One and Done
I’ve been thinking about disposable assignments in terms of my PhD dissertation as an open, shared, authentic, purposeful, meaningful, and engaging digital document. This stems from work by David Wiley and John Hilton (2018) when they propose criteria that can be applied to the evaluation of open educational pedagogies (OEP) in the use of open educational resources (OEP) that they refer to as OER-enabled pedagogy. This is based on Wiley’s definitional components of OER being the 5 Rs of retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute. They present a range of assignment categories as artifacts of teaching. Assignments are classified as disposable, authentic, constructionist, and renewable. Their key questions resonate as I read and think deeply about PhD dissertation production as the culminating assignment and artifact of the PhD program as an open artifact of learning.
Are students asked to create new artifacts (essays, poems, videos, songs, etc.) or revise/remix existing OER?
Does the new artifact have value beyond supporting the learning of its author?
Are students invited to publicly share their new artifacts or revised/remixed OER?
Are students invited to openly license their new artifacts or revised/remixed OER?
Wiley & Hilton, 2018,
When considering a PhD dissertation, these same questions apply. In terms of thinking about researching about open educational practices (OEPr) and the place for openly sharing artifacts, assignments and the products derived from learning events, how does this likewise apply to dissertations? Are these documents that I have been reading for the Research Colloquium being used in any way, other than to inform future PhD students, which has some merit but may not be furthering the fields of endeavour in which these documents have been published. Can these dissertations I’ve been reading and deconstructing meet the criteria set out by Wiley & Hilton? Future research in PhD dissertation work could search for answers to some of these questions.
•Do students assigned to create, revise, or remix artifacts find these assignments more valuable, interesting, motivating, or rewarding than other forms of assessment? Why or why not?
Wiley & Hilton, 2018
•Do students who make their assignments publicly available demonstrate greater mastery of learning outcomes or show more enthusiasm for their work than students assigned traditional assessments? Why or why not?
•Do students who openly license their work find additional learning benefits? Does openly licensed student work produce additional benefits to the broader community?
•Are there any drawbacks (real or perceived) that are voiced by students or faculty that participate in OER-enabled pedagogy?
For now, it’s enough for me to just ask the question – are PhD dissertations disposable assignments? Are they examples of a ‘one and done’ artifact of learning? Do they live on beyond the formal stamp of approval by an institution and a committee? Will the PhD document be shelved in a dusty archive or will it live on in open learning spaces?
References
Wiley, D., & Hilton, J. (2018). Defining OER-enabled pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(4). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/3601/4724
