1 Background

The Research Skill Development (RSD) framework (Willison & O’Regan, 2007), was used to guide the initial design and subsequent curriculum review of the Master of Education program (Jacobsen et al., 2018). RSD was used as a conceptual framework in our study to examine the ways in which open educational practices (OEPs) can be used to facilitate in-service teachers’ (I-STs’) research-based skill development through their examination of meaningful problems of practice in a scholarly community of inquiry. OEPs are teaching and learning approaches that promote collaborative networked learning opportunities that are digitally accessible to all learners. OEPs can include the co-creation and or use of open educational resources in digital spaces where educators and learners can reflect upon their learning in order to share their experiences with others (Cronin, 2017; Roberts, 2022). The six facets of RSD (Willison, 2020; Willison & O’Regan, 2007) were used as a conceptual framework to help us examine the intersections of research thinking and OEPs in a graduate program and as a lens to examine and interpret the results. We build upon the six facets of RSD to help us better understand how OEPs can be used to guide the development of research skills and research thinking for I-STs in a professional graduate program in education.

This chapter describes how the RSD Framework was used together with OEPs to purposively scaffold the development of I-ST’s research skills and research thinking. It then outlines a study that involved 13 I-STs who shared their reflections on making the process and products of their research thinking explicit and accessible to a professional and academic audience that extended learning beyond the formal program. The following vignette provides an entry point into the research by describing how one of the TEs (Verena) inspired I-ST co-development of an open educational resource in the program. Further, the vignette illustrates how one of the I-STs (Nicole) benefited from the approaches used by the TEs to support her contribution to one of the pressbook volumes and how this led her to join the research team as a research assistant for the project.

2 Vignette: Benefits of OEP to Support Research Thinking

While the course description and learning outcomes were pre-established as part of the graduate program, Verena and TEs teaching the courses in the program worked together to determine the pedagogical approaches and how to layer the learning tasks to support I-STs in achieving the learning outcomes (Cook-Sather et al., 2014). Verena suggested extending the layered assignments in the program by adding an option for students to co-design an open educational resource (OER) (Ashton, 2017). Verena’s experience and expertise in open education and the development of an Open Learning Design Framework (Roberts, 2022) also inspired the conceptualization of a research project. With a grant to support the development of a pressbook and to conduct research about student experiences, the TEs and research team worked together to incorporate OER development as part of the program for two consecutive years. After completing all of the coursework in the program, I-STs were invited to submit their final paper to be published as a chapter in an edited open pressbook (Brown et al., 2020, 2021). TEs engaged I-STs in open educational practices (OEPs), such as participatory and collaborative knowledge building activities with peers, throughout the program to create and build knowledge together that informed their own inquiry projects and development of research skills.

Nicole, one of the I-STs, reflected on the benefits of these approaches and how the use of OEPs helped her to contribute a pressbook chapter because of her work throughout the program. In her blog posts, Nicole captured her ongoing reflections during the inquiry which helped her critically evaluate information and to make decisions for next steps. In the program, Nicole’s knowledge building work was scaffolded by Scardamalia and Bereiter (2010) principles of knowledge building in educational contexts. Nicole recalled how the TEs mentored and coached learners throughout the program to help form collaborative knowledge building and peer learning relationships that were guided by principles of idea improvement and community knowledge (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2010).

Nicole connected with the TEs for timely, constructive feedback and editing support, and connected with experts outside the program (e.g., content experts, professional colleagues from their workplace, librarians and former students) to seek feedback and resources related to her topic of inquiry (Cronin & MacLaren, 2018). Connecting with a librarian and learning how to use information repositories and search engines helped Nicole and her peers find relevant resources. Connecting with a professional colleague or an expert in the topic or area of interest was also important to help Nicole recognize the relevance and interest of her inquiry for a broad audience beyond peers in the class and TEs in the program.

