Advertisement

Educational Technology Research and Development

, Volume 65, Issue 6, pp 1583–1604 | Cite as

Knowledge typologies for professional learning: educators’ (re)generation of knowledge when learning open educational practice

  • Nina HoodEmail author
  • Allison Littlejohn
Research Article

Abstract

Open education resources (OER) and accompanying open education practices (OEP), are changing the education landscape. For educators to take full advantage of the opportunities OER offer they must engage in learning activities to facilitate the extension and adaption of their practice. This paper forms part of a larger study exploring how adult educators learn from and through their engagement with OER in the contexts of their work. Following a quantitative investigation of the learning behaviours of 521 educators around OER use, follow up interviews were conducted with 30 participants. The interviews explore in greater detail the ways knowledge is being (re)generated and used by the educators as they learn new practices with and through OER. Six broad knowledge types were identified as supporting the expansion of practice. The data suggest educators not only require multiple types of knowledge, but also must be able to move fluidly among these different types of knowledge.

Keywords

Open education resources (OER) Open education practice (OEP) Professional learning Knowledge building Higher education 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted as part of the Erasmus + ExplOERer Project, funded by Erasmus Plus Programme, KA2 Strategic Partnerships (European Commission, Contract Number 2014-1-SE01-KA200-000994).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Atkins, D., Seely Brown, J., & Hammond, A. (2007). A review of the open educational resources (OER) movement: Achievements, challenges, and new opportunities (William and Flora Hewlett Foundation report). Retrieved from http://www.hewlett.org/uploads/files/ReviewoftheOERMovement.pdf.
  2. Banzato, M. (2012). A case study of teachers’ open educational practices. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society, 8(3), 153–163.Google Scholar
  3. Bauer, J., & Kenton, J. (2005). Toward technology integration in the schools: Why it isn’t happening. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(4), 519–546.Google Scholar
  4. Beetham, H., Falconer, I., McGill, L., & Littlejohn, A. (2012). Open practices: Briefing paper (JISC briefing paper). Retrieved from https://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/51668352/OpenPracticesBriefing.
  5. Bentley, T. (2012). Learning beyond the classroom: Education for a changing world. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Billett, S. (2004). Co-participation at work: Learning through work and throughout working lives. Studies in the Education of Adults, 36(2), 190–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Borko, H., & Putnam, R. (1995). Expanding a teacher’s knowledge base: A cognitive psychological perspective on professional development. In T. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  8. Caswell, T., Heson, S., Jensen, M., & Wiley, D. (2008). Open education resources: Enabling universal education. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 9(1), 1–11.Google Scholar
  9. Chen, C., & Hung, S. (2010). To give or to receive? Factors influencing members’ knowledge sharing and community promotion in professional virtual communities. Information and Management, 47, 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Collin, K. (2008). Development engineers’ work and learning as shared practice. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 27(4), 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Conole, G., & Ehlers, U. (2010). Open educational practices: Unleashing the power of OER. Paper presented to UNESCO Workshop on OER in Namibia 2010, Windhoek. Retrieved from http://efquel.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/OEP_Unleashing-the-power-of-OER.pdf.
  12. CTOED (2008). Cape Town open education declaration: Unlocking the promise of open educational resources. Retrieved from http://www.capetowndeclaration.org/read-the-declaration.
  13. Drent, M., & Meelissen, M. (2008). Which factors obstruct or stimulate teacher educators to use ICT innovatively? Computers & Education, 51, 187–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ecorys & Bertelsmann Stiftung (2015). Adult learners in digital learning environments. European Commission Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Report. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar
  15. Ehlers, U. (2011). Extending the territory: From open educational resources to open educational practices. Journal of Open, Flexible, and Distance Learning, 15(2), 1–10.Google Scholar
  16. Elbaz, F. (1983). Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge. London & Canberra: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  17. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
  18. Eraut, M. (2000). Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Eraut, M. (2004). Informal learning in the workplace. Studies of Continuing Education, 26(2), 247–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Eraut, M., & Hirsch, W. (2007). The significance of workplace learning for individuals and groups and organizations. Skope Monographs, 6. Oxford.Google Scholar
  21. Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fontana, R., Milligan, C., Littlejohn, A., & Margaryan, A. (2015). Measuring self-regulated learning in the workplace. International Journal of Training and Development, 19(1), 32–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuller, A., & Unwin, L. (2004). Expansive learning environments: Integrating organizational and personal development. In H. Rainbird, A. Fuller, & A. Munro (Eds.), Workplace learning in context (pp. 126–144). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Gagne, M., & Deci, E. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Geser, G. (2007). Open education practices and resources (OLCOS Roadmap report). Retrieved from http://www.olcos.org/cms/upload/docs/olcos_roadmap.pdf.
  26. Guskey, T. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8(3), 381–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hakkarainen, K., & Paavola, S. (2007). From monological and dialogical to trialogical approaches to learning. Paper presented at an international workshop guided construction of knowledge in classrooms, Jerusalem. Retrieved from http://escalate.org.il/construction_knowledge/papers/hakkarainen.pdf.
  28. Hargreaves, A. (1996). Transforming knowledge: Blurring the boundaries between research, policy, and practice. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18(2), 105–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Harteis, C., & Billett, S. (2008). The workplace as learning environment. International Journal of Educational Research, 47, 209–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Haythornthwaite, C. (2007). Social networks and online community. In A. Joinson, K. McKenna, U. Reips, & T. Postmes (Eds.), Oxford handbook of internet psychology (pp. 121–136). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hood, N., Littlejohn, A., & Milligan, C. (2015). Context counts: How learners’ contexts influence learning in a MOOC. Computers & Education, 91, 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huberman, M. (1992). Teacher development and instructional mastery. In A. Hargreaves & M. Fullan (Eds.), Understanding teacher development (pp. 122–142). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  33. Illeris, K. (2007). How we learn: Learning and non-learning in school and beyond. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  35. Kortemeyer, G. (2013). Ten years later: Why open educational resources have not noticeably affected higher education, and why we should care. Educause Review. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/2/ten-years-later-why-open-educational-resources-have-not-noticeably-affected-higher-education-and-why-we-should-care.
