Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Learning challenges in higher education: an analysis of contradictions within Open Educational Practice

  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Open education, including the use of open educational resources (OER) and the adoption of open education practice, has the potential to challenge educators to change their practice in fundamental ways. This paper forms part of a larger study focusing on higher education educators’ learning from and through their engagement with OER. The first part of the study was a quantitative survey investigating educators’ learning behaviour when they learned to use OER in their practice. The second part of the study explored qualitatively how educators engaged with OER and how they conceptualised their learning. Data were gathered through interviews with 30 higher education educators. This paper reports the analysis of these interviews. The analysis draws on the theory of self-regulated learning and cultural–historical activity theory to explore the challenges adult education practitioners encounter when changing their practice. The study tests the application of a framework that traces the discursive manifestations of contradictions, exploring how this framework can be used to examine different aspects of self-regulated learning as educators learn how to use OER. We have identified three distinct tensions in higher education educators’ practice: tensions between the emerging needs of the individual (as he or she adopts new forms of practice) and organisational policies; between the transfer of responsibilities from educators to students as new practice is embedded and institutional accountability; and between cost efficiency and learning objectives. The framework for the discursive manifestations of contradictions was a useful tool used to surface these apparent tensions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banzato, M. (2012). Barriers to teacher educators seeking, creating and sharing open educational resources: An empirical study of the use of OER in education in Italy. In 2012 15th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL) (pp. 1–6).

  • Beetham, H., Falconer, I., McGill, L., & Littlejohn, A. (2012). Open practices: briefing paper. JISC. Retrieved from https://oersynth.pbworks.com/w/page/51668352/OpenPracticesBriefing.

  • Cape Town Declaration. (2008). Read the Declaration. Retrieved from http://www.capetowndeclaration.org/readthe-declaration.

  • Carey, T., Davis, A., Ferreras, S., & Porter, D. (2015). Using open educational practices to support institutional strategic excellence in teaching, learning & scholarship. Open Praxis, 7(2), 161–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J., & Newman, J. (2007). What’s in a Name? New Labour’s citizen-consumers and the remaking of public service. Cultural Studies, 21(4–5), 738–757.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conole, G. C., & Ehlers, U. D. (2010). Open educational practices: Unleashing the power of OER. In UNESCO Workshop on OER, Windhoek, Namibia.

  • Cox, G. (2016). Explaining the relations between culture, structure and agency in lecturers’ contrivution and non-contribution to Open Educational Resources in a higher education institution. Retrieved from http://open.uct.ac.za/handle/11427/20300.

  • du Gay, P. (1996). Consumption and identity at work. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earl, L., & Katz, S. (2007). Leadership in networked learning communities: defining the terrain. School Leadership and Management, 27(3), 239–258. doi:10.1080/13632430701379503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • Ellström, P. E. (2011). Informal learning at work: Conditions, processes and logics. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of workplace learning (pp. 105–119). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Emery, Y., & Giauque, D. (2003). Emergence of contradictory injunctions in Swiss NPM projects. The International Journal of Public Sector Management, 16(6), 468–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-konsultit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999). Communication, discourse and activity. The Communication Review, 3(1), 165–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2007). From stabilization knowledge to possibility knowledge in organizational learning. Management Learning, 38(3), 271–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2011). Discursive manifestations of contradictions in organizational change efforts. A methodological framework. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 24(3), 368–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, M., & Stone-Johnson, C. (2010). Internal leadership challenges of network participation. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1(2), 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (2000). Language and neo-liberalism. Discourse and Society, 11(2), 147–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, I., Littlejohn, A., McGill, L., & Beetham, H. (2016). Motives and tensions in the release of Open Educational Resources: the UKOER programme, Australasian Journal of Educational Technology.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S., & Nicolini, D. (2000). To transfer is to transform: The circulation of safety knowledge. Organization, 7(2), 329–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruering, G. (2001). Origin and theoretical basis of new public management. International Public Management Journal, 4(1), 1–25. doi:10.1016/S1096-7494(01)00041-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hager, P. (2011). Theories of workplace learning. In M. Malloch, L. Cairns, K. Evans, & B. N. O’Connor (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of workplace learning (pp. 17–31). London: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C., & Dixon, R. (2013). A model of cost-cutting in government? The great management revolution in UK central government reconsidered. Public Administration, 91(1), 114–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, N, & Littlejohn, A. (2016). Knowledge typologies for professional learning: educators’ (re)generation of knowledge when learning open educational practice. Educational Technology Research and Development.

