This site requires Javascript to be turned on. Please enable Javascript and reload the page.

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

Figure 3: I. Teach.

This page has annotations:

Contents of this annotation:

This page is referenced by:

Teacher Education "Simply put, it is reasonable to assume that quality teacher education depends on quality teacher educators. Yet, almost nowhere is attention being paid to what teacher educators should know and be able to do" (Goodwin & Kosnik, 2013, p. 334).

Teaching is described as both art and science (Biesta, 2022; Marzano, 2007). Elements of teaching, according to Banner and Cannon (1997/2017) included learning, authority, ethics, order, imagination, compassion, patience, tenacity, character, and pleasure (see Figure 2). Across the provincial education jurisdictions for kindergarten to Grade 12 (K-12) education, elements of teaching practice are identified in the standards of practice and the ethical standards outlined for the profession (Alberta Education Office of Registrar, 2023; BC Teachers' Council, 2019; Ontario College of Teachers, 2020). Examining documents from Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario, I notice a range of attitudes, ethics, competencies, fluencies, and skills. The teaching standards may be applied for verification and certification of graduates from a FoE course of study; however, these are not explicitly identified for the context of teacher education, nor are these standards connected to the practice of teaching by teacher educators. Although the connections between teaching, knowledge acquisition, learning, and literacy development are worthy of further investigation, these were not the primary focus of this conceptual investigation. I focused on the conceptual frameworks that grounded my investigation into media and digital skills, fluencies, competencies, and literacies of teacher educators as these are experienced within an open educational practice and defined the elements of a teaching practice.

As the statement by Goodwin and Kosnik (2013) illuminated, there was an identified need for research into how TEds do what they do (Ellis & McNicholl, 2015) and delve into what it means to be a teacher educator. In this research, it is timely that teacher educators share their expertise as practitioners and theorists as part of an open educational network; making explicit what is often tacit and unspoken while sharing their knowledge, reflections and actions (Beck, 2016; Bennett & Bennett, 2008) outside of the traditional silos of academia. In this way, TEds may well showcase what they know and how they enact and embody the art and craft of teaching (Biesta, 2022; Marzano, 2007) (see Figure 3).

With a focus on TEds as being a critical component in faculties of education, it was essential to examine factors relevant to teacher education and specifically on research relating to teacher educators. Teacher education programs are referenced here as faculties of education (FoE). These are departments in higher education institutions providing a course of study in the discipline of education, sometimes referenced as initial teacher education (Association of Canadian Deans of Education, 2017). Courses in the FoE were designed and delivered by teacher educators (TEds) to teacher candidates (TCs) who graduate to become licensed teachers, usually employed to work within the kindergarten to grade 12 sector (K-12) of education. For this research, FoE programs are differentiated from professional development courses, instructional design departments, or higher education centers for teaching and learning, where opportunities and support for the development of teaching skills and competencies may also be provided. These alternative learning opportunities are often informal or short-term and frequently come without the full range of courses, subject matter, or credentialing systems found in initial teacher education within a FoE.

An additional consideration for this research was the inclusion rather than exclusion of reference to online course offerings and recognizing that open educational practices are not constrained to being only online. Chickering and Gamson's (1987) insights into good teaching practices for undergraduate online education included actions that encouraged contact between teachers and students, developed reciprocity and cooperation within course contacts, used active learning techniques, provided timely feedback, emphasized time on task, communicated explicit and high expectations, and respected diversity in learner’s talents and ways of learning. These elements may subsequently be seen as qualities of open educational practices.

Since education in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction, initial teacher education programs in FoE are developed with limited national oversight. An undergraduate degree followed by a course of study in the education department is the most common design of FoE in Canada (Russell & Dillon, 2015). Some universities offered a concurrent education program whereby education related courses are incorporated into the undergraduate course of study. A graduate degree at the master or PhD levels of study should not be confused with initial teacher education, alternatively called the professional-years study. For the purpose of this research, the focus was on initial teacher education, commonly completed within one to two years of study following an undergraduate degree.

