This page is referenced by:

• 1 2020-04-15T17:11:55+00:00 Theoretical Frameworks 16 This is a page in the literature review that outlines theoretical frameworks - ontology and epistemology. plain 2020-05-04T21:38:15+00:00      A theoretical framework identifies a researcher's worldview, from the heart, not the head, and impacts every decision made in the unfolding of the research (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). The choice of research theory needs to be explicitly and clearly stated (Grant & Osanloo, 2014). My PhD research is grounded in the theoretical foundations of socio-cultural constructivist theories of learning originating from Dewey, Vygotsky, and Papert (Dewey, 1916; Lowenthal & Muth, 2009; Papert & Harel, 1991; Roth & Lee, 2007) and critical literacies (Freire, 2009; Giroux, 2010; Luke, 2012). My “constructivist paradigm assumes a relativist ontology (there are multiple realities), a subjectivist epistemology (knower and respondent co-create understandings)” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2013), and framed by conceptions of shared and collaborative practice within networked and participatory cultures (Gee, 2015; Ito et al., 2010).
       This research will apply an interpretive framework from a constructivist-interpretive and critical paradigm (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). The interpretive researcher is described as a bricoleur (Denzin, 2017; Denzin & Lincoln, 2011), informed by "personal history, biography, gender, social class, race, and ethnicity and those of the people in the setting"; one who "stitches, edits, and puts slices of reality together” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011, p. 5). I push this notion of researcher as bricoleur by suggesting this interpretivist research as a crystallization accomplished by an alchemist, mixing elements into something precious and worthy of recognition (Stewart et al., 2017). I will explore this notion of crystallization in other sections of this literature review.
       The theory of connectivism (Siemens, 2018) will be explicated within this research. Connectivism relates to the role of cognition when generating connections and networks, both internally and externally to the human brain. Siemens (2012) set out the principles of connectivism as a “response to a perceived increasing need to derive and express meaning, and gain and share knowledge. This is pro­moted through externalisation and the recognition and interpretation of patterns, which are shaped by complex networks” (Tschofen & Mackness, 2012, p. 125). The four key principles of connectivism – autonomy, connectedness, diversity, and openness – (Siemens, 2012; Tschofen & Mackness, 2012) are supported by emerging technologies that are shaping human cognition in the way we “create, store, and distribute knowledge” (Couros, 2010, p. 114). For this research, the cognitive processes within the connectivist structures of teacher educators will be explored in the stories of their lived experiences as they navigate and make sense of complex MDL and OEPr amalgamations.
       This research is positioned within the cognition and learning field of study. I am interested in exploring the inner and outer cognitive landscapes of the human mind in relationship with others and technologies, as mediated by MDL within OEPr. Research into the cognitive theory of multimedia learning focuses on the demands on cognitive processing and the retrieval of information from long term memory. Working memory (WM), particularly our cognitive ability to manage multimedia information within complex teaching and learning environments, can impact MDL and OEPr. WM processes are described as essential, extraneous, and generative (Mayer, 2017). There are specific cognitive demands placed on teacher educators when using multimedia and exploring MDL. Multimedia is holistically defined by de Vries (2003) as “the influence of different symbol systems” presented concurrently or consecutively using text, pictures, sound, and animation (p. 157). Conceptions from the theory of connectivism, cognitive load theory (van Merrienboer & Sweller, 2005), and socio-cultural cognition (Kirschner et al., 2018) impact teacher educators as they engage with MDL to enact their OEPr. 
       This research is influenced by the philosophy of technology and material engagement theory (Ihde, 2011; Ihde & Malafouris, 2019) to better understand the human–technology relationship. Since the "larger overarching social, cultural, and political frameworks in which people partake and that may be said to vary on a scale from ‘left,’ e.g., (neo-)Marxist to ‘right,’ e.g., (neo)liberal" (Van Den Eede et al., 2015, p. 239) impacts how OEPr and MDL are perceived. I recognize that the everyday use of technology in education does not take place in a vacuum (VanDenEede et al., 2015). My interest lies in understanding the individual and socially negotiated actions that lead to a TEd's enacted OEPr and where this is influenced by MDL considerations.
  
   
• 1 2020-01-12T03:46:21+00:00 Alternate Dissertation Format 13 plain 2020-05-04T22:02:21+00:00

  "What is the reading of a text, in fact, except the recording of certain thematic recurrences, certain inconsistencies of forms and meanings?" (Calvino, 1981).

       To honour the topic of media and digital literacies, while authentically sharing and revealing the OEPr under investigation, the results of my research, as modelled in this comprehensive portfolio, will be presented in an openly accessible, alternative, digital format, while using and applying a variety of media and digital strategies and techniques. This “open-ended, problematic, critical, polyphonic” text (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005, p. 1124) will break open the boundaries imposed by traditional alpha/numeric representations. This reflects the non-linear, hyper-textually linked, dialogic, conceptually and topically interconnected and networked nature of my subject matter, and the nature of this qualitative research.
       Idhe and Malafouris (2019) posit the notion of Homo faber, suggesting that humanity is evolutionarily constituted and shaped by the technologies we use. In today's world new materialities and digital ecospheres encompass all aspects of living and learning, thus we are constructed by the tools that we've constructed and by which we engage in relationships and construct our learning (Idhe & Malafouris, 2019). This echoes McLuhan's position that the medium is the message. This comprehensive portfolio, and the future dissertation process and product, will “look beyond the obvious and seek the non-obvious changes or effects that are enabled, enhanced, accelerated or extended by the new thing” (Federman, 2004) and will ”suit the style as much as possible to the matter” (McLuhan & McLuhan, 1992, xi). In this way, my dissertation will critically analyze the privilege of representation, voice, and academy.
       Deciding to shift my research process and product into a fully interactive and digital environment fits with the ontological and epistemological frameworks within which I study. Pockley, the creator of the first electronic dissertation in 1995, describes texts as “mutable streams of thought, open to annotation, revision, re-presentation and part of the very fabric of their community of interest” (Jacobs, 2008, p. 245). By preparing and presenting my comprehensive portfolio, and future research, in an alternative dissertation (Alt-Diss) format, I contribute to the breaking open of “calcified conventions” sustaining the linear privilege of print text (Covey, 2013) that is traditionally found in electronic dissertation and theses formats relying on static PDF documents. With my experiences in producing and sharing media texts, I recognize the “cultural agoraphobia, the cognitive bias that leads us to underestimate the potential of openness” and will push open the structure, media, notions of authorship, and methods of assessment in the process and products of my research and dissertation (Covey, 2013, p. 550).
       I will design paths through the research information, as any research author would, but the reader will control the serendipitous navigation through the content. Reader control in determining the research reading experience, through strategic use of hyperlinks, embedded media, graphic organizers, taxonomic features, and visualization options and affordances in the Scalar software, will reflect the media filled, rich, thick descriptions, and the open nature of this dissertation.  For ease of access, the references will be included as a full curated reference list but also as an indexed, alphabetic offering. Software such as Scalar will be utilized to present the research results within a fluid, editable, elastic format that is “open to annotation and responsive to change” (Jacobs, 2008). One example of a dissertation presented using Scalar (Dixon, 2014 - Endless Questions)  is linked here to provide an opportunity to understand the digital mechanisms available in taxonomic visualizations.
       Since my research and dissertation is not without its political dimensions, and to meet institutional requirements for a ‘frozen in time’ document as a representation of my research capabilities (Barrett, 2014; Jacobs, 2008), a hyper-textually linked linear PDF version will be also produced. Dissemination of research results will be pursued through traditional, peer reviewed Canadian and international journals, (e.g. the Canadian Journal of Education, Open Praxis), conference presentations, (e.g. OTESSA, OER21, OEGlobal) and through open social media and web publications (blog posts, FoE newsletters). In this way, I heed Denzin's (2017) call to "unsettle traditional concepts of what counts as research, as evidence, as legitimate inquiry" (p. 8) reflecting postmodernist compositions such as Italo Calvino's novel A Winter's Night A Traveler. 
  
• 1 2020-04-15T15:14:19+00:00 Research Questions 11 This is the research questions section of the literature review plain 2020-04-29T16:57:21+00:00      I wonder how a teacher educator’s OEPr are impacted by an awareness and application of MDL? For the purpose of this research project, OEPr are defined, following Cronin (2017), as collaborative pedagogies utilizing digital technologies and authentic learning encounters for “interaction, peer-learning, knowledge creation, and empowerment of learners” (p. 18). In other words, teacher educators will individually or collaboratively select OEPr to support their ways of knowing, designing, planning, and assessing teaching and learning events (Cronin, 2017; Nascimbeni, 2018; Paskevicius, 2018; Paskevicius & Irvine, 2019).
       In this research, OEPr are explored through teacher educators’ participatory, collaborative, networked, shared, and public-facing educational practices (Cronin & MacLaren, 2018; Lohnes Watulak, 2018; Lohnes Watulak et al., 2018; Tur et al., 2020). Current research in the field of OEPr fails to clearly identify the critical role played by media and digital literacies (Bozkurt et al., 2019; Cronin, 2017) which prompts the question of how critical media and digital literacies impact teacher educators’ OEPr?
  
  RESEARCH QUESTIONS
  • How do teacher educators define open educational practices (OEPr)?
  • What are the lived OEPr experiences of teacher educators, as evidenced in the ethos and stories of their networked, connected, collaborative, openly accessible, digital and media infused teaching practice?
  • How do critical media and digital literacies inform or shape OEPr, from the perspective of teacher educators?
  This research will capture the teacher educators’ storied enactment of OEPr as shared through: “experiences (what people feel); practices (what people do); things (the objects that are part of our lives); relationships (our intimate social environments); social worlds (the groups and wider social configurations through which people relate to each other); localities (the actual physically shared contexts that we inhabit); and events (the coming together of diverse things in public contexts)” (Pink et al., 2015).
• 1 2020-04-15T16:51:39+00:00 Researcher Positionality 11 This is part of the literature review but also a stand alone page describing the position of the researcher in light of the research questions. plain 2020-05-04T19:57:40+00:00      My intention, at the beginning stages of this digital ethnographic research study, is to critically examine the open educational practices of teacher educators to explore where they enact media and digital literacies, tacitly and explicitly. By examining the experiences and expertise of teacher educators who may embody and enact OEPr within their teaching ethos, lessons may be learned that can support the growth of MDL and OEPr within FoE across Canada, and potentially into global teacher education sectors. Currently, there is little research that identifies or examines the depth of knowledge in pedagogy and technology of teacher educators as it impacts on OEPr, both within and outside teacher education spaces.
       This digital ethnographic research study will bring critical subjectivity, collaborative action, a participative reality, and an epistemology of experience (Guba & Lincoln, 2005). My voice, reflexivity and media infused textual representations will be reflexively interrogated as I locate my ‘self’ as researcher-participant, both within and outside the research field of study (Guba & Lincoln, 2005).
       This research benefits from my years of experience teaching media and digital literacy courses in the FoE where I am both educator and student, as well as my extensive background as an elementary school educator. My engagement in global networks (Global OER Graduate Network (GO_GN); UNESCO Open Education for a Better World (OE4BW); Open/Education Technology, Society and Scholarship Association (OTESSA)), cross-border collaborations (Virtually Connecting; International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE) Inclusive Learning Network), and open educational spaces (Ontario Extend, Ontario Open Education Fellows, Creative Commons, Mozilla Open Leaders) will inform and shape this research.
       My intention is to explore how Canadian FoE can support the growing demand for digitally and media literate educators who demonstrate global competencies (CMEC, 2020) and are responsive to global calls for OEPr (Bates, 2019a; Montoya, 2018). My position as researcher is supported by my academic persona as a scholarly writer and as a media-making educator. This supports my notion of becoming and being created through hupomnemata, as evidenced in this graphic Towards an Academic Self. When considering and coding the research data, my media making efforts will further crystallize the findings.
  
   
• 1 2020-04-15T14:42:23+00:00 Purpose and Rationale 9 This is the purpose and rationale section of the literature reveiw plain 2020-05-04T19:55:52+00:00      This literature review will unfold my qualitative, digital ethnographic inquiry centering on the open educational practices of teacher educators in Faculties of Education in Canadian higher education contexts. This research focuses on the confluence of three areas – media and digital literacies (MDL), faculties of education (FoE), and open educational practices (OEPr). First, MDL is an important research focus, with growing political and public demands for literacies in all areas of education (OECD, 2018; Zimmer, 2018). Calls for educational responses to ‘fake news’ (Gallagher & Rowsell, 2017) and the teaching of digital citizenship to combat cyberbullying (Choi, Cristol, & Gimbert, 2018; Jones & Mitchell, 2016) will increasingly influence educational landscapes in Canada (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 further education for citizenship (Carretero Gomez et al., 2017; Law et al., 2018). While research focuses on MDL in the K-12 education sector, on teachers in the classroom, or on the teacher candidates being prepared for teaching, there is little focus on the MDL competencies of teacher educators (Petrarca & Kitchen, 2017).
       Second, 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 & 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 and the National Council of Teachers of English have emphasized 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) suggests the need for a reconceptualization of current 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 will explore the lived experiences of teacher educators who openly share evidence of applying MDL as part of their teaching practice (Cronin, 2017; Hegarty, 2015; Watt, 2007). In order to gain a better understanding of the context of MDL within FoE, teacher educators’ voices and stories need to be re-presented. Teacher educators will be invited to participate in interviews to document their OEPr and their media and digital literacy landscapes. There is 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).
       Third, this research will explore, revise, and clarify current definitions of OEPr (Cronin & MacLaren, 2018; Nascimbeni & Burgos, 2016; Paskevicius, 2017; Tur et al., 2020). I will uncover potential connections from current conceptualizations of OEPr to understandings of critical media and digital literacy (Gee, 2015; Stordy, 2015). 
       My research will not only add to rapidly evolving discussions about OEPr but may also contribute a much needed focus on teacher educators (Woloshyn et al., 2017). Teacher educators bring experience in educational teaching practice to the nexus between OEPr, teaching practices, and MDL. Teacher educators from diverse, Canadian, FoE sites will be invited to participate in interviews, to “story” (Clandinin, 2015) their OEPr, and reflect on their MDL landscapes. The ubiquity of electronic technologies in the functional milieu of today’s educational environments suggest that digital tools are both field and method for ethnographic study (Burrell, 2009; Markham, 2016).
• 1 2020-04-17T14:01:10+00:00 Teacher Education 6 This is a section of the literature review but also a stand alone page outlining elements and contextual details related to Faculties of Education. plain 2020-04-28T16:08:08+00:00

  "Simply put, it is reasonable to assume that quality teacher preparation 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)     

  
  For the purpose of this research, teacher education programs are referenced as faculties of education (FoE). These are departments in higher education institutions, usually universities in Canadian contexts, providing a course of study in the discipline of education. Courses in the FoE are designed and delivered to preservice teachers, also referenced as teacher candidates in some literature, who are in the undergraduate program and will graduate to become licensed teachers, usually working within the K-12 sector of education. FoE programs should not be confused with professional development courses, instructional design departments, or higher education centers for teaching and learning, that also provide teaching and learning opportunities and support teacher development without the full range of courses or subject matter found in a FoE.
       Since education in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction, FoE develop programs 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 preservice teacher education or professional-years study. For the purpose of this research, the focus will be on the professional years of study.
  Globally, teacher education programs face the challenge of managing the ‘theory-practice’ tension. In Canada, this is a major consideration in FoE reform initiatives (Russell & Dillon, 2015). Program design traditionally includes the what and the how of teaching practice:

  “The what includes such familiar elements as foundations, subject area methods, and some generic aspects of teaching (e.g., behaviour management and assessment), as well as more recently introduced topics (e.g., diverse learners, inclusive education, and differentiated instruction). The what may also include issues such as the sequencing of courses and practicum experiences and coherence across courses” (Russell & Dillon, 2015, p. 151).

  
       The term teacher educator (TEds) describes those individuals tasked with teaching in the teacher education programs, seen as the gatekeepers to the teaching profession (Voithofer et al., 2019). These individuals frequently bring extensive practice in the field of education into their course designs. TEds can also be new to the discipline, coming through an academic and research stream of study. While teachers in the Ontario K-12 sector are licensed through the Ontario College of Teachers, this is not a requirement for employment or teaching in higher education sectors such as FoE. Although TEds are "at the core of good teacher education" yet receives far less attention (Vloet & van Swet, 2010). TEds are often overlooked, invisible, and rarely researched within the field of education (Crawley, 2018; Izadinia, 2014; Voithofer et al., 2019; Woloshyn et al., 2017). While this is not often the case, public perception suggests 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. Teachers and their educators should therefore clearly know what they value about being a professional and upon which values, standards and educational concepts they base their teaching and educating methods. 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 are increasing demands on teacher educators to improve outcomes (Buss, Foulger, Wetzel, & Lindsey, 2018). Research and change efforts in FoE include: a) the infusion of technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) frameworks (Jaipal-Jamani et al., 2018; Voithofer, Nelson, Han, & Caines, 2019); b) the application of participatory teaching (West-Puckett, Smith, Cantrill, & Zamora, 2018); c) networking teaching and learning (Lohnes Watulak, 2018; Oddone, 2019); d) digital literacies and digital citizenship (Choi et al., 2018; Nascimbeni, 2018); and e) open educational practices (Albion, Jones, Campbell, & Jones, 2017; Kim, 2018). Some of these changes are politically driven, specifically with the US Department of Educational Technology 2016 release of the Advancing Educational Technology in Teacher Preparation: Policy Brief and the European Union Practical Guidelines for Open Education for Academics documents.
       Focusing on these changes, specifically related to digital teaching and learning, research turned to examine the technological practices of teacher educators. The development of the Teacher Educator Technology Competencies (Foulger et al., 2017) establishes a foundational set of skills and attributes to support self-reflection and professional development. Research is beginning to examine these competencies in practice (Thomas et al., 2019) which may lead to explicit connections to OEPr of TEds in FoE and the identification of supports teacher educators require to enact new initiatives or innovations into their teaching. My research will focus on the nexus between MDL and OEPr found in teacher educators in FoE in Canadian contexts, so a deeper awareness of research foci with TEds is essential. 
   
• 1 2020-04-15T15:51:40+00:00 Open Education Framework 2 This is a page in the literature review but also a stand alone description of an open educational framework. plain 2020-04-15T20:53:58+00:00 Open Educational Practices
  There are many conceptions, definitions, and visions for open education in relation to:
  1. open educational resources (Bayne, Knox, & Ross, 2015; Rolfe, 2012; Weller, 2014; Wiley, Bliss, & McEwen, 2014),
  2. open scholarship (Stewart, 2015; Veletsianos & Kimmons, 2012; Weller, 2016),
  3. the open education movement (Alevizou, 2015; Bayne et al., 2015; Farrow, 2016; Noddings & Enright, 1983; Rolfe, 2017),
  4. open pedagogies (Armellini & Nie, 2013; Cronin & MacLaren, 2018; Ehlers, 2011; Hegarty, 2015), and
  5. open education practices (Couros, 2010; Paskevicius, 2017; Paskevicius & Irvine, 2019; Roberts, Blomgren, Ishmael, Graham, & Ferdig, 2018; Roberts, 2019; Stagg, 2017).
  While the dominant research discourse focuses on open education resources, my research will focus on the transformative potential of OEPr, which is underrepresented in scholarly work, particularly in the field of education, (Cronin & MacLaren, 2018; Nascimbeni, 2018; Paskevicius, 2018; Roberts, 2019). For clarification, I have differentiated between open education practices using OEPr, rather than the usually used acronym OEP which is commonly applied to both open pedagogies and open practices. In this way I hope to add to the evolution to this term in current research.
  
  This research will capture the teacher educators’ storied enactment of OEPr as shared through:
  “experiences (what people feel); practices (what people do); things (the objects that are part of our lives); relationships (our intimate social environments); social worlds (the groups and wider social configurations through which people relate to each other); localities (the actual physically shared contexts that we inhabit); and events (the coming together of diverse things in public contexts)” (Pink et al., 2015).