This page has annotations:

1. 1 2023-06-26T11:34:02+00:00 hjdewaard c6c8628c72182a103f1a39a3b1e6de4bc774ea06 Exterior Ring hjdewaard 2 describing the outer ring on the gyroscope plain 2023-06-26T11:35:51+00:00 hjdewaard c6c8628c72182a103f1a39a3b1e6de4bc774ea06
2. 1 2023-10-31T14:55:20+00:00 hjdewaard c6c8628c72182a103f1a39a3b1e6de4bc774ea06 Note: hjdewaard 2 Image Note for Figure 22 plain 2023-10-31T14:56:28+00:00 hjdewaard c6c8628c72182a103f1a39a3b1e6de4bc774ea06

This page is referenced by:

• 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.
• 1 2022-06-04T18:04:31+00:00 Discussion 19 this is the discussion of the data and analysis reflecting the research conducted for this dissertation plain 207 2023-10-30T20:48:50+00:00 In this chapter I review the findings to explore the complexities of MDL within OEPr reflected in the participants’ lived experiences as TEds. I make sense of these lived experiences within the broader field of media and digital literacy, and teacher education. This section of the dissertation is a liminal space, sifting through what is known and unknown, becoming as it is written. In this way, I generate “knowledge that is partial and prismatic. Knowledge that admits its failures and opens up new ways of thinking” (Cannon, 2018, p. 572).
  
            In order to stay true to the P-IP approach and the crystallization methodologies that are foundational to this research, this discussion section is offered as a kaleidoscope of ideas – both noesis (mode of experiencing) and noema (what is experienced) (Rosenberger & Verbeek, 2015). I remix from MDL frameworks that include the 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 explore where data gatherings from the lived experiences, interviews, observations, and media productions stand proxy for the MDL within the participants’ offerings (Rocha, 2015). Through these crystallizing moments, I reflexively open myself to possibilities as I turn to wonder (Rocha, 2015; Vagle, 2018).
  
            I appreciate that the intertwined concepts of media literacy and digital literacy are recognized in literature as complex concepts (Martinez-Bravo et al., 2022; Nichols & Stornaiuolo, 2019; Stordy, 2015). The extent to which global efforts attempt to bring media literacy and digital literacy into focus is evident in documents such as the Common Framework for Digital Literacy, Skills and Readiness (DQ Institute, n.d.) and the Media and Information Literacy Country Analysis (UNESCO, 2013). Although media literacy and digital literacy are more frequently seen as separate and distinct concepts, it is through a process of combination that I attempt to clarify my thinking (see Figure 22). I attempt to elicidate but not minimize the complexity of teaching and learning with MDL within an OEPr as a TEd, which may be as challenging and complex to understand as the inner workings and systems of practice responsible for sending the Hubble telescope into space. Thus, I focus on individual dimensions of MDL and OEPr as generated by the participants and identified in the findings.
  
            I revisit the research question in order to frame the findings: What lived experiences of media and digital literacies are evident in the open educational practices of teacher educators in Canadian faculties of education? I re-examine the concept map created from the findings, seeking to consolidate my understanding (see Figure 20). I analyze the navigational gyroscope graphic created from the findings (see Figure 22) and closely examine the layers and facets of the complex lived experiences of the participants with MDL within an OEPr in their roles as TEds in FoE in Canada.  I consider how the arbitrary delimiting boundary of selecting participants from within the geographic boundaries of the country of Canada offers little in terms of commonalities of experiences since it was applied to conveniently contain the scope of the research. Because of the dissimilarities in governance and funding structures of education in Canada, there may little in the lived experiences of the participants that can be drawn from the research that speaks to the unique Canadian-ness of those experiences. Perhaps future research could focus on making this type of comparison, seeking out similarities and differences within lived experiences of TEds in FoE in other global contexts.
  
            I attempt to break out of the siloed thinking that exists in the fields of teacher education, media studies, digital literacies, communication and information literacies, and critical literacies (Leaning, 2019) to allow synergies to emerge. I create and revise a table where I compare and contrast assemblages of MDL frameworks (see Table 4 in Appendix I). The map, the graphic and the table are analytic forms of ‘dispositio’, arrangements resulting from my “careful consideration of how component pieces should come together in a composition, both narratively and logically” (Hoechsmann in MacKenzie et al., 2022, p. 295). These analytic arrangements are representative assemblages of the participants’ MDL in their OEPr.
  
            I share share these crystallizations of media, specifically sketchnotes and concept maps, in order to make sense of the lived experiences of the participants in this research. My P-IP approach recognizes the impermanence and imperfection in these offerings. I acknowledge that this writing and the graphic renderings are dependent on language and that semiotics may shift meanings. The words I chose to use to represent the ‘thing’ called MDL in the participants’ OEPr may fail me. MDL and OEPr understandings depend on language where I as author, and you the reader, rely on code breaking and meaning-making to understand the nuanced and tacit scripts presented in these multimodal formats.
  