After the conclusion of courses, many of the I-STs like Nicole decided to share results of their inquiry publicly and submitted their paper for consideration as a chapter in one of the open pressbook volumes. Students who elected to publish their manuscript in the pressbook (9 in the 1st volume and 6 in the 2nd volume) continued to receive feedback from the TEs and members of the research team after they completed their course work in the program. With the help of an editorial review team and professional copy editor, the chapters continued to be refined by their respective authors. Nicole and many of the chapter authors returned as guest speakers in the program the following year to help inspire the next cohort of I-STs in becoming scholars of the profession and in developing their research skills. This experience with research-based learning and authentic work on an OER also led to Nicole joining the research team and becoming an advocate for increasing awareness of research-based learning and open educational practices in teacher education.

3 Why Integrate RSD and OEP in Masters Level Courses?

The vignette highlights some of the core ways that open educational practices—reflection, participatory and collaborative knowledge building and internal and external formative feedback—combined to facilitate research skills and research thinking. The introduction and use of the RSD Framework within the courses provided a way to both practically consider how research could be designed and scaffolded into the program and how OEPs could be used to facilitate research thinking. The RSD framework includes six facets outlining important research skills that instructors can integrate into class learning activities (Willison, 2020; Willison & O’Regan, 2007). The six facets, elaborated upon by Willison in Chap. 1 in this book outline the iterative actions and elements of research thinking. The TEs teaching courses in the program designed learning activities that aligned with the RSD facets. Griffiths (2004) noted that “processes of inquiry are highly integrated into the student learning activities” when research-based teaching occurs (p. 722). The RSD framework outlines how each facet is situated on a continuum of levels of learning autonomy and how much guidance students need from a highly structured and facilitated learning experience to a more student-led inquiry for developing research thinking.

4 Developmental Approach Used for Research Thinking

The TEs who taught in this program adopted Cronin’s (2017) description of OEP: “collaborative practices that include the creation, use, and reuse of OER as well as pedagogical practices employing participatory technologies and social networks for interaction, peer-learning, knowledge creation, and empowerment of learners” (p. 4). The design of the program and developmental approach specifically used in four courses for developing I-STs’ research thinking was guided by Cronin’s description of OEP. The four courses were designed as a stand-alone graduate certificate or with the option to apply the certificate towards a Master of Education degree. It is important to note that each course included several assignments that mapped to the RSD facets and in Fig. 3.1, we illustrate how the facets mapped to the major assignments that were interconnected throughout the program using OEP and learning activities for formative assessment.

Fig. 3.1
An illustration. Interdisciplinary learning and technology, technological literacies, ethics and technology, digital age leading citizenry with critical article review, literature review, draft O E R manuscript, and leading participatory action are in order for Summer, Fall, Winter, and Spring.

Major assignments in four courses with alignment to RSD

Full size image

In the first course during the summer term, Interdisciplinary Learning and Technology, the emphasis of the critical article review was on developing facets one: embark and clarify and three: evaluate and reflect. These facets were foundational for the subsequent assignments. Building on the skills developed during the first course, facets one through five were emphasized during the literature review assignment in the second course on Technological Literacies during the fall term. Building upon the first two courses, the third course in the winter term, Ethics and Technology, amplified all six of the facets in the major learning task (Draft OER manuscript). The fourth course in the spring term, Leading Citizenry in a Digital Age, concluded the program with an emphasis on developing facets two through six through a participatory dialogue/action-oriented assignment. Brown et al. (2022) described the progression of these key assignments across the four graduate courses in the program as layered and renewable and providing an opportunity for knowledge-building:

Students [I-STs] had the option to remix and build on their previous work and assignments as they progressed through the four courses in the program (layered). Students [I-STs] continued to build-on and use their own openly published work during subsequent courses and beyond the duration of the program (renewable). Each of the courses provided students [I-STs] with opportunities to personalize the assignments to their professional contexts and interests (knowledge-building) (Brown et al., 2022, p. 459).

Mapping the learning tasks from the four courses to the six facets in the RSD framework helped the TEs to recognize the intersection of research skill development and OEP. For additional examples of applications of the RSD framework to postgraduate work see Heck, Chap. 4 in this book.

