2.2 Conceptual Frameworks

2.2      Conceptual Frameworks

“I think that even though we need to have some outline, I am sure that we make the road by walking. … I see this thing as just unfolding as we go along.” (Horton & Freire, 1990, pp. 6–7)

The conceptual framework outlines the factors, constructs, variables, and relationships in the research design (Grant & Osanloo, 2014) while reflecting the above mentioned ontological and epistemic theoretical lenses. Just as Horton and Friere (1990) suggest, and in post-phenomenological fashion, I’ll allow this research to unfold as I go – always in a state of ‘becoming’. I will next explore conceptual understanding of what it means to be a teacher educator, then examine the conception of open educational practices, and conclude with an exploration of the concepts of media and digital literacy, with scrutiny of current trends toward global competencies. I will conclude this section with a crystallization of these conceptual frameworks that will inform and provide next steps for the proposed research.

2.2.1.  Teacher Educators in Faculties of Education

As this statement 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 reflections and actions (Beck, 2016) outside of the traditional silos of academia, while showcasing what they know and how they enact and embody their craft of teaching.

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 (see Figure 1). 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. Courses in the FoE are designed and delivered by teacher educators (TEds) to teacher candidates (TCs), also referenced as preservice teachers in some literature, who graduate to become licensed teachers, usually working 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 teaching and learning opportunities and support for teacher development are also provided, without the full range of courses or subject matter and credentialing systems found in a FoE.

Since education in Canada falls under provincial jurisdiction, FoE programs 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 preservice teacher education or professional-years study. For the purpose of this research, the focus will be on the professional years of study, also referenced as teacher preparation programs. 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 such 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. The OEPr of TEds can reveal how work within these tensions occurs, particularly in the what, how, and why they integrate digital literacies 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 prior to stepping into the classroom, e.g. through 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:

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

     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). Some of these changes 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).

While not explicit to MDL or OEPr research, the proposed 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 development of the Teacher Educator Technology Competencies (Foulger et al., 2017) establishes a foundational set of skills and attributes which can support self-reflection and professional development. 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 are 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. My research will focus on the nexus between MDL and OEPr found in teacher educators in FoE in Canadian contexts. 

Next section: 2.2.2 Open Education