Research literature revealed two key issues in teacher education. First, teacher education programs faced the challenge of managing two competing demands - the ‘theory-practice’ and ‘research-teaching’ tensions (Cochran-Smith, 2005; Eisner, 2002; Zeichner, 2012). This episteme – phronesis dichotomy was an ongoing issue in teacher education (Pisova & Janik, 2011). In Canada, these tensions were the focus of many FoE reform initiatives (Russell & Dillon, 2015). As outlined by Russell and Dillon (2015), teacher education program design traditionally included the what and the how of teaching practice. The what focused on foundational elements such as subject specific methods, aspects of teaching such as behaviour management or assessment, as well as the sequencing of courses and the organization of practicum experiences. The how focused on the process of enacting teaching in the classroom and the contexts of learning such as within a community of inquiry. Tensions emerged in FoE in a push/pull relationship for time, space, and attention to theory or practice. These tensions were exacerbated by recent pandemic-influenced teaching and learning constraints (Danyluk et al., 2022). The OEPr of TEds can reveal how working thing and through these tensions occurred. Through actively 'thinking out loud' in blogs, social media, and open publications, particularly when sharing details of the what, how, and why they do what they do, teacher educators may reveal integrated MDL activities, strategies, and opportunities within their OEPr.

A second issue was the nature of those who teach in FoE. The term teacher educator (TEd) described those individuals tasked with teaching in the FoE. These TEds were seen as gatekeepers and lynchpins to the teaching profession and considered to be a critical factor in the quality and transformation of teacher education programs (Kosnik et al., 2015; Stillman et al., 2019; Voithofer et al., 2019). Yet it was noted that here is a highly transient nature of precarious employment within teacher education (Kosnik et al, 2015). Some TEds bring extensive practice from the field of education into their course designs. Other TEds may be new to the discipline, or become TEds as a result of an academic and research stream of study. Although teachers in the K-12 sector in many provinces are licensed to teach by a governing body, such as the Ontario College of Teachers, this is not a requirement for employment or teaching in higher education sectors such as FoE. Research noted that some TEds had extensive research experience yet may have little or no formal knowledge of teaching practices. Although TEds were considered central to good teacher education, they received little attention (Vloet & van Swet, 2010). TEds were often overlooked, invisible, and rarely researched within the field of education (Crawley, 2018; Izadinia, 2014; Kosnik et al., 2015; Voithofer et al., 2019; Woloshyn et al., 2017). Perceptions suggested that TEds:
should be able to handle themselves in their practice, to act in an effective way, to take care for themselves and to be physically, emotionally and cognitively balanced. They should have a realistic self-concept, concerning who they are, what they are able to do and how they want to develop themselves, especially when coping with educational innovations. … They should have insight into their personal experiences, feelings, values and motives, and gain self-knowledge about processes of their identity development, construction of meaning and their professional development (Vloet & van Swet, 2010, p. 150).
With rapid changes in media and digital technologies impacting the preparation of teachers in FoE, there were increasing demands on teacher educators to improve outcomes (Buss et al., 2018; Garcia-Martin et al., 2016). Research and change efforts in FoE included: a) self-study (Hordvik et al., 2020; Kosnik et al., 2015); b) the infusion of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) frameworks (Allen & Katz, 2023; Jaipal-Jamani et al., 2018; Voithofer et al., 2019); c) the application of participatory teaching (West-Puckett et al., 2018); d) networking and collaborative teaching and learning (Heldens, 2017; Lohnes Watulak, 2018; Oddone et al., 2019); e) digital literacies and digital citizenship (Choi et al., 2018; Nascimbeni, 2018); and f) open educational practices (Albion et al., 2017; Kim, 2018). Recent research showed some of the issues and opportunities TEds face when digital literacies were infused or integrated within Canada’s teacher education programs (DeWaard, 2022). Changes to FoE programs are politically driven, as suggested by the US Department of Educational Technology 2016 report on the Advancing Educational Technology in Teacher Preparation: Policy Brief (Stokes-Beverley & Simoy, 2016) calling upon "leaders of teacher preparation programs to engage in concerted, programmatic shifts" (p. 4). The political impact on teacher education is evident in governmental reforms that drastically changed the organization and application of initial teacher education programs in Faculties of Education in Ontario (Kitchen & Petrarca, 2015).

