Media and digital literacies in Canadian teacher educators’ open educational practices: A post-intentional phenomenology

Dimension Four

Criticality

“Critical thinking requires us to use our imagination, seeing things from perspectives other than our own and envisioning the likely consequences of our position.” bell hooks (1994)

Drawing on the dimension of social justice from the previous section, the critical dimension of MDL is illuminated through this quote by bell hooks. I notice that MDL takes an intentional shift in critical and imaginary thinking to teach with an infusion of MDL within an OEPr for the TEds’ in this research. Criticality not only problematizes their use of technologies when applying MDL into teaching and learning, but is also foundational when problem-solving as new technologies are integrated into educational contexts within teacher education. This is suggested by Martinez-Bravo et al., (2022) when emphasizing criticality in digital literacy, since it “constitutes a great commitment to the construction of significant ecosystems and the development of an awareness and values connected with social and civic responsibility in a globalized world” (p. 11). The findings in this research support this conception of a social and civic responsibility exhibited by the participants, particularly when MDL is applied within their OEPr. This occurs through a critical examination of identity, emirec – the reception and emitting of media and digital productions – and, the participants’ decision-making about the circulation of learning artifacts. In this research criticality is evident as both cognitive and social dimensions of MDL and is defined as the practice of critique through close and careful examination and questioning of objects, actions, or ideas of decisive importance (OED online, 2022).

From the frameworks

Criticality is embedded in each the frameworks I explore for this discussion (see Table 4).Criticality focuses on the participants’ careful, collaborative, and informed critique of technologies, structures, and participation. For the participants in this research criticality explicitly includes examinations of their own practice, and that of organizational decision-makers. From their lived experiences I notice when participants mention intentional actions to counter techno-deterministic educational technology sector narratives, particularly the notion of knowledge scarcity (Stewart, 2015a) and how they resist attentional economies with its focus on clicks and time on task. Participants shared their intentional decisions to oppose the academic surveillance of students (Kuhn & Raffaghelli, 2022) and how they combat the market logics of referencing students as consumers (Mirra et al., 2018). Dimensions that emerge from the findings and discussed here include criticality in the selection of tools, technologies, spaces, and places for MDL within an OEPr, critical examinations of boundaries relating to identity and power structures (Koseoglu, 2017; Stewart et al., 2021), criticality in data literacies and algorithmic bias (Nichols et al., 2021; Raffeghelli & Stewart, 2020), and a critical focus on intentionality applied to human↔︎technology↔︎world relationships (Ihde, 2015; Kallinikos, 2002).

 

This page has paths:

Contents of this path:

This page references: