Category: sharing Page 12 of 40

Someone asked me recently to share some thoughts about higher education trends and futures. I thought these might be useful to others as well.

– University decision-makers have often assumed that technology will have a profound and lasting impact on education. They’ve often been led astray by romanticizing disruptive technologies in other industries (eg., Netflix, Airbnb, Uber, and the list goes on – Uber for education? check. Airbnb for education? check). Honing in on the technology while ignoring the rest of the landscape is problematic. The gig economy surrounding these platforms for example, has also given rise to concerns such as worker stress and surveillance. Honing in on the technology while ignoring the broader issues around it is like thinking that we are going to prevent climate catastrophe by individually recycling plastic bottles. We need to address the broader forces (e.g., social, demographic, economic, etc) that shape access, success, affordability, and so on.

– Some trends impact everyone (e.g., globalization, climate change), but some issues are local, meaning that the solutions proposed in some areas of the world (e.g., USA) may not be solutions to problems faced in other parts of the world (e.g., Mexico, Canada, UK). For example, a young population in some parts of the world translates to higher online learning enrolments, while declining proportion of young people in other parts of the world translates to less demand for higher education.

– Flexibility is key, but it needs resourcing to be successful. Learners value flexibility, and oftentimes need flexibility in order to meet the demands of their lives. This flexibility can come in many forms (e.g., flexible admissions policies and prior learning assessment/recognition; flexible and DIY; or online learning offerings that allow students to complete coursework on their own time). This may have significant impacts across many facets of university life, from course offerings to staffing, and so on. However, for students to be successful and take advantage of flexibility, universities need to support them (e.g., through making supports available at times that students need them; through making accommodations for what varied learners need at different times in their life; through providing varied options for completion, etc).

– Online/distance learning is no longer the poor-cousin of face-to-face learning. It’s a viable alternative. In many instances it is the better alternative , the only alternative, or even expertly integrated into in-person offerrings.

– We should start approaching education, teaching, and learning with greater compassion, kindness, and caring, and still need to work through what this looks like at various levels (e.g., teaching, service, administration, etc).

Edited by Suzan Koseoglu, George Veletsianos, Chris Rowell

Planned publication in open access online format and in paper format by Athabasca University Press (authors pay no fees).

We are excited to announce the call for proposals for an edited collection on the intersection of critical pedagogy and digital technologies in post-secondary and higher education contexts. Although there has been growing interest in critical digital pedagogy, scholarly literature in this area is scarce, fragmented, and lacks a diversity of voices. In addition, there is a dearth of examples showing how the philosophy of critical pedagogy is applied in practice in today’s increasingly digital and expansive higher education systems. This gap raises significant concerns because it makes it difficult for instructors, faculty trainers, instructional designers, administrators, and policymakers to transfer critical theory to practice and policy, and engage with critical digital pedagogy as an emerging and intersectional practice. To address this gap, we invite case studies and reflections that demonstrate how critical pedagogy is enacted in digital learning contexts (i.e., open, online, blended, etc.). Due to the interdisciplinary and practical nature of the edited book, we welcome contributions from scholars in a broad range of fields and from different backgrounds.

Target Audience
The edited collection is aimed for instructors, faculty trainers, instructional designers, administrators, policymakers and students who wish to better understand how critical pedagogy is applied in different digital learning contexts and across different disciplines. As such, submissions should be accessible to a broad range of readers.

Scope and Recommended Topics
Critical pedagogy is the central theme in the edited book and all submissions should clearly contribute to the theme. We encourage submissions that demonstrate “failures” as well as successes, while taking a critical look into the approach itself.

Related topics include but are not limited to: decolonization, diversity, equality, equity, inclusion, indigenization, targeted pedagogical approaches such as feminist- and anti-racist pedagogy, a critical look into the use of technology for learner empowerment and agency, the use of critical pedagogy in open and networked spaces.

Submissions
We invite submissions which explore critical digital pedagogy in context through case studies and/or reflective accounts of practice. Language and style should be accessible to a broad range of readers. To ensure consistency between the book chapters, all proposals should address the following in their submissions: (i) how critical pedagogy is enacted in practice, (ii) the role of digital technologies in this practice, and (iii) lessons learned/implications. Final submissions should be between 3500-4000 words including references. Further guidelines will be provided with notifications of acceptance.

