Teacher Education
Teaching is described as both art and science (Biesta, 2022; Marzano, 2007). Elements of teaching, according to Banner and Cannon (1997/2017) includes learning, authority, ethics, order, imagination, compassion, patience, tenacity, character, and pleasure (see Figure 2). Elements of teaching are further identified in the standards of practice and the ethical standards outlined by the Ontario College of Teachers (Ontario College of Teachers, 2020) and explored using reflective Anishnaabe artwork (Ontario College of Teachers, 2017). There may be similarities in practice between K-12 and higher education, however, these are not specific or explicitly identified for the context of teacher education. Additionally, while the connections between teaching, knowledge acquisition, learning, and literacy development are worthy of further investigation, these are not the primary focus of this conceptual investigation. Here I focus on the conceptual frameworks that ground my investigation into media and digital skills, fluencies, competencies, and literacies of teacher educators through their lived experiences within an open educational practice.
As the statement by Goodwin and Kosnik (2013) illuminates, there is need for research into how teacher educators do what they do (Ellis & McNicholl, 2015) and delve into what it means to be a teacher educator. It is time that teacher educators shared their expertise as practitioners and theorists as part of an open educational network – making explicit what is often tacit and unspoken – sharing their knowledge, reflections and actions (Beck, 2016; Bennett & Bennett, 2008) outside of the traditional silos of academia, while showcasing 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 teacher educators as being a critical component of teacher preparation, it is essential to examine factors relevant to teacher education and specifically for teacher educators in contemporary times (see Figure 3). 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, often referenced as initial teacher education (ACDE website publications 2, n.d.). Courses in the FoE are 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 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, often informal or short-term learning opportunities come without the full range of courses, subject matter, or credentialing systems found in initial teacher education within a FoE.
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 offer a concurrent education program whereby education related courses are incorporated into the undergraduate course of study. A subsequent master level of study should not be confused with initial teacher education or professional-years study. For the purpose of this research, the focus will be on initial teacher education, commonly completed within one to two years of study following an undergraduate degree.
Research literature reveals two key issues in teacher education. First, teacher education programs face the challenge of managing two competing demands - the ‘theory-practice’ and ‘research-teaching’ tensions (Cochran-Smith, 2005; Zeichner, 2012). This episteme – phronesis dichotomy is an ongoing issue in teacher education (Pisova & Janik, 2011). In Canada, these tensions are the focus of many FoE reform initiatives (Russell & Dillon, 2015). As outlined by Russell and Dillon (2015), teacher education program design traditionally includes the what and the how of teaching practice. The what focuses 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 focuses on the process of enacting teaching in the classroom and the contexts of learning such as within a community of inquiry. Tensions emerge 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). Through actively 'thinking out loud' in blogs, social media, and open publications, particularly in sharing details of the what, how, and why they do what they do, teacher educators can reveal integrated MDL activities, strategies, and opportunities within their OEPr.
A second issue is the nature of those who teach in FoE. The term teacher educator (TEd) describes those individuals tasked with teaching in the teacher education programs. These TEds are 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, there 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. While 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. Thus, some TEds may have extensive research experience yet have little or no formal knowledge of teaching practices. Although TEds are central to good teacher education, they receive little attention (Vloet & van Swet, 2010). TEds are 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 suggest that TEds:
With rapid changes in media and digital technologies impacting the preparation of teachers in FoE, there are increasing demands on teacher educators to improve outcomes (Buss et al., 2018; Garcia-Martin et al., 2016). Research and change efforts in FoE include: a) self-study (Hordvik et al., 2020; Kosnik et al., 2015); b) the infusion of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) frameworks (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 shows the challenges and constraints within Canada's FoE when digital technology and literacies are infused or integrated into course work (DeWaard, 2022). Changes to FoE programs are politically driven, as seen from the US Department of Educational Technology 2016 release of the Advancing Educational Technology in Teacher Preparation: Policy Brief (Stokes-Beverley & Simoy, 2016) and the European Union Practical Guidelines for Open Education for Academics documents (Inamorato dos Santos, 2019).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).
While not explicit to MDL or OEPr research, the teacher educator technology competencies (TETCs) proposed by Foulger et al., (2017) in their exploration of the technological practices of TEds can inform this research. The TETCs establishes a foundational set of skills and attributes which can support self-reflection and professional development (Foulger et al., 2017). Research is beginning to examine 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) posit that teacher educators are positioned to impact the future or OEPr within K-12 education. A deeper awareness of the OEPr of TEds is essential. This research focuses on the nexus between MDL and OEPr found in teacher educators in FoE in Canadian contexts.