3.5 Implications
3.5. Implications for the proposed research
Throughout this research proposal, I recognize the heteroglossia (diverse voices within creative constructions), polyphony (unison of multiple elements including media constructions), and dialogism (dialogue required for change to occur) (Hoechsmann, 2019) that are embedded into the construction of this research. Bakhtin’s (1981) notion of “unfinalisability” reminds me that this research proposal is an object in transition, changed through a process of feedback and active reflection, not only from my committee members, but the wider, open educational ecosphere in which I network, collaborate and engage.
This research may be impacted by conceptions of teacher educators’ self-efficacy (Bandura, 2012; Taimalu & Luik, 2019) and teacher educators’ pedogogical beliefs about the importance of open education. While Taimalu and Luik (2019) investigated the use of technology among teacher educators, this was not related to, nor did it mention, OEPr. Teacher educators’ perceptions of the impacts of MDL on their OEPr may be skewed due to their confidence in their abilities to create and model media and digital literacies, while using technologies, within their teaching practice.
One limitation of this proposed research is that the narrow scope of participant criteria may render this research not applicable to other contexts such as higher education in general or TEds in global contexts. Additionally, the limitation of data gathering methods to one interview and one artifact may not reveal the potential depth of the MDL that could be found in the OEPr of TEds, not could it uncover the breadth of MDL that TEds may apply to their OEPr over time. One caution and potential limitation for me as a new researcher is to maintain a clear focus on the research questions. While the intended focus for this P-IP research is on the becoming (becoming media and digitally literate, becoming an open educational practitioner) this research may inadvertently result in discovering what has been.
An additional limitation is that the limited participation numbers in this research, precludes the potential for generalizability or theory building. While I hope this research opens new avenues of thought relative to MDL within the OEPr in faculties of education, it will require further study in broader categories and crossing boundaries of fields of study beyond the field of teacher education, for confirmation and conversation. This hinders the potential implications but does not negate the importance of this proposed research.
Open educational resources and practices, created and share by experienced practitioners of the art and science of teaching, can potentially improve access to educationally focused media and networks, extend the adaptability of educational practices and resources, provide exemplars of rich digital artifacts of educational information, and lead to the transformation of faculties of education to collaborative and creative learning spaces (Couros, 2006). Since teacher educators’ voices are currently absent from OEPr conversations and discourses, it is through this research that I will “make public the knowledge and everyday lived experiences of the oppressed, the silenced, and the lost and forgotten in the service of social justice” (St. Pierre, 2013, p. 648).
