Experiencing and evidencing educational influences in learning through self-study using ICT in schools and universities

 

Abstract

 

There is a growing awareness in higher education of the need to move beyond the "tired old 'teaching versus research' debate" (1) and work out what are 'due standards of excellence' (2) for practice-based research. Three self-study researchers in higher education, will show how they are contributing to a knowledge base of professional practice by using a 'living educational theory' (3) approach to action research in their own learning. They will provide evidence to show how the meanings of their embodied ontological values, can become living standards of judgement in evaluating the validity of their knowledge-claims. These living critical standards of judgement include a 'pedagogy of the unique', a 'web of betweenness', a 'generative approach to mentoring'.

 

Objectives of the session

 

The objectives of the presentation are to:

 

i).  To communicate the meanings of embodied values of a web of betweenness, a pedagogy of the unique, a generative approach to mentoring as living critical standards of judgement in this S-STEP research.

 

ii). To demonstrate how Information and Communications Technology (ICT ) can contribute to making the embodied knowledge of teacher-researchers public, through "artefacts that capture its richness and complexity" (4). 

 

iii). To provide evidence of how other S-STEP researchers are being taught and mentored on masters programmes and supervised in doctoral programmes to develop their own living standards of judgement and educational theories from their practice-based research.

 

Educational and scientific importance

 

In a review of the literature on pedagogies in higher education, Zukas and Malcolm (5) suggest that the new specialism of teaching and learning in higher education has developed without reference to adult education.  Neglecting the strongly self-motivated learner has tended to impoverish many current approaches to teaching and learning in higher education. Zukas and Malcolm found little evidence of critical practice in writings on higher education pedagogy. As diverse and more mature types of students enter higher education, it is vital that the traditional role of the educator as one who offers content knowledge is broadened so that teaching is aimed at developing student's capacity to create their own understandings and insights through participation, negotiation and dialogue. Barnett's writings on critical practice in higher education points towards a learning environment where students are provided with the space to develop their own voice (6).  The educational significance of this presentation is that the evidence-based self-studies show the educational influences of the educators in the students learning as they develop their own understandings and insights through participation, negotiation and dialogue.

 

The educational and scientific significance of the presentation can also be seen in educational influences in learning of the use of ICT. As the full potentiality of human computer interaction is developed there is likely to be a further explosion of the use of multimedia and the ability for people to communicate in more dynamic ways through use of technology.  Myers (7) points to the emerging technologies that are a result of research in human-computer interaction. These extend from the mouse pointing device, windows, computer applications such as drawing, text editing and spreadsheets and hypertext, and to the new technologies of the future, such as, multimedia and 3D, gesture recognition, natural language and collaborative learning technologies. Myers claims that user interfaces will most likely be one of the main 'value-added competitive advantages' of the future, as both hardware and basic software become commodities. His prediction is being borne out as one can see that yesterday's advanced systems are today's commodity. Further advances in technology, such as high-resolution displays, 3D graphics and animations are likely to improve the end-users interface. We are still witnessing the pursuit of a developmental paradigm whose eventual outcomes can only be guessed at.  By contrast with the evident potentiality and dynamism of the new technology, studies of its impact upon teaching practices in higher education indicate that, as yet, teachers in general are making use of email and web resources but more advanced technologies, such as online learning environments and wireless solutions are only being used to a limited extent. Few in higher education are dealing in a practical manner with the new technology's central ideas about the handling of knowledge.

 

An international comparative study on 'Models of Technology and Change in Higher Education' was carried out by the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies and the Faculty of Educational Science and Technology of the University of Twente in the Netherlands (8). The study found that Institution wide technological structures are now in place.  However, rich pedagogical use of the technological infrastructure is still in development.  The central concept in handling of e-learning currently tends to centre upon 'content'. Jochems et. al. (9) regret that forms of e-learning that emphasise the active engagement of learner in rich learning tasks and the active, social construction of knowledge and acquisition of skills are rare. In other words, the potential of the technology to transform the teaching/learning environment is still far from being realised in the institutions of higher education.  Hence part of the educational and scientific significance of this presentation is in showing how multi-media representations of educational practices and accounts of learning can open up new possibilities for expressing and communicating living standards of judgment appropriate for self-study of teacher education practices.

The educational significance of the presentation is also related to the issue of the relationships between individual and collective standards of judgment . The shared living theories (10) developed in this presentation include self-studies of the contribution ICT has offered to the development of educational knowledge. This is particularly significant in the development of new standards of collective-individual educational judgments in educational relationship that will be characterized in terms that include the webs of betweenness of Celtic spirituality and a generative approach to mentoring. 