5 Co-design and Formative Assessment Strategies at the Intersection of OEP and RSD

5.1 Co-design

Co-design is often associated with OEP approaches and can be described as a relationship between TEs and I-STs in which the learners are positioned as active agents in the learning process and supported by their TE (Barbera et al., 2017; Jahnke et al., 2020) to complete learning tasks that are authentic and student-centered (DeRosa & Robinson, 2017). For example, I-STs selected topics for inquiry and problems of practice that emerged from their own school contexts. Co-designing and co-creating learning experiences are promising for I-STs learning and have been connected to increases in student engagement (Jacobsen et al., 2021; Paskevicius & Irvine, 2019; Wiley & Hilton, 2018). When reviewing the literature in OEP, we noted that various examples of co-design are emerging, such as building learning relationships between course participants, negotiating learning tasks, promoting student voice and choice within the course activities and course content and integrating authentic, meaningful and participatory learning activities (Barbera et al., 2017; Paskevicius & Irvine, 2019; Roberts, 2022). However, we also noticed there is a dearth of research studying the intersections of OEP and research skill development for I-STs in online graduate education programs.

5.2 Formative Assessment Strategies

Formative assessment strategies for learning support students in deeper learning (Earl, 2012; Thomas & Brown, 2021) and diverse types of feedback can help students understand how to improve their work (William & Leahy, 2015). In the courses, TEs provided formative feedback with personalized suggestions to help I-STs to strengthen work during the course (Daly et al., 2010; Khan & Khan, 2019). Peer-feedback using assessment criteria was another common strategy facilitated by the TEs to further support I-STs with improving their work (Hegarty, 2015; William & Leahy, 2015). I-STs were continually provided with opportunities to reflect on their work and engage in self-assessments (Sutton, 2012). Other strategies involving members outside of the class, for example reaching out to experts in the field, were amplified during the final two courses of the program. During the third course, the TE invited experts in the field, including former I-STs, to provide current I-STs with feedback. In addition, the feedback process was often reflected upon in the course assignments so the TEs could track I-STs’ perceptions of and appreciation of the feedback process. During the fourth course, the TE encouraged I-STs to identify experts and take the lead in reaching out to their networks for feedback. Although many of these formative feedback strategies are commonly used, it is important to note that developing feedback literacy is a skill that requires progression and sufficient time to develop trust among everyone involved in the process (Molloy et al., 2020).

6 Methodology

This section describes the qualitative interpretive study undertaken to investigate the intersections of research thinking and OEPs in a graduate program using the RSD as a lens to examine and interpret results. After the completion of the four courses, we recruited I-STs to be participants. Drawing on McKenney and Reeves’ (2019) approach for design-based research, we aimed to develop a deeper understanding about how TEs can use OEPs (Karunanayaka & Naidu, 2017), and the ways that purposefully designed and layered assignments and formative assessment strategies can support I-STs’ research skill development. For the research, the participants provided consent to share artefacts of learning, such as their blog post reflections. The study was approved by the University Research Ethics Board.

We have previously reported more detail about our study as part of our ongoing efforts to improve the design of the program (Jacobsen et al., 2018), and discussed how OEP supported the conditions for learning research-based skills (Brown et al., 2022). We recognized we needed to explore the intersection between research skill development and OEP further by examining students’ reflections on their learning. In this present chapter, we draw on the reflections collected over two years from a group of 24 I-STs who were invited to participate in the study. Data included written reflections in response to open-ended survey questions completed by the I-STs (n = 13) and transcripts from interviews conducted with a subset of the survey respondents (n = 8). In the surveys and interviews, the participants were asked to reflect on their experiences during the four courses. Participants in our study who were interviewed (n = 8) also shared their blog post reflections as artefacts for analysis in the research.

For this chapter, we organized our analysis and reporting of these three types of student reflections in response to the following question:

How do open educational practices, such as formative assessment strategies, support the conditions for learning research-based skills?

Four members of the research team analyzed the reflections using the RSD facets as the lens through which the data was interpreted. All text excerpts from the survey, interview transcripts, and blog post reflections were coded using the RSD facets and then compared across the three data sets. The results demonstrated evidence of I-STs’ experiences in OEP, particularly surrounding formative assessment practices. Excerpts from students’ reflections are used to help illustrate our findings in this chapter relative to the six facets of RSD and to demonstrate how responsive teaching is integral to OEP.