            From these diverse formats (Figure 20, Figure 22; Table 4) my focus turns toward identifying terms from within the findings that are more likely to be referenced within frameworks describing MDL. Despite my intentional focus on FoE in Canada, I critically selected both media and digital literacies frameworks that are representative of Canadian and global perspectives, providing a range of dimensions and factors relevant to this research. Two of the selected frameworks are compilations and distillations of numerous international frameworks (Martinez-Bravo, 2022; DQ website, n.d.) with the DQ framework identified as being comprehensive (Park et al., 2020). From a comparison of these frameworks, specific facets of MDL emerge as being more likely to be associated with teaching practices, particularly within an OEPr. Although these are not the only possible terms to explore, the ones I have selected as the dimensions on which to focus this discussion include the terms communication, creativity, connection, and criticality. As I examine these elements in this discussion, I reconnect to the research literature and reflect on the participants’ lived experiences as enacted within the autonomous and ideological conceptions of literacies, acknowledging MDL as cognitive and socially-contextual practices (Stordy, 2015; Street, 2003).
• 1 2023-04-24T17:31:50+00:00 Crystallizing Some Final Thoughts 14 in this section of the conclusion I present final thoughts from the dissertation process, product, and presentation plain 2023-10-30T21:37:33+00:00

  "For last year's words belong to last year's language. And next year's words await another voice. And to make an end is to make a beginning" (T. S. Elliot, 1942,p. 24).

  In this research, I focus on the lived experiences of teacher educators in Canadian faculties of education in an effort to clarify facets of their media and digital literacies that impact their open educational practices. As the T. S. Elliot quote reminds me, this ending is but the beginning, where the words and stories shared by the participants are becoming new stories. In unique ways the stories shared in this research are shaped by my focus on facets and dimensions found in the generated findings. In other ways, these stories share a moment out of time. New stories by the participants in this research are already being written. 
  
            In the literature review section I explore theoretical and conceptual foundations to teacher education, media and digital literacies, open educational practices and phenomenology. In the research design section I share the application of post-intentional phenomenology and crystallization methodology to my research. I reveal details of the methods including participant selection, timelines, interview procedures, and data gathering strategies. In the findings, I hold up facets of the stories shared by the participants and in the discussion section I re-examine the findings through selected lenses and dimensions of MDL frameworks. In this conclusion I draw upon the previous sections to present implications of this research, limitations to consider, and the potential for future research emerging from this work. 
  
            Lived experiences are storied and as stories do, they contain heroes and protagonists. These stories include sites of struggle, loss of innocence, a heroic quest, companions along the way, trials and tribulation, with insight and transformations along the routes taken toward resolution (Brown & Moffett, 1999). The lived experiences of the participants in this research are no less heroic for their efforts to bring media and digitally enabled educational practices into the open. It is through these efforts to communicate, connect, teach creatively, and enact criticality that MDL are becoming evident in the OEPr of TEds in Canadian FoE and beyond. The global push for OEPr and the importance of MDL are increasingly emphasized (UNESCO, 2018, 2019b, 2023). Within teacher education, as evident in the lived experiences of the participants, awareness of OEPr is key, re-visioning is essential, and re-imagining futures have yet to emerge. 
  
            Although some may advocate for separation of media from digital, I petition for a combinatorial view of MDL as a wholistic response to what is a complex and often chaotic concept. By sharing these lived experiences, as captured within the gyroscopic navigational imagine crafted from the findings (see Figure 22), the individual facets and dimensions come into focus, thus enhancing understanding that complexity surrounds each individual’s practice of teaching in the open. The participants’ lived experiences with MDL in their OEPr is shaped by a “base level of digital competence, defined as the confident, critical and responsible use of, and engagement with, digital technologies for learning, at work, and for participation in society” (Redecker, 2017, p. 107). What has become clearer through this research is the continuum(s) along which participants dial up or dial down their focus on specific facets of MDL as they design student learning and engage in scholarship as open educators (see Figure 8). The participants actively negotiate elements of knowledge production and dissemination, for themselves and their students, in order to “become consciously inclusive, socially and culturally diverse, interdisciplinary and inter-professional, and are able to foster communication, collaboration, ownership and mutual learning” (UNESCO, 2021, p. 127). 
  
            I suggest that although the findings and discussion do not reveal anything dramatically new in terms of media or digital literacies for teaching and learning in a faculty of education, this research presents an opportunity to refocus from the wide range of foundational frameworks for MDL that are globally available. It is also an opportunity to redefine literacies as this concept spirals from media and digital skills, fluencies and competencies (see Figure 10). What is revealed in this research is a broader understanding of the social and constructive nature of MDL and OEPr within FoE, when TEds practice from mindsets of media and digitally enable communications, connections, creativity and criticality. The transitory, destabilizing, and emergent nature of MDL within an OEPr, particularly as it responds to changes in the field of teacher education, can be chaotic and complex. Suggesting the use of a navigational device such as a gyroscope as a metaphor for lived experiences of MDL in OEPr can help TEds in FoE keep their eye on the horizon, maintain some balance in their practice, and manage the complexities of the work being done.
  