Although not explicit to MDL or OEPr research, this research was informed by the teacher educator technology competencies (TETCs) proposed by Foulger et al., (2017) in their exploration of the technological practices of TEds. The TETCs establishes a foundational set of skills and attributes which can support self-reflection and professional development (Foulger et al., 2017). Subsequent research examined these competencies in practice (Thomas et al., 2019), but explicit connections to MDL within OEPr of TEds in FoE have yet to be made. Allen and Katz (2019) proposed that teacher educators were positioned to impact the future or OEPr within K-12 education. With this in mind, this research focused on the nexus between MDL and OEPr found in teacher educators in FoE in Canadian contexts, recognized the complexity of teaching in teacher education, and hinted at a life-long learning approach to teacher education (Livingston, 2014, 2017).
Crystallizing the discussion Media and digital literacies reside in the intentionality between human and world, shifting how humans interact through technologies with/in the world, impacting how they read the word and read the world (Freire, 2018/1970). The presence or absence of skills, fluencies, competencies and literacies with media-based technologies and digital/electronic devices will impact communications, creativity, connections and criticality when building and maintaining relationships and intentions emerging from human↔︎technology↔︎world interactions (Ihde, 2015). In this discussion, the dimensions selected shine light on the participants' shared stories of struggles with knowing enough and finding time to learn more, about technology integrations that would benefit their MDL within their OEPr with/for their students in order to collaborate and co-construct learning. This struggle was particularly evident in Andromeda, Lyra, and Orion's interviews.

Through this discussion, I make sense of these lived experiences within the broader fields of media and digital literacy, open education, and teacher education. What emerges is a story of MDL relevant to communication, creativity, connecting, and criticality. Although I juxtapose and merge ideas to shape my understanding, I recognize that this discussion is a liminal space, shifting through and between what is known and unknown as evidenced in the findings, 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).

As I crystallize the findings of this research in this discussion, I focus through the dimensions evident within the participants’ ethos and stories. I revisit the entangled conceptions of MDL as remixed within this research. I expose the confusion emerging between the conceptions of media and digital skills, fluencies, competencies and literacies (see Figure 10) and examine understandings of what is encompassed in the notion of teaching practice (see Figure 3). As I crystallize conceptions, what becomes clear is the complex and sometimes chaotic nature of assemblages gathered from this exploration.
Contribution to TEds
Contribution to the study of teacher education
Teaching in teacher education is a complex task (Livingston, 2017). Through this research I recognize and emphasize this complexity in the art and science of teaching (see Figure 2, see Figure 3). Teaching encompasses diverse factors relating to design, content, assessment, sociality, technology, community, and cognition. Elements and dispositions include patience, compassion, tenacity, character, pleasure, learning, authority, ethics, order, and imagination (Banner & Cannon, 2017/1997). By considering these factors as being relevant to the lived experiences of TEds in Canadian FoE contributes to the value that should be considered in the profession.

With the creation of the gyroscopic image (see Figure 22) comes a second contribution to the study of teacher education. This complex navigational aid can be applied to the management of the ever-shifting terrain of teacher education. Through this remixed image, focusing on the infusion of MDL into an OEPr, I contribute to the technological dimension of specificity and salience (Scott, 2014). Specificity is evident in the key elements that emerge from the participants’ efforts to communicate, connect, create and become a critical emitter and receptor of media and digital processes and productions in their work as teacher educators. Salience is the noticing of information that is notable (Scott, 2014). This is evident in the gyroscopic navigational image where I place the teacher educator in the center of the image, surrounded by the moving parts representing their MDL within an OEPr. In this way, the centrality of teacher educators in this research is recognized.

Although the main focus of this research is grounded in the work of teacher educators, this work can support the infusion of MDL into other areas of study in teacher education or broader higher education contexts. For example, one extension of this doctoral inquiry is exemplified by my supporting work with students in the application of e-portfolios into the faculty of education with a focus on introducing and building MDL into the lived experiences of students and faculty.

This doctoral inquiry and resulting research contribute to explorations into the complex and diverse practices of teacher educators (see Figure 23), thus modelling how MDL practices which are not divided “according to binary oppositions, but instead moves fluidly between the ethical and the personal; the objective and the subjective; the creative and the critical. Practices spread across digital contexts and include social, cultural and political elements” (Pangrazio, 2016, p. 168).