Monological practices, authoritative discourses and the missing “C” in digital classroom communities

IF 0.8 4区 教育学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Vicki A. Hosek, Lara J. Handsfield
{"title":"Monological practices, authoritative discourses and the missing “C” in digital classroom communities","authors":"Vicki A. Hosek, Lara J. Handsfield","doi":"10.1108/etpc-05-2019-0067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this study was to examine teacher decisions surrounding opportunities for student voice, experiences and beliefs in digital classroom communities. The teachers’ decisions reflect monologic rather than dialogic teacher pedagogies which prompted the authors to ask the following question: What led to these teacher-centered practices in digital environments?\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nAuthoritative discourses in school policies and a missing connection between critical pedagogies and teachers’ technology practices are examined in light of teachers’ decisions to engage in monologic and/or dialogic teaching practices. The authors propose professional development and research that emphasize pedagogy that supports student voice as foundational to practices involving digital literacies.\n\n\nFindings\nExamination of the teachers’ decisions showed monologic practices void of student opportunities to critically engage in digital environments. Dominant discourses imposed through protectionist and digital citizenship policies of schools as well as lack of opportunity through professional development to connect critical pedagogy to technology impacted the teachers’ decisions.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nCurrent research surrounding teachers’ digital literacies uses the TPACK framework to examine technology integration practices. Missing is a critical component that addresses and works to dismantle the dominant discourses and power structures in digital communities (Author, 2018). The authors build on research in critical digital literacies to argue for adding the critical missing “C” into the TPACK framework (C-TPACK) to move researchers and educators to consider pedagogies that examine ideologies at work in digital communities to provide opportunities for student voice.\n","PeriodicalId":45885,"journal":{"name":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English Teaching-Practice and Critique","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/etpc-05-2019-0067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine teacher decisions surrounding opportunities for student voice, experiences and beliefs in digital classroom communities. The teachers’ decisions reflect monologic rather than dialogic teacher pedagogies which prompted the authors to ask the following question: What led to these teacher-centered practices in digital environments? Design/methodology/approach Authoritative discourses in school policies and a missing connection between critical pedagogies and teachers’ technology practices are examined in light of teachers’ decisions to engage in monologic and/or dialogic teaching practices. The authors propose professional development and research that emphasize pedagogy that supports student voice as foundational to practices involving digital literacies. Findings Examination of the teachers’ decisions showed monologic practices void of student opportunities to critically engage in digital environments. Dominant discourses imposed through protectionist and digital citizenship policies of schools as well as lack of opportunity through professional development to connect critical pedagogy to technology impacted the teachers’ decisions. Originality/value Current research surrounding teachers’ digital literacies uses the TPACK framework to examine technology integration practices. Missing is a critical component that addresses and works to dismantle the dominant discourses and power structures in digital communities (Author, 2018). The authors build on research in critical digital literacies to argue for adding the critical missing “C” into the TPACK framework (C-TPACK) to move researchers and educators to consider pedagogies that examine ideologies at work in digital communities to provide opportunities for student voice.
一元实践、权威话语与数字课堂社区中缺失的“C”
本研究的目的是考察教师在数字课堂社区中围绕学生声音、经验和信念的机会做出的决定。教师的决定反映了单一的而不是对话的教师教学法,这促使作者提出以下问题:是什么导致了这些以教师为中心的实践在数字环境中?设计/方法/方法学校政策中的权威话语和批判性教学法与教师技术实践之间缺失的联系,在教师决定从事单一和/或对话教学实践的情况下进行了检查。作者建议专业发展和研究,强调支持学生声音的教学法,作为涉及数字素养的实践的基础。对教师决策的检查表明,单一的实践缺乏学生批判性地参与数字环境的机会。通过学校的保护主义和数字公民政策强加的主导话语,以及缺乏通过专业发展将批判性教学法与技术联系起来的机会,影响了教师的决策。目前围绕教师数字素养的研究使用TPACK框架来检验技术整合实践。缺失是解决并致力于拆除数字社区中的主导话语和权力结构的关键组成部分(Author, 2018)。作者以批判性数字素养的研究为基础,主张将缺失的关键“C”添加到TPACK框架(C-TPACK)中,以推动研究人员和教育工作者考虑在数字社区中检查意识形态的教学法,为学生的声音提供机会。
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: English Teaching: Practice and Critique seeks to promote research and theory related to English literacy that is grounded in a range of contexts: classrooms, schools and wider educational constituencies. The journal has as its main focus English teaching in L1 settings. Submissions focused on EFL will be considered only if they have clear pertinence to English literacy in L1 settings. It provides a place where authors from a range of backgrounds can identify matters of common concern and thereby foster broad professional communities and networks. Where possible, English Teaching: Practice and Critique encourages comparative approaches to topics and issues. The journal published three types of manuscripts: research articles, essays (theoretical papers, reviews, and responses), and teacher narratives. Often special issues of the journal focus on distinct topics; however, unthemed manuscript submissions are always welcome and published in most issues.
×
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