  36. Lane, A., & McAndrew, P. (2010). Are open educational resources systematic or systemic change agents for teaching practice? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(6), 952–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lawless, K., & Pellegrino, J. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Littlejohn, A. (2003). Issues in reusing online resources. In A. Littlejohn (Ed.), Reusing online resources: A sustainable approach to eLearning (pp. 1–8). London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  39. Littlejohn, A., & Hood, N. (2017). How educators build knowledge and expand their practice: The case of open education resources. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 499–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2014). Reusing resources: Open for learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education. Retrieved from http://jime.open.ac.uk/articles/10.5334/2014-02/.
  41. Ludvigsen, S. (2012). What counts as knowledge: Learning to use categories in computer environments. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(1), 40–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Masterman, L., & Wild, J. (2012). OER Impact Study: Research Report (JISC Open Educational Resources Programme Report). Retrieved from http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140614114910/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearning/oer/JISCOERImpactStudyResearchReportv1-0.pdf.
  43. Matzat, U. (2010). Reducing problems of sociability in online communities: Integrating online communication with offline interaction. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(8), 1170–1193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McCully, W., Lampe, C., Sarkar, C., Velasquez, A., & Sreevinasan, A. (2011). Online and offline interactions in online communities. Paper presented at WikiSym’11 Conference Mountain View, CA, USA.Google Scholar
  45. Milligan, C., Littljohn, A., & Margaryan, A. (2014). Workplace learning in informal networks. Reusing Open Resources: Learning in Open Networks for Work, Life and Education, 93.Google Scholar
  46. Nonaka, I. (1994). Dynamic theory of organisational knowledge creation. Organizational Science, 5(1), 14–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. OPAL, (2010). OEP guide: Guidelines for open educational practices in organisations (Vs. 2011). (Open Education Quality Initiative report). Retrieved from http://oerworkshop.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/44605120/OPAL-OEP-guidelines.pdf.
  48. OPAL. (2011). Beyond OER: Shifting focus to open educational practices (OPAL report). Essen, Germany: Open Education Quality Initiative.Google Scholar
  49. Reeves, J. (2010). Adopting a new approach to professional learning. In: Professional learning as relational practice. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  50. Säljö, R. (2012). Literacy, digital literacy and epistemic practices: The co-evolution of hybrid minds and external memory systems. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 7(1), 5–19.Google Scholar
  51. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2002). Knowledge building. In J. Guthrie (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of education. New York: Macmillan Reference.Google Scholar
  52. Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  53. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2010). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In B. Bachmair (Ed.), Medienbildung in neuen Kulturräumen (pp. 87–99). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Spillane, J. (1999). External reform initiatives and teachers’ efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers’ zones of enactment. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(2), 143–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Stacey, P. (2010). Foundation funded OER vs. tax payer funded OERA tale of two mandates. Paper presented at Universitat Oberta de Catalunya Open Ed Conference, Barcelona. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10609/5241.
  57. Timperley, H. (2013). Learning to practice: A paper for discussion (Ministry of Education report). Wellington: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  58. Tynjälä, P. (2005). Integrative pedagogiesLearning in real life situations. Paper presented at Enhancing Physiotherapy Competencies in Innovative Learning Environments. European Network of Physiotherapy in Higher Education, Helsinki, Finland.Google Scholar
  59. Tynjälä, P. (2007). Connectivity and transformation in work-related learning: Theoretical foundations. In M. L. Stenstrom & P. Tynjälä (Eds.), Towards integration of work and learning: Strategies for connectivity and transformation (pp. 11–37). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  60. Tynjälä, P. (2008). Perspectives into learning at the workplace. Educational Research Review, 3, 130–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Tynjälä, P. (2013). Toward a 3-P model of workplace learning: A literature review. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 11–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. UNESCO. (2002). Forum on the impact of open courseware for higher education in developing countries (final UNESCO report). Retrieved from http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.phpURL_ID=5303&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
  63. Unwin, L., Felstead, A., & Fuller, A. (2004). Learning at Work: Towards more Expansive Opportunities. Paper presented at NIACE Commission of Inquiry into ‘The Future for Lifelong Learning’, London. Retrieved from http://www.niace.org.uk/lifelonglearninginquiry/docs/Workplace-Lorna-Unwin.pdf.
  64. Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does”: Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9, 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wellman, B. (2001). Computer networks as social networks. Science, 293(14), 2031–2034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wild, J. (2012). OER Engagement Study: Promoting OER reuse among academics (SCORE Fellowship report). Retrieved from http://www.open.ac.uk/score/files/score/file/Joanna%20Wild%20SCORE%20Fellowship%20Final%20Report%20-%20web%20version.pdf.
  67. Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 165–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wozney, L., Venkatesh, V., & Abrami, P. (2006). Implementing computer technologies: Teachers’ perceptions and practices. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 173–207.Google Scholar
  69. Zhao, J., & Frank, K. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 807–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Social WorkUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  2. 2.Open University, UKBuckinghamshireUK

Personalised recommendations