7 Results and Discussion

7.1 Facet 1: Embark and Clarify for Purposive Thinking

Reflections shared by the I-STs in our study demonstrated evidence of purposive thinking as they embarked on their inquiry. The following excerpt from a blog post reflection shows how one I-ST noted the importance of recognizing the influences that background experiences and contexts can have when embarking on an inquiry and how the opportunity to reflect on these experiences can inform the purpose of the inquiry:

I have blogged weekly (or more) about the course readings and my reflections on the world as it relates to the course. Each week, I tried to relate what I read in the assigned readings to my own context as an [I-ST] or as a learner myself. I have recognized that my personal context has shaped my perception of education and the ethical issues associated with educational technology. I’ve already acknowledged that I have a significant amount of privilege when it comes to education, but my age and educational experiences also shape my perceptions.

In this excerpt, this I-ST acknowledged how their workplace setting influenced thinking about their topic of inquiry related to ethical issues of educational technology. This connection between context and inquiry was a common sentiment expressed by the I-STs when describing what led them to selecting their topic of inquiry and determining there was a need to explore the topic. As one way to embark on the inquiry, I-STs shared their topic of inquiry with the TEs, their peers, and with external audiences. The TEs used OEPs, such as an elevator pitch, to provide opportunities for I-STs to test out their inquiry idea with peers. This is an example of responsive teaching as an OEP that can be used to help support I-STs as they are developing research-based skills and beginning the process of identifying their topic of inquiry by engaging openly with peers. I-STs developed purposive thinking as they worked out what they wanted to do, and what was meaningful for their learning and teaching situation when they clarified the purpose of their inquiry. When implementing responsive teaching as an OEP, the TEs empowered I-STs to take an active role in their own learning journey (Barbera et al., 2017; Jahnke et al., 2020).

7.2 Facet 2: Find and Generate for Informed Thinking

The development of an open education resource required I-STs to find and generate information for their inquiry and was a result of student work accomplished throughout the courses, including the development of a draft manuscript in the third course. One of the survey respondents described the process as a collective product that resulted from co-design:

In this case, collaboration (co-labour) directly describes the idea that the end product, the OER chapter, is actually a product of many minds and many hands. Students are traditionally restricted to their own abilities and the resources they find independently. Co-design utilizes an ongoing feedback loop where the opinions, suggestions, and resources from others are valued.

TEs used responsive teaching as an OEP to help students find information to help prepare a manuscript for publication in an open pressbook. I-STs also helped each other by sharing resources (DiPietro, 2013). For example, one of the layered learning activities involved using Twitter and a common hashtag (#EdTechEthics) to help students curate resources (Brown & Roberts, 2023). One of the I-STs blog post reflections captures how this learner used this approach to share resources:

I’ve found that having the #EdTechEthics hashtag has allowed me to connect with classmates and faculty in a different way. When stumbling across an article or source that might be applicable to others, it’s a simple link shared on Twitter to the entire group following the hashtag and/or a direct tag to a classmate to alert them to a possible source for their research. This casual browsing of information is much more conducive to my learning style, allowing me time to process and browse to find things of interest without feeling the need to respond.

This excerpt demonstrates how an I-ST viewed the use of the Twitter feed as a worthwhile strategy for identifying relevant sources. Another I-STs survey response described how the learning activities in the courses offered an ongoing opportunity to find and access information from a broader network of supports:

The course was not conducted in isolation. The integration of Twitter and the publicly accessible blogs made the learning open to the world and therefore more authentic. The utilization of the wider #edtechethics community brought the possibility of engaging with others around the world who have been working on the topics and provided the opportunity to expand the student’s professional learning network.

The I-STs continued to use the Twitter feed throughout their inquiry to find information and share information with peers and as noted by one interview participant, “it felt like a community project.” I-STs used informed thinking to review information curated through the common hashtag and to find relevant information for their inquiry. When implementing responsive teaching as an OEP, the TEs engaged I-STs in providing mutual assistance and acknowledged the significance of peer input and open resource sharing (Di Pietro, 2013; Hegarty, 2015; William & Leahy, 2015). For additional examples of integrating social media in learning activities and RSD, see Mataniari et al., Chap. 6 in this book.

