从社会公正的角度构建开放教育实践

IF 2.7 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Maha Bali, C. Cronin, R. Jhangiani
{"title":"从社会公正的角度构建开放教育实践","authors":"Maha Bali, C. Cronin, R. Jhangiani","doi":"10.5334/jime.565","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter’s (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser’s model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"65","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective\",\"authors\":\"Maha Bali, C. Cronin, R. Jhangiani\",\"doi\":\"10.5334/jime.565\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter’s (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser’s model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Interactive Media in Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"65\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Interactive Media in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.565\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.565","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 65

摘要

OEP(开放教育实践),包括开放教育学,通常被理解为使用OER(开放教育资源),但可以用更广泛的概念来构想(见Cronin & McLaren 2018;DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017;Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018)。本文试图从两个方面构建现有的OEP研究和实践。首先,我们提供了OEP的类型,给出了开放性连续体的实践示例,并沿着三个轴:从以内容为中心到以过程为中心,以教师为中心到以学习者为中心,以及主要用于教学目的的实践,主要用于社会正义(Bali 2017)。其次,我们采用Hodgkinson-Williams和Trotter(2018)的概念框架,该框架建立在Fraser的社会正义模型的基础上,批判性地分析OEP的使用/影响可能被认为是社会正义的方式,特别关注广泛的、以过程为中心的OEP。我们分析OEP可以(i)在经济、文化和政治方面支持社会正义,以及(ii)以变革、改善、中立甚至消极的方式来支持社会正义。我们使用类型学和框架来分析特定的以过程为中心的开放式教育资源形式,包括协作注释、维基百科编辑、开放网络课程、虚拟连接、公共奖学金和学习者创建的开放式教育资源。对具体做法的分析突出了各轴之间的多样性和它们之间的细微差异,例如,何时一种特定做法被认为是良好的教学法,以及如何将其修改为更面向社会正义。我们不仅从它的话语和设计,而且从它在实践中的工作方式来讨论每种实践的局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective
OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter’s (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser’s model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Interactive Media in Education
Journal of Interactive Media in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
8
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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