Learning as Participation: Open Practices and the Production of Identities

Bidisha Chaudhuri, Janaki Srinivasan, Onkar Hoysala
{"title":"Learning as Participation: Open Practices and the Production of Identities","authors":"Bidisha Chaudhuri, Janaki Srinivasan, Onkar Hoysala","doi":"10.7551/MITPRESS/11480.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For some time, the world has been looking hopefully toward digitally enabled openness to bring about positive transformation and development (Smith, Elder, and Emdon 2011). In this chapter, we unpack this hope and examine the linkages between open initiatives and development. The prefix open conjures up the idea of making digital platforms, knowledge, and knowledge development processes more accessible, including to a hitherto excluded group of people. However, the links between openness, participation, and development are far from automatic, and understanding people’s participation in open processes continues to elude researchers and practitioners. Thus, what we need to focus on is not only whether participation occurred but who participated and who was excluded (whether by exercising their choice or systematically). In sum, there is a need to understand how existing micro and institutional power structures shape the dynamics of participation. Moreover, open development cannot afford to focus merely on the outcomes of an intervention and label them a success or failure relative to the goals of that intervention. We need to focus equally on the processes and practices by which those outcomes were reached. This chapter develops a framework for a better understanding and analysis of open development processes that link people’s participation in open practices to open development outcomes through changes in their identities. Understanding people’s participation in open processes involves analyzing “what kind of participation and to what avail, on whose terms it takes place, and how it recasts power” (Singh and Gurumurthy 2013, 176). Harvey (2013, 284) likewise pointed out in his study of AfricaAdapt that participation in a collaborative learning network is contingent on “the 4 Learning as Participation: Open Practices and the Production of Identities","PeriodicalId":133444,"journal":{"name":"Critical Perspectives on Open Development","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Perspectives on Open Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7551/MITPRESS/11480.003.0007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

For some time, the world has been looking hopefully toward digitally enabled openness to bring about positive transformation and development (Smith, Elder, and Emdon 2011). In this chapter, we unpack this hope and examine the linkages between open initiatives and development. The prefix open conjures up the idea of making digital platforms, knowledge, and knowledge development processes more accessible, including to a hitherto excluded group of people. However, the links between openness, participation, and development are far from automatic, and understanding people’s participation in open processes continues to elude researchers and practitioners. Thus, what we need to focus on is not only whether participation occurred but who participated and who was excluded (whether by exercising their choice or systematically). In sum, there is a need to understand how existing micro and institutional power structures shape the dynamics of participation. Moreover, open development cannot afford to focus merely on the outcomes of an intervention and label them a success or failure relative to the goals of that intervention. We need to focus equally on the processes and practices by which those outcomes were reached. This chapter develops a framework for a better understanding and analysis of open development processes that link people’s participation in open practices to open development outcomes through changes in their identities. Understanding people’s participation in open processes involves analyzing “what kind of participation and to what avail, on whose terms it takes place, and how it recasts power” (Singh and Gurumurthy 2013, 176). Harvey (2013, 284) likewise pointed out in his study of AfricaAdapt that participation in a collaborative learning network is contingent on “the 4 Learning as Participation: Open Practices and the Production of Identities
作为参与的学习:开放实践和身份的产生
一段时间以来,世界一直希望数字化开放能够带来积极的转变和发展(Smith, Elder, and Emdon, 2011)。在本章中,我们将解读这种希望,并研究开放倡议与发展之间的联系。前缀“开放”让人联想到让数字平台、知识和知识开发过程更容易获得的想法,包括迄今被排除在外的人群。然而,开放、参与和发展之间的联系远不是自动的,研究人员和实践者仍然无法理解人们在开放过程中的参与。因此,我们需要关注的不仅是是否参与,而是谁参与了,谁被排除在外(无论是通过行使他们的选择还是系统地)。总而言之,有必要了解现有的微观和体制权力结构如何塑造参与的动态。此外,开放发展不能仅仅关注干预的结果,并根据干预的目标将其标记为成功或失败。我们需要平等地关注实现这些成果的过程和做法。本章为更好地理解和分析开放发展过程提供了一个框架,将人们对开放实践的参与与通过其身份的变化而产生的开放发展结果联系起来。理解人们在开放过程中的参与包括分析“什么样的参与,有什么好处,在谁的条件下发生,以及它如何重塑权力”(Singh和Gurumurthy 2013, 176)。Harvey(2013, 284)同样在他对AfricaAdapt的研究中指出,参与协作学习网络取决于“4种学习即参与:开放实践和身份的产生”
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信