7.3 Facet 3: Evaluate and Reflect for Astute Thinking

This open access to shared resources also required I-STs to discern the credibility of sources, referred to as astute thinking when evaluating and reflecting. The following I-ST described using this strategy to expand their professional learning network

This platform is most challenging for me, as it is so open – that being both its strength and a potential point of concern for me….I rarely used Twitter but now I see the potential that all the academics raved about. It is informative, to the point, so I have actually been following a few authors that I have read while writing a chapter …. I really found Twitter to be cool and energetic and glad to be connected to such knowledgeable perspectives and minds. In fact, I think I may go back to our hashtag and see if there are any more “edtech” people out there for me to follow (Blog Post Reflection).

When TEs were using responsive teaching as an OEP, I-STs were developing research skills and learning how to provide and receive feedback in formal (e.g., course learning management system) and informal learning spaces (e.g., blog spaces) for reflection (Earl, 2012). The sheer amount of feedback provided from different sources presented a challenge for many I-STs; nevertheless, the students appreciated the constructive feedback as described by one of the blog post reflections:

I was able to use their [externals] feedback, as well as the feedback of my group to strengthen my chapter significantly. My groupmates all came from different professional contexts and we were exploring vastly different topics, however I found that we were all able to give each other helpful feedback and provide ideas that others hadn’t thought about…. has caused me to rethink many of my previously held opinions. It has caused me to consider what ethical behavior looks like in relation to the use of technology, both in education and beyond.

As a demonstration of the third facet of RSD (evaluate and reflect), the I-STs required astute thinking for reviewing formative feedback and when making decisions about using or not using the feedback provided. The TEs established instructional frameworks that enabled students to effectively discern and act upon feedback (William & Leahy, 2015) when implementing responsive teaching as an OEP.

7.4 Facet 4: Organise and Manage for Harmonised Thinking

In their reflections the participants shared how some of the feedback provided, particularly that from their peers, was not always useful and that students preferred specific feedback with concrete suggestions on how to make the improvements instead of broader recommendations that could move the inquiry into a completely different direction. As we reviewed the reflections, we noted the I-STs benefited from and felt challenged by the feedback process with their TEs and peers. In relationship to organise and manage, one of the interview respondents said, “It was nice to bounce ideas off of people who were in the same situation and had the same understanding of what was expected of us, even if we started off a little bit confused.” Similarly, one of the survey respondents commented that peer feedback was helpful when managing so much information, “It was a great way to push me and develop skills I was weak on.” I-STs also reflected on the comfort and level of trust in sharing work with peers who they previously worked with and “if you’re just throwing your work out into a random stranger’s eyes, it can be a little bit nerve-racking, so it’s a bit easier if you know you trust the people.” In a blog post reflection, one of the I-STs recognized the value in reviewing work created by peers and learning about different ways to organise and manage information using shared documents (e.g., google docs):

Our group shared our diagrams/outlines with one another and found that all of us are quite different in how we process our information, not a surprising fact but I find it simply interesting to see how others brainstorm and organise their thoughts. Not to mention how fascinating the various topics are. I appreciate the feedback and knowledge they can provide when sharing their own experiences.

Responsive teaching involves making provisions for formative feedback opportunities to help I-STs organise their ideas and harmonise thinking about their inquiry. When implementing responsive teaching as an OEP, the TEs incorporated mechanisms that facilitated continuous feedback regarding both the process and outcomes of the inquiry (Molloy et al., 2020; Thomas & Brown, 2021).

7.5 Facet 5: Analyze and Synthesise for Insightful Thinking

Formative feedback also helped I-STs develop insightful thinking as they developed a synthesis and understanding of their inquiry. One of the interview participants described formative feedback for purposes of synthesis: “It’s like a piece of art. You just keep adding to it, molding it constantly to get this one final artifact.” Another interview participant described this aspect of the inquiry as an “opportunity to hone research skills and writing, analysis, assessment, what to include, what not to include, how to relate your particular chapter to personal experience.” In a blog post reflection, one of the I-STs reflected on the value of receiving input from peers to help understand what ideas needed more elaboration to clarify how the information was synthesised:

[With] suggestions to use headings, I pulled apart what I wrote, started a new document, and put my ideas down in an organised manner. As it turns out, even at that point, I had a lot of the main ideas, I just needed to support it and explore it more.

