This page is referenced by:

• 1 2022-06-04T15:43:12+00:00 Glossary 19 alphabetic listing of glossary items with links to notes that describe each item plain 2023-06-28T15:29:30+00:00 Here is an alphabetic listing of the glossary items included in this dissertation document. Each item is linked to a note where the item is defined, described, and/or examples provided. These glossary items are also embedded throughout the document as notes within pages, where they provide 'just in time' clarification for you, the reader.
  • Actor Network Theory
  • Affinity Spaces
  • Alternative Dissertation
  • Artificial Intelligence (AI)
  • Black Box technology
  • Block Chain
  • ChatGPT
  • Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS)
  • Creative Commons
  • Cynefin framework
  • Data Gathering
  • Digital Rights Management (DRM)
  • Educommunication
  • Emirec
  • Episteme / Phronesis
  • Faculty of Education (FoE)
  • #FemEdTech
  • Free and Open Software (FOSS)
  • Homo Faber
  • Hupomnemata
  • Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA)
  • Learning Management Systems (LMS)
  • Makerspace
  • Massive Open Online Course (MOOC)
  • Media and Information Literacy (MIL)
  • Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
  • Open Educational Practices (OEPr)
  • Paywall
  • Platforms
  • PDF
  • Portable Graphics Network (PNG)
  • Post-Intentional Phenomenology (P-IP)
  • Practice - both noun and verb
  • Research Ethics Board (REB)
  • Safety, Security, Privacy, Permission (SSPP)
  • Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, Canada (SSHRC)
  • Teacher Candidates (TCs)
  • Teacher Educators (TEds)
  • Teacher Educator Technology Competencies (TETCs)
  • TPACK
  • Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans
  • UNESCO
  • Uniform Resource Locator (URL)
  • Universal Serial Bus (USB)
  • Visitors / Residents
  
   
• 1 2022-10-26T20:12:09+00:00 Crystallizing the findings 19 summary of the data analysis section of this dissertation plain 2023-10-02T14:55:49+00:00 By applying the P-IP methodology, I paused to analyze the findings using a whole, part, whole process. I returned to the crystallization methodology in order to bring clarity to the views that framed my seeing (Lather, 2006).  I remixed the findings into a concept map in order to make sense of the data gatherings. I understood that the graphic tacitly included individual cognitive components — what participants know and think — and their actions within social contexts — what they say and do (Gee, 2015) within their OEPr. I recalled the Cynefin framework as I emerged from the chaotic and confusing mix of lived experiences and stories of MDL that the participants shared throughout the data gathering moments – the interviews, artifacts, notes, memos, and web-creations.
  
            First, I crystallized the findings into a final version of a concept map (see Figure 20). 
  
           What emerged and crystallized was a metaphor to describe and focus on the facets found in the complex, inter-relational conception of MDL within an OEPr. I considered the image of a navigational gyroscope to assist my understanding. For you, the reader, try if you will to envision MDL within OEPr represented by a navigational gyroscope, spinning on a series of rotating wheels set on an axis. Perhaps a graphics interchange format (GIF) visualization will assist this seeing (see Figure 21).
  
  
  
   As a crystallization of the findings, I created the MDL in OEPr navigational gyroscope described below (see Figure 22).
  
            Now imagine teacher educators on the central platform which is a rotating wheel in the middle of the gyroscope. I positioned this as the inner layer of teacher education where critical digital literacies influenced TEds' actions and learning design decisions. I framed this from the foundational components of critical digital literacy as identified by Hinrichsen and Coombs (2013) building on the critical literacies identified by Luke (2012). These components included code breaking, meaning making, using and creating, analyzing, and developing digital persona. These aspects of digital literacy were also evident in several of the MDL frameworks examined (see Table 4). This wheel, representing the faculties of education in Canada, was positioned as the central platform. This platform spins around an axle which is attached to an inner wheel called a gimbal. This gimbal floats freely inside a larger outer wheel, a second gimbal, both nested within a stabilizing frame which is attached to a base. 
  
            I envisioned the inner ring, or gimbal of the gyroscope, as holding the components of MDL that were generated from the data as outlined in the findings. The moving sliders on this inner gimbal include the MDL factors of text, audience and production which shaped the focus of participants’ lived experiences on the components of communication, creativity, and criticality. These components included underlying elements of ethical practice, an emirec stance as both emitter and receptor of multimodal productions and performances, data management with consideration of SSPP, development of persona and identity, and circulation. The sliders on this ring point are indicative of the shifts of focus participants applied when making decisions about factors shaping text, audience and production. These elements were evident in many MDL frameworks and were represented in the Association for Media Literacy (AML) media triangle (Association for Media Literacy, 2022) (see Figure 11). 
  
