OEP: Open Pedagogy
Finding the edges of the concept of OEP will help clarify the conception of OEPr that is essential to my research. While neither 'open' or 'pedagogy' requires the use of digital technologies, the constraint I apply included the condition of electronic or web-based tools and resources. The use of OER is not a required condition within this conception of OEP, but making use of OER that are licensed for remix and reuse are often considered part of a pedagogical design. For this research, I consider open pedagogies (OEP) as a subset encompassed within the broader concept of OEPr.
OEP are sometimes referred to as open teaching (Couros, 2010; Nascimbeni & Burgos, 2016) and are defined by teaching and learning habits, facilitation and support by open educators, making or using OER, engaging students in creating OER, and the sharing of accessible professional materials (Cronin, 2017b; Farrow, 2015; Tietjen & Asino, 2021). As shared by McAndrew and Farrow (2013), the International Council for Open and Distance Education declares OEP to include the creation, use and repurposing of quality OER that is supported by institutional policies. Veletsianos (2015) distinguishes between OEP licensing and OEP sharing cultures relating to making artifacts or activities to engage with others. Werth and Williams (2022) contribute a value-laden framework to conceptions of OEP since education is a value-laden enterprise. Values such as transparency, sharing, personalizing learning, learner empowerment, deconstruction of traditional power structures, and collaborative knowledge construction were associated with open design, content, assessment, and OER-enabled pedagogies (Worth & Williams, 2022). Tietjen and Asino (2021) contend that definitions of OEP are devoid of any consideration or inclusion of conversations about pedagogy.
Open pedagogy is further defined as a:
This definition suggests an evolving understanding of what open pedagogy means and points toward the praxis/practices in education that enable openness. In this way, pedagogy moves beyond the collection or distribution of educational 'stuff' and shifts toward an orientation, a "quality held by educators themselves", and a description of an educational identity (Tur et al., 2020, p. 4).site of praxis, a place where theories about learning, teaching, technology, and social justice enter into a conversation with each other and inform the development of educational practices and structures. This site is dynamic, contested, constantly under revision, and resists static definitional claims. But it is not a site vacant of meaning or political conviction (Jhangiani & DeRosa, 2018).
Hegarty (2015) explored open pedagogies by applying eight attributes - learner generated, connected community, peer review, participatory technology, innovation and creativity, sharing ideas and resources, people openness and trust, and reflective practice. These attributes rely on digital tools and resources but also envelop the skills and attitudes of educators and learners (Hegarty, 2015). Open pedagogies bring a high degree of sharing and authentic, agentic action into learning spaces but relies on learner self-regulation and learning needs (Hegarty, 2015). Educators who enact open pedagogies provide openly accessible, openly managed, socially engaging, experiential, and scaffolded learning events and assets as co-facilitators and catalysts for learning (Ehlers, 2011; Hegarty, 2015). In considering OEP as a learning design process Roberts (2022) applies Hegarty's OEP attributes to suggest pathways and interventions as supports for a continually reflective teaching practice that may be evident in my research.
An OEP framework developed by Tietjen and Asino (2021) provides five elements that connect to this dissertation research. First, OEP is viewed as poly-vocal, seeking and thriving on a diversity of cultural voices within knowledge-building networks. Second, OEP emphasizes a participatory culture, accepting contributions from around the world and where learners contribute to global knowledge. Third, OEP uses and applies a common and open licensing system to contribute to the learning of others. Fourth, OEP connects to external, non-traditional and informal learning spaces. Fifth, OEP encourages collaboration by structuring communities of practice since this is viewed as a means to support others through crises situations (Tietjen & Asino, 2021). These elements may emerge from within the lived experiences of the participants in this research.
Paskevicius and Irvine (2019) apply structuration theory to their investigation into the OEP of higher education in British Columbia, finding approaches to openness influenced by selection of source materials, compilation of found and created resources, and the use of open tools and resources to communicate and share openly. The three approaches include the explorations of OER, designing materials and artefacts with openness in mind, and a focus on open publications of scholarly work. They discovered a diverse arrangement of openness along a continuum from closed access without open design to shared and created with open design (Paskevicius & Irvine, 2019). Challenges and issues include a lack of time, lack of program-wide integration planning, and the need for clear “delineation of boundaries for terminology so that the semantics around access and pedagogical strategies are clear” (Paskevicius & Irvine, 2019, p. 17). These findings may support my research as there may be similarities or differences within the lived experiences of open pedagogical practices of TEds in Canadian FoE.
INSERT FIGURE 5 - Open Pedagogy from a Social Justice Perspective