  • Il’enkov, E. V. (1977). Dialectical logic: Essays in its history and theory. Moscow: Progress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalliola, S., & Nakari, R. (2006). Rajojen ylittäminen sosiaalisena innovaationa kuntien kehittämistoiminnassa. In P. Jokivuori, R. Latva-Karjanmaa, & A. Ropo (Eds.), Työelämän taitekohtia Työpoliittinen tutkimus 309 (pp. 34–50). Helsinki: Työministeriö.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leont’ev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prence-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Little, D. (2007). Language learner autonomy: Some fundamental considerations revisited. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 1(1), 14–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn, A., Falconer, I., McGill, L., & Beetham, H. (2014). Open Networks and Bounded Communities: Tensions Inherent in Releasing Open Educational Resources. In A. Littlejohn & C. Pegler (Eds.), Reusing Open Resources: learning in open networks for work, life and education (pp. 57–69). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn, A., & Hood, N. (2016). How educators build knowledge and expand their practice: The case of open education resources. British Journal of Educational Technology,. doi:10.1111/bjet.12438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2014). Reusing resources: open for learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 1. http://jime.open.ac.uk/articles/10.5334/2014-02/.

  • Livingston-Vale, K., & Long, P. (2003). Models for open learning. In A. Littlejohn (Ed.), Reusing online resources: A sustainable approach to eLearning. London: Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Roldán, C. M. (2015). Translanguaging practices as mobilization of linguistic resources in a Spanish/English bilingual after-school program: An analysis of contradictions. International Multilingual Research Journal, 9(1), 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masterman, L., & Wild, J. (2012). OER impact study: Research Report. JISC Open Educational Resources Programme. Retrieved from http://www.webarchive.org.uk/wayback/archive/20140614114910/http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/elearning/oer/JISCOERImpactStudyResearchReportv1-0.pdf.

  • McAndrew, P. (2011). Inspiring creativity in organisations, teachers and learners through Open Educational Resources. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 14(2), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGill, L., Beetham, H., Falconer, I., & Littlejohn, A. (2010). JISC/HE Academy OER Programme: Pilot Phase Synthesis and Evaluation Report. Retrieved from https://OERynth.pbworks.com/w/page/29688444/Pilot%20Phase%20Synthesis%20and%20Evaluation%20Report.

  • Moore, M. G. (1973). Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, XLIV(12), 661–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2007). Giving Knowledge for Free: The Emergence of Open Educational Resources. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/document/41/0,3746,en_2649_35845581_38659497_1_1_1_1,00.html.

  • OPAL. (2011). Beyond OER: Shifting focus to open educational practices. OPAL Report 2011. Essen, Germany: Open Education Quality Initiative.

  • Pereira Querol, M. A. (2011). Learning challenges in biogas production for sustainability: An activity theoretical study of a network from a swine industry chain. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, M. Zeidner, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, D. A. (2013). Exploring the practices of educators using open educational resources (OER) in the British Columbia higher education system (Doctoral dissertation, Education: Faculty of Education). Retrieved from: http://summit.sfu.ca/item/13663.

  • Richter, P., & Cornford, J. (2008). Customer relationship management and citizenship: Technologies and identities in public services. Social Policy and Society, 7(02), 211–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitzmann, T., & Ely, K. (2011). A meta-analysis of self-regulated learning in work-related training and educational attainment: what we know and where we need to go. Psychological Bulletin, 137(3), 421–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tynjälä, P. (2008). Perspectives into learning at the workplace. Educational Research Review, 3, 130–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tynjälä, P. (2013). Toward a 3-P model of workplace learning: A literature review. Vocations and Learning, 6(1), 11–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vainio, J. (2012). Hegemony, contradiction, and gender in the context of Finnish university physics. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eekelen, I. M., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Vermunt, J. D. (2005). Self-regulation in higher education teacher learning. Higher Education, 50, 447–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiley, D., Bliss, T. J., & McEwen, M. (2014). Open educational resources: A review of the literature. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 781-789). New York: Springer.

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: a social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, M. Zeidner, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was conducted as part of the Erasmus+ExplOERer Project, funded by the European Commission.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Heli Kaatrakoski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kaatrakoski, H., Littlejohn, A. & Hood, N. Learning challenges in higher education: an analysis of contradictions within Open Educational Practice. High Educ 74, 599–615 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0067-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0067-z

Keywords

Navigation