Draft Research Proposal in 2 pages

Posted on by

I’m posting this draft research proposal here to allow for classmates and trusted friends to annotate and provide feedback. This proposal is bound by the parameters of the assignment for the Research Colloquium course with this initial submission between 50-1000 words. This is a test of my belief in open education and the power of critical insights to shift my research to become better through collaboration.

You are invited to annotate using Hypothes.is in this ‘private’ group (done this way since many classmates are not as yet familiar with this digital annotation technology and safe sandbox spaces is one way to learn). Here is a quick start guide to Hypothes.is for those unfamiliar with this digital resource. I’ve posted some annotations as presented by one of my classmates, along with my response to their queries [Hypothes.is annotations in PhD Collaborations group]

MY PROPOSAL

This qualitative, digital ethnographic inquiry will center on the open educational practices (OEPr) of teacher educators in Faculties of Education (FoE) in Canadian contexts. The ubiquity of electronic technologies in the cultural milieu of today’s educational environments suggest that digital tools are both field and method for ethnographic study (Burrell, 2009; Markham, 2016). This research will explore, and potentially revise, current definitions of open educational practice (Cronin & MacLaren, 2018; Cronin, 2017; Nascimbeni & Burgos, 2016; Paskevicius, 2017). It will bring to light connections from current conceptualizations of OEPr, specifically in the field of education, to understandings of critical media and digital literacy (Gee, 2015; Stordy, 2015).

Problem and Purpose:

Since “teacher’s knowledge is an essential component in improving educational practice” (Connelly, Clandinin, & Ming, 1997), this research will enmesh the lived experiences of teacher educators who openly share while applying media and digital literacies within an OEPr (Cronin, 2017; Hegarty, 2015; Watt, 2007). Teacher educators from diverse, Canadian, FoE sites will be invited to participate in interviews and to “story” their OEPr, reflecting on their media and digital literacy landscapes (Clandinin, 2015).

This research will not only add to rapidly evolving discussions about OEPr (Cronin & MacLaren, 2018) but add much needed inquiry into a gap in literature involving teacher educators as the focus of investigation (Woloshyn, Kaefer, Savage, & Ratkovic, 2017). I propose to undertake this research for several reasons. First, as societies change and the functions of education, culture, citizenship and work increasingly migrate online, there are growing calls worldwide for a digitally and media literate citizenry (Antoninis, 2019; Carr, Hoechsmann, & Thesee, 2018; Hadziristic, 2017). Canadian FoE should be responding to these calls for change (Bates, 2019). Second, since the 2012 UNESCO Paris OER Declaration, there have been global initiatives to openly share information, particularly in education, thus impacting teacher preparation programs (UNESCO, 2012). These initiatives within Canadian FoE programs have yet to be studied. Third, there is a pressing global need for trained educators with proficiencies in 21st century global competencies (Atchoarena et al., 2017; OECD, 2018) which Canadian FoE can provide, if programs are in place to respond to this need.

Research Questions:

  • How do teacher educators define open educational practice?
  • What are the lived experiences of teacher educators, as evidenced in the ethos and landscape 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?

Theoretical Framework and Positionality:

This research is grounded in the theoretical foundations of socio-cultural, constructivist theories of learning (Dewey, 1916; Lowenthal & Muth, 2009) and critical literacies (Freire, 2009). This is further framed by conceptions of shared and collaborative practice within networked and participatory cultures (Gee, 2015; Ito et al., 2010) and communities of practice (Wenger, 1998) which shapes the structures and actions of teacher educators learning in concert with others. The theory of connectivism (Siemens, 2004) will be explicated within this research.

This ‘participatory’ research paradigm (Guba & Lincoln, 2005) will bring critical subjectivity, collaborative action, participative reality and an epistemology of experience. My voice, reflexivity and media infused textual representation (Lincoln & Guba, 2005) will be problematized and interrogated as I locate my ‘self’ as researcher participant, both within and outside the research field of study. With eight years of experience as a teacher educator teaching critical media and digital literacies, this area of study is familiar ground. Trustworthiness, rather than validity, will emerge as my criteria for quality research, “rooted in the epistemological/ethics nexus” of standards such as positionality, discourse communities, voice, critical subjectivity, reciprocity, sacredness, and privilege (Guba & Lincoln, 2005, p. 209). My engagement in global networks (GOGN, UNESCO OE4BW), cross-border collaborations (Virtually Connecting, ISTE Inclusive Learning Network), and open educational spaces (OEFellows, Creative Commons, Mozilla Open Leaders) will inform and shape this research.

Methodology:

I will apply a digital ethnography methodology (Hine, 2015; Markham, 2016; Murthy, 2013) in order to explore the digital identities, networks, collaborations, and stories within the negotiated and digitally connected, lived experiences, and cultures of teacher educators who exhibit OEPr. By framing OEPr within an understanding of teaching practices, and a lens of media and digital literacies, while physically situating participants in faculties of education in Canada, some connections and patterns may be revealed.

Method:

Through an examination of FoE websites, courses where in media and digital literacy topics are integrate will be identified and the names of instructors of these courses will be curated for potential participation in this research. I will apply purposeful sample selection of up to 15 teacher educators from geographically and diverse FoE settings across Canada. Ethics review and consent (Seko & Lewis, 2017) will be requested to conduct web usage and social network analysis, in order to examine their professional and networked cultures within which OEPr will be evidenced.

Data will be collected through semi-structured interviews, document analysis, field notes, and an audit trail which will track tasks within this concurrent, six-month, research design. Analysis and coding of blog and/or web site content, web usage patterns, and social network analysis (SNA) of connections on Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram will be conducted, using software such as Gephi or NodeXL. Results will be returned to the participants for accuracy and member checking.

