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)

Page 20: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 21: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

Lessons from experience

What we have learned

Page 22: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 23: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 24: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 25: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 26: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

A path forward

Some small steps we could take

Page 27: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

OEP in teacher education• Little evidence of persistent

collaboration• Piecemeal adoption of OEP is not

enough

Page 28: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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

Page 29: Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

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


Recommended