Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Navigating the boundary
between formal & informal learning
in higher education
Catherine Cronin @catherinecronin #oer15 14/04/15
@catherinecronin
#oer15
slideshare.net/cicronin
Image: CC BY-NC 2.0 carnagenyc
…’open’ signals a broad, de-centralized constellation of
practices that skirt the institutional structures and roles by
which formal learning has been organized for generations.
– Bonnie Stewart (2015)
Ima
ge
: C
C B
Y 2
.0 D
ee
Ash
ley
a divide between formal and informal learning:
students navigate the dissonance between these –
with or without our support
Image: connectedlearning.tv/what-is-connected-learning
Connected
Learning
Connected Learning:
an agenda for research & design (2012)
eds. Mizuko Ito, et al.
networked
educators
networked
students
Physical
Spaces
Bounded
Online
Spaces
Open
Online
Spaces
Higher Education
Image: CC BY-SA 2.0 Catherine Cronin, built on original Networked Teacher image by Alec Couros
‘Open’ is a continuous, not binary, construct.
A door can be wide open, completely shut, or
open part way. So can a window. So can a
faucet. So can your eyes. Our common-
sense, every day experience teaches us that
‘open’ is continuous.
David Wiley (2009)
@opencontent
“
Openness is not the opposite of closed-ness,
nor is there simply a continuum between the two…
An important question becomes not simply whether
education is more or less open, but what forms
of openness are worthwhile and for whom;
openness alone is not an educational virtue.
Richard Edwards (2015)
@RichardEd1
“
my PhD research:
open educational practices (OEP)
in higher education
research questions
1. Why and how do academic staff in higher
education use online tools and spaces,
both bounded and open, for research,
learning and teaching?
2. Why and how do students and staff
interact in open online spaces in higher
education, and how do they negotiate their
digital identities in these spaces?
open
digital
critical
pedagogy & practices
Rosen & Smale (2015) Open digital pedagogy = critical pedagogy
A critical approach allows researchers and
writers to address questions of how digital
technologies (re)produce social relations, in
whose interests they serve, and identify sites
for resisting and unsettling such relations.
Neil Selwyn & Keri Facer (2013)
@neil_selwyn @kerileef….………
“
padlet.com/cicronin /oer15
I welcome your ideas & feedback…
Thank you!
Catherine Cronin@catherinecronin
about.me/catherinecronin
slideshare.net/cicronin
Image: CC BY 2.0 visualpanic
References
Edwards, Richard (2015, February 3). Knowledge infrastructures and the inscrutability of
openness in education. Learning, Media and Technology.
http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/21592/1/Edwards_LMT_2015.pdf
Guntrum, Geser (Ed.) (2012). Open Educational Practices and Resources: OLCOS
Roadmap 2012. Salzburg Research EduMedia Group.
Ito, Mizuko, et al. (2012). Connected Learning: An Agenda for Research and Design.
Digital Media & Learning (DML) Research Hub.
Rosen, Jody R. & Maura A. Smale (2015, January 7). Open digital pedagogy = critical
pedagogy. Hybrid Pedagogy. [blog].
Selwyn, Neil & Keri Facer (2013). The Politics of Education and Technology: Conflicts,
Controversies, and Connections. Palgrave MacMillan.
http://www.palgrave.com/resources/sample-chapters/9781137031976_sample.pdf
Stewart, Bonnie (2015). Open to influence: What counts as academic influence in
scholarly networked Twitter participation. Learning, Media and Technology 40(3), pp 1-
23. http://theory.cribchronicles.com/Open%20to%20Influence%20Pre-print.pdf
Wiley, David. (2009, November 16). Defining “Open”. iterating toward openness. [blog].