            The outer gimbal of the gyroscope image is where I positioned components of OEPr as generated from the data and outlined in the findings. The sliders on this wheel were factors that focus on access, choice and connections as generated from the findings. On the wheel itself were the elements found within the participants’ lived experiences with OEPr including entry, intentionality, language, relationship, collaboration, knowledge building, agency and ownership, design, and sharing. Since the sliders can rotate around this outer ring, it suggested fluid yet intentional decisional forces that influence and focus the underlying components.
  
            The final, exterior and outermost ring appeared to be a stabilizing ring because it is attached to a standing base. I positioned this wheel as representative of the contextual and cultural environments within which participants’ lived experience are enacted. These included the local, provincial, national, and international ecospheres within which the TEds in FoEs enact their MDL within an OEPr. It was within this exterior ring where the inner rings were in motion. Although the interior rings were fixed together at pivot points in a semi-structured way, there was fluid motion of these interior rings. The outermost ring was perceived to provide a stabilizing influence and anchored the actions of the other rings. Despite the perception that the cultural and contextual factors represented by this exterior element appear anchored, it should be recognized that culture and contexts are also potentially in motion, albeit somewhat less obviously or less rapidly as the interior elements.
  
            Evident from this moving and spinning image was the realization that infusing MDL into a teaching practice can be challenging, particularly when the subject matter being taught may already be complex in itself. Infusing MDL elements within an open educational practice brought additional challenges to the art and science of teaching. This was further complicated for teacher educators as they attempted to develop a sense of what it meant to be a teacher within the novice teaching practice of their students, the TCs in the FoE.
  
            What was not evident within this image of the moving layers of the gyroscope was the movement along the wheel rim itself where elements of MDL and OEPr were positioned, which I have represented by the sliders on each inner wheel. What may also be missed was the potential interplay between the wheels, as indications of the iterative and fluid navigation TEds experienced when applying MDL into their OEPr. In viewing these multiple layers and potential moves between layers, I recognized the intentional decision-making about MDL that the participants made when including or excluding elements within the full scope of their OEPr. This intentionality was reflective of the multiple complexities participants face in the MDL they apply as they navigate the nuanced layers of their OEPr.
  
            Although the graphic image may suggest the layered and fluid motion among the elements found in the lived experiences of the participants, it was through the analysis of the findings in contrast to frameworks of MDL that deeper understanding emerged. By reflecting on previous assemblages of MDL frameworks (Belshaw, 2011; DQ Institute, 2021; Hoechsmann & Poyntz, 2012; Inamorato dos Santos et al., 2016; Martínez-Bravo et al., 2022; MediaSmarts, n.d.; Redecker, 2017). I looked for commonalities and connections to the facets generated in the findings (see Table 4). By aligning the elements found in a variety of research frameworks, I focused on dimensions that consistently appeared between and among the conceptions of MDL evident in these frameworks. These include communication, connecting, creativity, and criticality (see Figure 23). These framed the dimensions in the discussion of my findings. The chart and graphics supported the framing of my seeing (Lather, 2006).
  
             This chapter focused on the lived experiences with MDL of the TEds within their OEPr. When describing their experiences, participants explored themes of access, choice, and connections. Access touched on issues of entry, intentionality, and language. Choice revealed decisions when the participants shared, designed, and enhanced agency within media and digital teaching and learning activities. Connections revealed concerns with trust and power dynamics within OEPr in teacher education. Within their MDL, participants described communication considerations, creativity, and criticality within their teaching practices and the learning designs shared with students. Communication elements in the MDL of participants touched on audience, ethics, and data management specifically safety, security, privacy, and permissions with student data in an OEPr. Creativity was revealed through multimodal and intertextual, media infused productions that shared learning content and assessments created with media and digital tools. Productions and performance for the participants became focused on voice and co-creation. Criticality was revealed through both creating and sharing, identity work, and in circulation and distribution practices. In the next chapter these OEPr and MDL elements will be discussed in my quest for understanding of the lived experiences with MDL in the OEPr of TEds in Canadian FoE.