            One solution to this complexity is the open sharing of collaborative approaches to teaching and learning. Since “openness has certainly made teaching and learning resources and practices more accessible and reusable, and those affordances have encouraged the sharing and reflection of practice among communities” (Paskevecius, 2018, p. 170) it is increasingly more important for TEds to share with/in cross-disciplinary fields in all higher education contexts around the world. 
  
            Media and digital literacies are an ideal, as I suggest in the Spirals to Literacies graphic (see Figure 10), as an unobtainable condition characterized by liminality, fluidity, partiality, and liveliness. Yet it is toward such an ideal we must all strive in today’s modern, technologically enabled world. It is through this quest for literacies, as we journey toward becoming literate in aspects of media and digital technologies, that we acquire skills, fluencies, and competencies that can be measured and achieved, thresholds over which we can cross to demonstrate proficiency. Although many frameworks suggest literacies are attainable, the acquisition of MDL is not a threshold event, it is determined by cognitive and contextual factors. This research reveals how MDL and OEPr are co-dependent and reciprocal in process, production, and presentations. As evidenced in this research, it is via the purpose and passion of the teacher educators working toward an ethos of openness in their educational practice (OEPr) through which the vision and acquisition of media and digital literacies can become world-making. 
• 1 2023-06-25T19:47:23+00:00 Contributions to OEPr 6 conclusion section outlining how this research contributes to OEPr plain 2023-10-30T21:26:22+00:00

  Contribution to the study of MDL in OEPr

  This research adds to global conversations and the growing body of scholarship in the study of open educational practices (OEPr) by focusing on facets of understanding about MDL as revealed through the lived experiences of TEds (see Figure 22). This research contends that MDL within an OEPr is not contingent on the use or application of OER, as mentioned in research (Cronin, 2018; O’Neill, 2021; Paskevicius, 2018) but on mediations and negotiations within educative communication, creativity, connections, and criticality, as revealed in stories of the participating TEds’ teaching practices. From within these contested, situated, and contextual spaces, this dissertation research contributes to the growing awareness of how an open mindset in teacher education is not solely focused on overcoming ‘know-how’ in order to resolve technical obstacles, but in resolving to view teaching practices differently to support how learning can be achieved (Couros, 2006). The participants in this research continually negotiate and make critical decisions when dialing-it-up or dialing down (see Figure 8) their open educational practices, with awareness of media or digital engagements, as they design and work with students in their learning contexts. Similar to the findings of Paskevicius (2018), this research contributes insights into how the TEds who participated in this research infuse MDL into their OEPr; inviting learners to communicate, connect, create, and critically analyze process, products, and presentations within their learning practices. The participants come from diverse backgrounds in teaching and teacher education, with many holding years of experience as K-12 educators. These lived experiences with MDL are grounded in pedagogical and cognitive practices within the field of education in higher education contexts, but with deeply held connections to K-12 education. The collective expertise of the participants is not directly or explicitly tied to any field of study relating to media studies, media education, digital technologies, or open education.
            
            The MDL within the participants’ OEPr support the findings of (Cronin, 2017), Paskevicius (2018), and Oddone (2019). Cronin (2017) identifies four elements of open educational practices including balancing privacy and openness, developing digital literacies, valuing social learning, and challenging traditional teaching roles and expectations. Paskevicius’ (2018) research identifies three categories of openness, which can be seen as sites where MDL contributes to OEPr, in explorations of open resources, engagements with open design tools and techniques, and open publications that engage in reflection, peer-review and contributions to knowledge building. Similar to Paskevicius’ findings, I see the lived experiences of the participants’ MDL in their OEPr as varied, responsive, complex, and not tied to the use of OER as primary teaching materials.  The participants model a mindset and orientation toward radical flexibility and imaginative use of tools, teaching strategies, and technologies (Veletsianos & Houlden, 2020). Since “academics need to start from their teaching practices in order to find ways in which they can share and collaborate openly” (Inamorato dos Santos, 2019, p. 108) this shift in mindset contributes to clarifications necessary for understandings of the complexity of teaching in the open.
  
            An additional contribution to the field of open education is the explicit distinction I make in the use of the abbreviation / acronym for OEPr. This provides a delineation between the current multiple meanings behind OEP – being applied to both open educational pedagogies and open educational practices. By creating the distinct abbreviation and applying the acronym OEPr to the concept of open educational practices, this contribution within the field highlights the distinctive difference between pedagogy and practice in the field of teaching, and contributes to a clarity to conceptualizations. Although pedagogy focuses on and relates to the act and actions of teaching and learning that usually occur in the classroom, I consider practices as a manifestation of everything educators are and do both in the classroom and beyond. Practices encompass and reflect the educators’ personality, persona, identity, and ethos in how they select, use, and integrate MDL into their OEPr. Educators reveal, both physically and virtually, their identity and selfhood in their pedagogies which are one component of the overall conception of a teaching practice. Thus, I define OEPr as the sum total of an educator’s internal ethos, acts of hospitality, and ways of being open, along with pedagogical decisions and shared scholarship.