 

The significance is in the evidence that shows how ICT has been used to complement and support the pedagogies of the self-study researchers. These include;

 

á             digital video to record teaching and supervision and reveal tensions and living contradictions when values could be lived more fully;

á              online learning environments that have sustained ongoing dialogue among practitioner-researchers with evidence of reciprocal educational influences in learning;

á              desktop videoconferencing that has opened up the classroom environment and provided opportunities to share our knowledge with others with reciprocal influences in learning;

á              multimedia and web-based artefacts with supporting text provide evidence of how practitioners are developing living standards of judgement through asking, researching and answering the question, "How do I improve my practice?' 

 

Methods

 

The methods used in the investigations include:

 

á             Living educational theory action research cycles;

 

And the use of the following to enhance the rigor and validity of the research:

 

á             Winters (11) six criteria of rigor; dialectical critique, reflexive critique, collaborative resource, risk, plural structure, theory, practice transformation. 

á             Methods of social validity that include the application of Habermas' (12) four criteria of; comprehensibility, truth, rightness and authenticity in a validation group. 

 

Data Sources

 

The following data sources will be used to provide evidence of the standards of judgements used to show learning in the public interest.

 

      i).          Accounts of our learning as higher education educators. These include pre-doctoral, doctoral and postdoctoral educational enquiries. 

      ii).        Accounts of the learning of self-study researchers on an MSc in Computer Applications for Education and MSc in Education and Training Management (ICT).

      iii).   18 Living Theory Doctoral Theses awarded between 1995-2005

    iv).   Accounts of the action research methodology used in the development of a Training School in the UK.

 

Conclusion

In the context of our 'pedagogies of the unique', dialogical processes of self-study can reflect a growing openness to learning and relearning with others. They reveal how democratic processes of pedagogy and evaluation in higher education can give adequate "space to each participant to contribute to the development of new knowledge, to develop their own voice, to make their own offerings, insights, to engage in their own actions, as well as to create their own products" (6).

 

Self-studies of teacher education practice can move teaching towards learning by gradually providing opportunities for participants to take responsibility for their own learning and to develop their capacity as learners in the creation of their own living educational theories.

 

Self-studies of teacher-education practice can provide evidence from collaborative enquiries to produce new living critical standards of judgement (13) for evaluating the validity of the knowledge-claims of self-study researchers.  Ontological values can be clarified in the course of their emergence in practice into communicable and living critical standards of judgement.  

 

S-STEP researchers can contribute to new understandings of the link between teaching and research and how teachers can contribute to a knowledge base of practice by revealing their living critical standards of judgement through the use of ICT.  

 

References

1) Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

2) Furlong, J. & Oancea, A. (2005). Assessing Quality in Applied and Practice-based Educational Research. A Framework for Discussion [Accessed from http://www.bera.ac.uk/pdfs/Qualitycriteria.pdf on July 4th, 2005)

3) Whitehead, J. (2004) What Counts as Evidence in the Self-studies of Teacher Education Practices? - in Loughran, J. J., Hamilton, M. L., LaBoskey V. K & Russell, T. (eds) (2004) International Handbook of Self-Study of Teaching and Teacher Education Practices. Dordrecht; Kluwer Academic Publishers

4) Shulman, L. (2004). Teaching as Community Property: Essays on Higher Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

5) Zukas, M. & Malcolm, J. (2002). Pedagogies for Lifelong Learning: Building Bridges or Building Walls? Chapter 13 in Harrison, R., Reeve, F., Hanson, A. and Clark, J. (2002) Supporting Lifelong Learning. Volume 1: Perspectives on Learning. Routledge. Pp 203-217.

6) Barnett, R. (2000). Realizing the University in an age of supercomplexity. The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.  

7) Myers, B. A. (1998). A Brief History of Human Computer Interaction Technology. ACM Interactions. Vol. 5, No. 2, (pp. 44-54).

8) Collis & van der Wende (2002). Models of Technology and Change in Higher Education. An international comparative survey on the current and future use of ICT in Higher Education. [Accessed from www.utwente.nl/cheps/documenten/ictrapport.pdf on May, 2005].

9) Jochems, W., Van Merrienboer, J & Koper, R. Van Merrienboer, (2003). Integrated E-Learning: Implications for Pedagogy, Technology and Organization,. Routledge.

10)Smith, C. A. (2003) Supporting Teacher and School Development: Learning and Teaching Policies, Shared Living Theories and Teacher-Researcher Partnerships. Teacher Development, Volume 6, Number 2, pp.157-179.

11) Winter, R. (1989) Learning from Experience. London; Falmer.

12) Habermas, J. (1975) Communication and the Evolution of Society. London; Heinemann.

13) Coulter, D. and Wiens, J. (2002), Educational Judgement: Linking the Actor and the Spectator. Educational Researcher, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 15-25.