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

Background

I design and teach about teaching and learning in a teacher education program in Canada. I am a life-long practitioner of the art and science of teaching and learning. It is through this research that I aim to better understand the role of media and digital literacies (MDL) in current educational contexts in Canada from a teacher educator's perspective.

          Critical literacies is an important research focus, as evident from the growing political and public demands for literacies in all areas of education (CMEC, 2020b; OECD, 2018; Zimmer, 2018). Calls for educational responses to ‘fake news’ (Gallagher & Rowsell, 2017) and the teaching of digital citizenship to combat cyberbullying (Choi et al., 2018; Jones & Mitchell, 2016) increasingly influence educational landscapes in Canada (DeWaard & Hoechsmann, 2021; Hoechsmann & DeWaard, 2015).

          Digital literacy and competency frameworks have been developed by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the European Union to enhance education for citizenship (Carretero Gomez et al., 2017; Law et al., 2018). While research focuses on MDL in the K-12 education sector (Buss et al., 2018; Gallagher & Rowsell, 2017), on teachers in the classroom (Choi et al., 2018), teaching and learning in higher education contexts (Castañeda & Selwyn, 2018); and, teacher candidates being prepared for a career in teaching (Cam & Kiyici, 2017; Cantabrana et al., 2019; Cervetti et al., 2006; Gretter & Yadav, 2018), there is little research studying the MDL of teacher educators (Foulger et al., 2017; Knezek et al., 2019; Krumsvik, 2014; Petrarca & Kitchen, 2017).

          I aim to understand the lived experiences of teacher educators as they apply MDL within Canadian teacher education, as evidence within their open educational practices (OEPr). UNESCO amplifies the notion of education as common good(s), shifting from previous notions of education as individualistic and economically entangled public good(s), with a focus on open educational practices and networks as mechanisms for change (Daviet, 2016; Law et al., 2018). Common good(s), contributing to societal well-being, are undergirded with a humanistic and holistic belief system (Daviet, 2016).

          The Canadian Council of Ministers of Education (CMEC) and the National Council of Teachers of English emphasizes the need for enhanced literacy development in conjunction with technology competencies in education for all provincial education jurisdictions (Gallagher & Rowsell, 2017). The Canadians for 21st Century Learning & Innovation document Vision for 21st century learning in Canada (2012), identifies key skills and competencies learners should possess, which suggests that teachers, teacher candidates, and teacher educators should also possess these skills and competencies. The development of a set of technology competencies for teacher educators (Foulger et al., 2017) indicates the need for a reconceptualization of current faculty of education (FoE) structures and teacher educators’ practices.

          Since “teacher’s knowledge is an essential component in improving educational practice” (Connelly et al., 1997, p. 674), this research explores the lived experiences of teacher educators who openly share experiences and applications with a consideration toward MDL as part of their teaching practice. Sharing openness in educational practices “does not require overcoming huge technical obstacles, but rather, requires a change in mindset and a differing view of practice, and of how learning can be achieved” (Couros, 2006, p. 188). A better understanding of the contexts of MDL within FoE can emerge when teacher educators’ voices and stories are represented. A better understanding of the contexts of MDL within FoE can emerge when teacher educators’ voices and stories are represented. This investigation adds to the limited research addressing the needs of teacher educators or how teacher educators infuse MDL into their teaching practice (Lohnes Watulak, 2016; Phuong et al., 2018; Seward & Nguyen, 2019; Stokes-Beverley & Simoy, 2016).

          Because I espouse to be an open educational practitioner, promoting open educational practices in the courses I design and teach, I aim to further understand the role of OEPr within teacher education in general, and within the lived experiences of others who work openly as teacher educators. Through this research I aim to explore, revise, and add to current definitions of OEPr (Couros, 2006; Cronin & MacLaren, 2018; Nascimbeni & Burgos, 2016; Paskevicius, 2017; Tur et al., 2020). In this research, I aim to uncover connections between current conceptualizations of OEPr with understandings of MDL (Gee, 2015; Hoechsmann, 2019; Stordy, 2015) and living literacies. (Pahl et al., 2020).

          This research responds to a call from Zawacki-Richter et al., (2020) to “re-explore the benefits of openness in education to respond to emerging needs, advance the field, and envision a better world” (p. 329). Cronin (2017) reveals connections between OEPr and digital literacies which I believe to be essential to the work of open educators. Through this research I endeavour to find connections between MDL and OEPr within the lived experiences of TEds as they navigate and negotiate their teaching practice into the open.

          This research not only adds to rapidly evolving discussions about OEPr but also contributes a focus on teacher educators (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2020). I believe that teacher educators bring experience in educational teaching practice to the nexus between OEPr, teaching, and MDL. Teacher educators from diverse, Canadian Faculty of Education (FoE) sites are invited to participate in interviews to “story” (Clandinin, 2015) their OEPr, and reflect on their MDL negotiations. The ubiquity of electronic technologies in the functional milieu of today’s educational environments, particularly in light of the global COVID-19 pandemic, suggests that digital tools are both field and method for research studies (Burrell, 2009; Markham, 2016).

 

This page has paths:

This page references: