Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education

Open Educational Practice and Preservice Teacher Education: Understanding past practice and future possibilities

Peter Albion, David Jones, Janice JonesUniversity of Southern Queensland, AustraliaChris CampbellGriffith University, Australia

Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education 2017Austin, TX

Introduction

Setting the scene

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Is open the new educational black?

Learning objects & repositoriesOpenCourseWare

Open Education Consortium

Open Educational Resources (OER)

Open Educational Resources University (OERu)

Open Educational Practices (OEP)

Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs)

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Open = ?• Wiley (2010; 2014)– Objects that are shared and can be

• Retained• Reused• Redistributed• Revised• Remixed

– No sharing = no education• Sharing is fundamental to advancing education

– Historic effect of print = lower cost of sharing– Online sharing lowers cost toward zero

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Unrealised promise of OER• Developing world– Scale of educational demand is huge• Building & staffing is impossible• Online using OER offers solution

• Uptake of OER is limited– Described as first phase• Developing basic functions

– Second phase• Open Education Practices (OEP)

– Application of OER

OER & OEP in teacher educationExploring the value of OER & OEP in teacher education

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Professional engagement• Becker & Riel (2000)– Professional engagement = interest beyond

class– Higher levels associated with• Constructivist views & computer use

– Contrasted with ‘private practice’• Berry et al. (2010)– Engagement reduced teacher wastage– 20% of value for students from shared

expertise– 90% of teachers thought networking

improved teaching

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Teachers and open practice• Lortie (1975)– Teachers are often isolated• Fall back on experience in schools

• Hargreaves (2010)– School culture restricts collaborative

improvement• Belland (2009)– Teachers replicate experience through habitus

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Moving teachers to OER & OEP• Liable to be challenging– For reasons discussed– Teacher engagement invisible to others• Perception of classroom only activity

• Conventional education is product focused– Assessment of individual outputs– Collaboration discouraged or resented

• Teacher education needs to encourage OEP

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Curating resources• Teachers collect teaching resources–Multiple & varied sources– Tools - Pinterest, Scoop.it, etc.

• Preservice teachers– Curation activity develops skills– Professional contribution

• Curation may offer a path to OEP

Frameworks for OER & OEPMaking sense of the relationship

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

What is open?• Pomerantz & Peek (2016)– 50 shades of open– A ‘fashionable’ marker• Openwashing = describing non-open things as

open• Open Educational Quality Initiative

(2011)– Despite availability of OER uptake is limited– Requires movement beyond access• Learning as construction & sharing• Culture change

–Matrix linking OER & OEP

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Elements of OEP (Ehlers, 2011)

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Continuum of open practice (Stagg, 2014)

• Seeks to evaluate progress toward OEP• Begins with consumption• Progresses to co-creation with learner• Some doubt about sequence

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Matrix & continuum overlaid

Tracking progress with OER & OEPSome illustrations of our open(ish) practice in teacher preparation

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Rambling on learning paths• 3rd year ICT pedagogy course– 400 students, 60% online

• Weekly learning paths– Series of resources & activities including

OER– Students post reactions to blogs• Become part of ramble for subsequent students

– LMS prevents open sharing– Students are setting objectives, sharing

reactions, & modifying paths– A or B

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Digging into Diigo• LMS is safe & reliable– Limits outside access & sharing

• Sidestep using outside services• Diigo used for webpage annotation– Readings assigned & student notes shared

via Diigo– Residue of experience is passed on = B or E

• Diigo & Twitter used to share OER into LMS– Simple sharing = A

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Blogging as co-creation• Driven by LMS limitations• Aggregator & Moodle module– Share student blogs in LMS–Within & between offers– Student reactions overlay & co-create

rambles– Interaction is in the open but rambles in

LMS– B or E + element of co-creation (Stage 5)

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Student creators & sharers• Relate-create-donate– Students create/share resources– Collections openly available

• Seek-sense-share– Curated collections of existing resources

• Students create & share with class & beyond– Peer review in class for quality assurance– Choice about content & form– C & Stage 5

Lessons from experience

What we have learned

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Reality is messier than models• Both models were helpful• Neither was a neat fit– Activities were often ambiguous– Crossed over categories

• Other researchers responded similarly• Useful as guides to evaluating practice

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

PST responses• Account based on recollections, no

formal data• Activities required unfamiliar software– PSTs were stretched

• Being open posed challenges– Unfamiliar with software and sharing– Schooling prefers tidy products over

process– Open collaborative practice is discouraged

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Collaborative creation challenges• Creating & sharing resources– Seen as relevant and valuable–Wanted tight specifications vs open process

• Sharing work in progress– Fear of misappropriation

• Peer review– Appreciated as source of ideas and

feedback• Use of ‘special’ sites suggests lack of

presence for professional practice

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Open = 5 Rs• Retain, reuse, redistribute, revise, remix• Courses address questions of use• Should encourage explicit CC licences– Need for additional work

A path forward

Some small steps we could take

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

OEP in teacher education• Little evidence of persistent

collaboration• Piecemeal adoption of OEP is not

enough

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Steps ahead• Program-wide approach to OEP–Move habitus away from ‘private practice’

• De-emphasise grading of products– Attend more to process and visible

collaboration• Facilitate at institutional level– Encourage coherent professional presence

• Integrate with profession– Engage PSTs with profession

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

Dreaming for a moment• Focus on teacher planning• Develop support system with OEP– Templates & tools– Linked to support networks– Facilitate comment & reuse

• Graduate teachers enculturated in OEP

SITE 2017 Austin, TX

ContactPeter.Albion@usq.edu.auDavid.Jones@usq.edu.auJanice.Jones@usq.edu.auChris.Campbell@griffith.edu.au