Results and Dissemination:

            Research results will be presented in an alternative, digital format, to reflect the non-linear, hyper-textually linked, conceptually and topically interconnected, and networked nature of the research. Paths through the information will be reader directed, within a fluid, editable, elastic format that is “open to annotation and responsive to change” (Jacobs, 2008, p. 237).

References

Antoninis, M. (2019, March 5). Digital Literacy Skills: From a Framework to a Measure [Blog]. Retrieved July 21, 2019, from UNESCO website: http://uis.unesco.org/en/blog/digital-literacy-skills-framework-measure

Atchoarena, D., Selwyn, N., Chakroun, B., Miao, F., West, M., & de Coligny, C. (2017). Working group on education: Digital skills for life and work. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000259013

Bates, T. (2019, May 30). The coming crisis in Canadian post-secondary education: Some strategies for survival. Retrieved June 7, 2019, from https://www.tonybates.ca/2019/05/30/the-coming-crisis-in-canadian-post-secondary-education-3-some-strategies-for-survival/

Burrell, J. (2009). The field site as a network: A strategy for locating ethnographic research. Field Methods, 21(2), 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X08329699

Carr, P., Hoechsmann, M., & Thesee, G. (Eds.). (2018). Democracy 2.0: Media, political literacy and critical engagement. New York: Brill Sense.

Clandinin, D. J. (2015). Stories to live by on the professional knowledge landscape. Waikato Journal of Education, Special 20th Edition Anniversary Collection, 183–193.

Connelly, F. M., Clandinin, D. J., & Ming, F. H. (1997). Teachers’ personal practical knowledge on the professional knowledge landscape. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13(7), 665–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(97)00014-0

Cronin, C., & MacLaren, I. (2018). Conceptualising OEP: A review of theoretical and empirical literature in open educational practices. Open Praxis, 10(2), 127–143.

Cronin, Catherine. (2017). Openness and praxis: Exploring the use of open educational practices in higher education. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(5). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/3096/4301

Dewey, J. (1916). Chapter 7: The democratic conception in education. In Democracy and Education (pp. 85–104). Pennsylvania: Penn State.

Freire, P. (2009). From pedagogy of the oppressed. Race/Ethnicity: Multidisciplinary Global Contexts, 2(2), 163–174.

Gee, J. P. (2015). Literacy and Education. New York: NY: Routledge.

Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed., pp. 191–215). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Hadziristic, T. (2017). The state of digital literacy in Canada: A literature review (p. 67). Retrieved from Brookfield Institute for Innovation + Entrepreneurship website: https://brookfieldinstitute.ca/wp-content/uploads/BrookfieldInstitute_State-of-Digital-Literacy-in-Canada_Literature_WorkingPaper.pdf

Hegarty, B. (2015). Attributes of open pedagogy: A model for using open educational resources. EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY, 11.

Hine, C. (2015). Ethnography for the internet: Embedded, embodied and everyday. Retrieved from http://stc2.uws.edu.au/CRproj/Ethnographic_Strategies.pdf

Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., boyd,  danah, Cody, R., Herr-Setphenson, B., … Tripp, L. (2010). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media. Retrieved from https://clalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/files/Hanging_Out.pdf

Jacobs, D. T. (2008). The authentic dissertation: Alternative ways of knowing, research, and representation. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/3717886/The_Authentic_Dissertation_-_Alternative_ways_of_knowing_research_and_representation

Lowenthal, P., & Muth, R. (2009). Constructivism. In E. F. Provenzo Jr. & A. B. Provenzo (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Social and Cultural Foundations of Education (pp. 178–179). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.lakeheadu.ca/10.4135/9781412963992.n86

Markham, A. (2016, January 20). Ethnography in the digital internet era: From fields to flows, descriptions to interventions [Online article]. Retrieved from http://jeremydean.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/ethnographyinthedigitalera2016finaldraft.pdf

Murthy, D. (2008). Digital ethnography: An examination of the use of new technologies for social research. Sociology, 42(5), 837–855. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038508094565

Nascimbeni, F., & Burgos, D. (2016). In search for the open educator: Proposal of a definition and a framework to Increase openness adoption among university educators. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(6). http://dx.doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i6.2736

OECD. (2018). Education at a glance 2018: OECD indicators. Retrieved July 21, 2019, from OECD Publishing, Paris, France website: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en

Paskevicius, M. (2017). Conceptualizing open educational practices through the lens of constructive alignment. Open Praxis, 9(2), 125–140.

Seko, Y., & Lewis, S. (2017). “We tend to err on the side of caution”: Ethical challenges facing Canadian research ethics boards when overseeing internet research. In M. Zimmer & K. Kinder-Kurlanda (Eds.), Internet Research Ethics for the Social Age (pp. 133–150). New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Siemens, G. (2004, December 12). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from Elearnspace website: http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Stordy, P. H. (2015). Taxonomy of literacies. Journal of Documentation, 71(3), 456–476. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2013-0128

UNESCO. (2012). Shaping the education of tomorrow: 2012 report on the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, abridged—UNESCO Digital Library. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000216606

Watt, D. (2007). On Becoming a Qualitative Researcher: The Value of Reflexivity. The Qualitative Report, 12(1), 82–101.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Woloshyn, V. E., Kaefer, T., Savage, M., & Ratkovic, S. (2017). Exploring research methodologies: Mapping the Canadian education landscape as represented through two national journals. In S. Opic, B. Bognar, & S. Ratkovic (Eds.), New Approaches to research methodology in education (pp. 223–266). Zagreb: Faculty of Teacher Education: University of Zagreb.