Developing feedback literacy is a skill that requires a progression and sufficient time to develop trust among everyone involved in the process (Molloy et al., 2020). One of the limitations of our study is that we conducted the research immediately following the completion of the four courses; however, the I-STs development of the OER chapter continued for many months after the completion of the courses. Additional feedback was provided to students from external sources, such as an editorial team and professional copy editor. When implementing responsive teaching as an OEP, the TEs promoted I-STs feedback literacy via the acquisition and use of feedback from external sources (William & Leahy, 2015).

7.6 Facet 6: Communicate and Apply for Externalised Thinking

It is possible, if we collected data again after the publication of the OER, that reflections would have illustrated externalised thinking and the ways I-STs applied their understanding to their professional practice. The following excerpt from one of the blog post reflections shows how one I-ST reflected on their journey through the research process when developing the draft OER manuscript:

I really pushed myself in my research. This is the first time I have recorded all the articles, websites, blogs, etc., that I looked at to gain information about [inquiry] in the classroom. I used a spreadsheet to organise the information. I also tapped into the expertise of the university librarians....and Twitter....see my post about ....The feedback that was given to me. I was able to get support from my classmates and instructor, as well as my colleagues and friends. They all contributed valuable and diverse perspectives that caused me to reflect and reshape my thinking.

During the interviews, one of the I-STs reflected, “I feel I had the opportunity to gain applicable skills that I can apply in the classroom.” For example, one I-ST described how reflective blogging could be used in the classroom, which is promising evidence of the potential for transfer to professional work. When implementing responsive teaching as an OEP, the TEs demonstrated a strong presence and attentiveness in providing constructive feedback that can translate into further practice (Daly et al., 2010; Khan & Khan, 2019; William & Leahy, 2015).

In the future, we recommend conducting another round of data collection later, so that participants have an opportunity to comment on externalised thinking and ways the inquiry may have informed their teaching. We still wonder if the I-STs perceptions of the feedback changed after the completion and publication of the OER chapter. For example, how did the I-STs perceptions about the amount of feedback, or type of peer feedback, or outside expert feedback change after their work was published? How did the I-STs experiences with OEPs and OER impact their professional practice? In the data we also noted feedback provided by the TEs was viewed as supportive and responsive for meeting their learning needs; however, there was less discussion about students’ self-reflections. Did I-STs’ perceptions about self-reflections or creating blog post reflections change in any way after their OER chapter was published? Further research is needed to continue exploring the RSD facets and thinking developed during the program and following the program when TEs used OEPs and some of the I-STs collaboratively contributed to an OER.

8 Conclusion

Our research team’s contribution is unique as it describes how TEs interweaved research skill development with open educational practices to scaffold I-STs research thinking. Each course was designed with layered and renewable assignments, and formative feedback strategies, to engage I-STs in research thinking. RSD was a helpful framework to inform TEs learning design of participatory and collaborative knowledge building tasks to explicitly engage facets of research thinking, such as embark and clarify, find, and generate, and evaluate and reflect. This design, along with our research approach using RSD as a lens to examine and interpret results, made the outcomes of I-STs inquiry projects and evidence of research thinking explicit and accessible to a broader professional and academic audience beyond the duration of a program. Intentional reflection on inquiry processes via regular blog post reflections and feedback from the TEs and others supported I-STs in self-identification as researchers who developed and enacted diverse research skills that amplified facets of research thinking. Analysis and reporting on three types of student reflections using the RSD as a lens provided evidence of I-STs’ research skill and research thinking relative to the six facets of RSD.

By providing the invitation to present, reflect, and blog openly about their inquiry projects, many I-STs were able to gain insights about their research experiences and processes, and to enhance their knowledge building through peer support, and collaborative peer feedback. The participatory and collaborative activities demonstrate responsive teaching, which is integral to OEP, helped students to engage in an inquiry, develop research skills, and employ research thinking. Our research on the intersection of open educational practices and research thinking demonstrates the value of RSD as both a design strategy and as a lens for interpreting research results. Using open educational practices in a graduate program is a promising learning approach for research skill development with in-service schoolteachers.