Important Dates
1 December 2019: Proposal submission deadline (one page)
1 January 2020: Notification of acceptance (chapter guidelines will be provided)
1 April 2020: Full chapter submission (3500-4500 words including references)
15 June 2020: Reviews (authors will be invited to review other contributions)
1 August 2020: Revisions due from authors
September 2020: Editing and submission to Athabasca University Press.

Proposals should be submitted to the editors via email (s.koseoglu@gold.ac.uk). For further enquiries, please feel free to contact any of the editors.

Information on Athabasca University Press
The final manuscript will be submitted to the Distance Education series at Athabasca University Press. Books in this series offer informative and accessible overviews, research results, discussions and explorations of current issues, technologies and services used in distance education. It’s current focus is on digital learning and education, with each volume examining critical issues, emerging trends, and historical perspectives in the field. The series is targeted at a wide group of readers that study and practice digital and online learning. Book published under this series are available at http://www.aupress.ca/index.php/books/series#DistanceEducation

Like many of you I am thinking about the class I am teaching in September, and in the process I am tweaking and restructuring syllabi and resources, replacing readings, and renewing assignments.

In our field, we talk a lot about other people’s courses. There’s good reasons for this, as that’s the nature of the field and that’s where our expertise lies.

But, we rarely talk about our own courses. We rarely share how we apply our thinking about other people’s courses to our own courses. So below is one example of how I revised one of my assignments this year. The second paragraph is this year’s addition. Along with course discussions and readings, it opens the conversation around issues of equity, diversity, and inclusion in our field.

Assignment 1 | People in the field (Individual)

This assignment aims to introduce you to individuals in the field and their contributions. Your task is to research an individual’s work and contributions, and in XXX words describe who they are, why you selected them, and what aspect of their work is important to the field. Within your description, include at least 3 links relevant to this individual. For example, if this person is an active blogger, it would be helpful to include a link to their blog (which, then the rest of us can use to add to our RSS reader). It might also be helpful to link to specific work they did (e.g., a software they developed, a paper they wrote) or interviews with them (such as for example this interview with Dr. Marta Mena or this podcast with Prof. Laura Czerniewicz). You do not need to limit yourselves to researchers and professors or people who are living, but please select individuals whose work lies at the intersections of learning and technology.

As in many other fields of study, the contributions of women, indigenous people, people of colour, and people from other marginalized communities often remain invisible. This situation impacts all of us because any work that helps us improve the ways we teach, learn, and develop education is important work. To familiarize yourselves with the notion that there are ‘hidden’ histories in educational technology that are not part of the dominant narrative, and thereby people, prior to beginning your research read Watters (2014) Un-fathomable: The Hidden History of Ed-Tech (chapter 2) and skim her History of the Future of Ed-Tech (chapter 1). Who will you choose to shine a light on? I look forward to reading your posts! 

tl;dr There’s no real answers in this post, so if you’re looking for an actual future in this particular post, you’ll be disappointed.

In a recent paper around “flexible learning” (pdf) we argued that what is often described as an accommodating approach to online learning (aka flexible offerings that allow students who work and who have a family to complete their studies) may end up being oppressive (aka in addition to all other responsibilities, individuals are asked to make space for study, to upskill, to reskill, to efficiently fill in the remaining time that is remains in those paltry 24 hours with more productive activities… after work is done, after the family is fed, and so on). In other words, to pursue more education, the individual student is asked to be more flexible. To do more.

This, along with other work that I’ve been following, like Catherine Cronin’s and Laura Czerniewicz’s reflections from OER19, raise many questions about what a radically different future of education looks like. If, as some believe, there isn’t much difference between public higher ed and for-profit higher ed, then what does a public higher ed that is radically different look like?

• Would it look to alternative areas to support one’s studies rather than the individual? In the example above, the onus on the individual invites one to subscribe to a particular ideological position. Why shouldn’t the employer make space for the employee’s study? Why is the individual asked to be flexible and not the employer?
• What does teaching look like in this radical future? Who does it, and why? How do we harness field expertise, pedagogical expertise, and digital expertise without requiring instructors to be experts in all of these areas?
• What do courses look like?
• What is the role of instructional designers in developing visions for the future and how does one ensure that their voices are heard and valued in this conversation?
• In a radically different future, are institutions “selective” or do they they open their doors wide?
• In this future, do all institutions look alike? In proposing a radical future, should we be proposing multiple futures?
• Whose interests are being served in radically different futures?
• What would higher ed look like if it were more kind, more inclusive, more equitable?