Estimated reading time: 1 minute, 42 seconds
What is Open Pedagogy? Who gets to define what open pedagogy is, and how does that affect all of us who call what we practice “open pedagogy”?
I was invited to submit my answer to that question by the OEConsortium for #YearOfOpen a while ago, and I submitted it before my trip to London to OER17. During #OER17, my response, as well as others’, was published here.
My feeling was that
- A discussion among open pedagogy advocates and practitioners was needed beyond these statements
- More diversity of voices on the matter are needed
- David Wiley’s contribution is controversial imho and I wanted an opportunity to discuss a variety of approaches. Hence the hangout I am announcing here
I have lots of complicated feelings about this topic, and I have invited a bunch of (relatively) diverse folks to discuss this topic as part of #YearOfOpen (thanks Sue and Mary Lou for giving their blessing and being part of it)
The session is scheduled for Monday April 24 at 4pm EDT/8 GMT/9 BST/10 Egypt/South Africa time
You can watch here and participate via #YearOfOpen hashtag on Twitter (hangout will livestream to this link and be available as recording afterwards).
Discussion on definition of open pedagogy will involve:
David Wiley, Catherine Cronin, Robin DeRosa, Sheila MacNeill, Sukaina Walji, Viv Rolfe, David Kernohan, Mike Caulfield and me (Maha Bali). Joined by Sue Higgins and Mary Lou Forward from OEConsortium
(note that there are a few people I invited who declined for various reasons, and a lot of people I would have liked to invite but the hangout filled up – using a space that allowed larger numbers of people was an option, but any larger and we probably won’t be able to really have a deep discussion – and the livestreaming of GHO allows people to watch and tweet along even if they’re not inside the hangout itself)
If you have suggestions for activities or questions to do before this session is scheduled, please post them in the comments.
I wonder if you could get Clinte Lalonde @edtechfactotum involved too? http://clintlalonde.net/2017/02/04/does-open-pedagogy-require-oer/
oh man, both you and Clint were on my list of people to invite – hangout filled up. I remember that post now that I’ve re-read it… happy to consider other ways of engagement beyond the sync hangout, if you wanna do something via #OpenEdSIG like an asynchronous activity?
Hi Maha – I see you have much more material than you can use or even curate, but to honor my commitment I will include these resources from #openlearning17 for you and others to consider.
Two from Amy Nelson (Virgina Tech:
“Connected Learning & Integrative Thinking: Teaching History at Virginia Tech” (YouTube tour of her open pedagogical practices within a connected learning framework): http://openlearninghub.net/syndicated/redesigning-liberal-education/
“Redesigning Liberal Education” (Interview for #OpenLearning17 in which Amy offers a briefer high-level overview of her thoughts on open pedagogy and connected learning): http://openlearninghub.net/syndicated/redesigning-liberal-education/
My own post “Openly Dedicated”: http://www.gardnercampbell.net/blog1/?p=2718
Sue Erickson, a librarian and member of the #OpenLearning17 steering committee, shares her thoughts on open pedagogy in a library context in “Open Pedagogy Praxis”: https://sueerickson.wordpress.com/2017/03/17/open-pedagogy-praxis/
Meg Mulrooney (James Madison University) wrote an inspiring post on her practice as well as what she’s learning from the entire #openped community, including the #OpenLearning17 cMOOC: “It’s A Real Thing: Open Pedagogy”: http://mmulrooney.net/2017/03/15/its-a-real-thing-open-pedagogy/
And one more from me: “Connected Learning: A Personal Epiphany”: http://www.gardnercampbell.net/blog1/?p=2710
I hope these are helpful. I’ve tried to curate writers and resources you’ve not already noted. In my heart I feel there are many more related posts and resources from #OpenLearning17 I could list, but these are the ones that seem most directly connected to your call for examples.
Wish I could have watched this Hangout – just now seeing this post. Hopefully I will get to catch up on the archive someday. As you know, I generally avoid using terms like Open Pedagogy and Critical Pedagogy because of my concerns over the word Pedagogy. I just do open and critical and have been for a long time (quite frequently getting both wrong, I know, I know). I think there is an even larger conversation about the how many of us do these ideas but rarely find acceptance from the advocates and practitioners because we won’t use their words or views. You and I have discussed this in the past, so I know that you know I am not saying this about you or some of the others mentioned above. It just seems to be an unexamined aspect of these two movements in general – you have to say “open pedagogy” or “critical pedagogy” or else you really aren’t doing it.
In this particular convo you will find use of the term “Open Educational Practices” and actually Josie Fraser challenged use of pedagogy (see previous post of curations, including Suzan’s of course)
When David Wiley asked about “what is left to Open Educational Practices once you remove OER,” I wish there would have been a more in-depth discussion about blogging as OEP regardless of whether the post itself is designated as an OER. Blog posts (and even podcasts and other open sharing) are ways of openly sharing practices that people can then utilize, remix, etc in their own teaching and design. Its part of the network aspect that you brought up Maha (that I think has better staying power than David gives it credit for), but can also exist as an OEP outside of any relationship as well. They aren’t just artifacts to be used, but idea repositories to learn from.
That’s the work Suzan Koseoglu and I focused on when we said “self as OER”. It’s kind a trick because it’s not at all about OER!!! Also the article I co-authored with Rajiv and Catherine unpacks this in much more detail (non-OER Open Educational Practices)
So much reading to catch up on – lots to look forward to! I’m obviously just now getting to this one 🙂
Its also weird to hear David’s comment at the end about not advocating for the term Open Pedagogy until he understands it better. I prefer the term Open Educational Practices for many of the reasons mentioned in the video… but that is what I have been doing for as long as I can remember, and I have never even really been a part of the OER/OEP community or discussion per se. Much less ever been able to give a solid definition. It seems to me that it was just something I did because it came naturally to me – have an idea, find a way to share it with anyone that will listen. Better definitions can be helpful (depending on who controls the defining aspect), but that still won’t change the core idea of sharing. So, yeah – self as OER. I like that trick 🙂
Amazing! Thank you, Maha. We’ve been watching your work for a long time. Your work in digital pedagogy has informed so much of our thinking around online education.