ZiYu Zhou

After going through this topic’s readings, the question on the future of education keeps rising. I have come to realize that the modes of service delivery have evolved over the last century. Transportation, health care, communication, and so much more have morphed into new technology. However, how we deliver information in our education systems remains rigid and rooted in the pioneering styles and designs. What is the hope for education, particularly for higher education (DeRosa & Jhangiani, 2017)? How do you see the learner and the teacher (DeRosa & Jhangiani, 2017)? These are two of the four questions that DeRosa & Jhangiani (2017), one of the readings I went through, posited in the book ”Open Pedagogy.” I understood that open pedagogy is a modern model of education that suggests that students should be engaging in an actively constructive model of learning, where they are creators of knowledge, instead of a passive one, where they consume it.

The readings I handled in topic 3 have elaborated this topic more presently by analyzing the conception and principles of the theory and the developmental stages. For instance, there is a discussion about David Wiley, the Lumen Learning Chief Academic Officer, one of the first scholars to suggest OERs (Open Educational Resources) and how they should be used (DeRosa & Jhangiani, 2017). Open Educational Resources have been effective in promoting learning control by the students, influencing what they want to learn. This encourages them to constantly seek knowledge as they are motivated by their ability to choose the type of information they prefer to consume (Temesio, 2020). However, this is practical in very few institutions as some universities and colleges virtually control what the students want to search. This is disadvantageous as it reverses the progress made in open learning as students’ access to some information is limited.

One of the strategies used to virtually control students’ searches in most institutions is digital redlining. This is clearly described in my second reading, the article by Gilliard & Culik (2016) that takes a tour down memory lane to explain the technology of digital redlining used in the 90s. I agree with the attributed frustrations that came with digital redlining as described in this article. Redlining could be used positively, for instance, through network filtering that prevents malware and virus attacks and access to child pornography. However, in most cases, redlining limits students’ engagement while accessing online resources by creating boundaries against some information. In such cases, therefore, students are not allowed to satisfy their curiosity. Besides, redlining is a bias option as its concept revolves around removing some information that specific groups are not allowed to view. For an education system where inclusivity should be maintained, censorship creates division by limiting some students to online resources. In a nutshell, redlining does not promote open-access learning to students (Kuthy, 2016).

Lifting censorship as a whole is unrealistic as it is sometimes advantageous by preventing access to harmful and hurtful information by some students. To ensure the beneficial use of redlining, therefore, would involve a lot of considerations. For instance, institutions should first evaluate how their policies about redlining support open-access education to enable them to come up with strategies that will allow students to take control of their learning and not create invisible walls that limit their access (Gilliard & Culik, 2016). Additionally, integrating policy and design would help in coming up with redlining principles that favor accessible education material that is good for the students. Furthermore, tech developers should bear in mind the institutions and populations they are developing redlining software for so that their resources do not create racial discrimination while accessing education.

In another reading, I went through the Aboriginals’ case study, which demonstrates through indigenous youth in remote Australia that engaging and acknowledging learners in projects can have sustainable outcomes as far as the learning agenda goes (“- Learning spaces – ANU,” 2019). For example, creating a space where learning resources are accessible and conducive to literary activities is vital in promoting education in remote areas such as Aboriginals. Community-based organizations like libraries and media centers play a critical role in providing a sense of spatial control for the youth, thus encouraging more independent education. This is promoted by the fact that creating safe spaces where they can carry out education makes them feel less marginalized and discriminated against based on race (Miyahara, 2017).

I have also found out that the answers to the questions posed by DeRosa & Jhangiani (2017) lie in the transference of the risk element to learners to promote and encourage their desire to read. Allowing students to satisfy their curiosity instead of suppressing it works to encourage them to search for more information through the risk element transference. By so doing, it also theoretically and practically promotes continuity, transformation, and innovation within the learning age set. Education can join other sectors in remodeling the delivery of service through open pedagogy.

References

DeRosa, R., & Jhangiani, R. (2017). Open pedagogy. A guide to making open textbooks with students, 6-21.

Gilliard, C., & Culik, H. (2016). Digital redlining, access, and privacy. Common Sense Education, 24.

Kuthy, D. (2016). Redlining and Greenlining: Olivia Robinson investigates root causes of racial inequity. Art Education, 70(1), 50-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2017.1247573

New references:

Learning spaces – ANU. (2019, April 11). ANU Press. https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p197731/html/ch04.html?referer=&page=10#toc_marker-11

Miyahara, M. (2017). Creating space for learning. Realizing Autonomy. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230358485.0012

Temesio, S. (2020). Accessible open educational resources and librarian involvement. International Journal of Open Educational Resources, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.18278/ijoer.3.1.7

Part 1: Evidence and Reflection on Your Learning

During this course, I did four critical blogs that explored the importance of digital and internet platforms in education. My first blog explored the relevance of internet technology in solving contemporary issues by taking the case of Covid-19.

Blog 1 link: https://ziyuzhou.opened.ca/topic-1-post/

Comments I received:

Blog 2 in this series discussed the relevance of Massive Open Online Courses in the dispensation of teaching activities and practices. Similarly.

Blog 2 link: https://ziyuzhou.opened.ca/topic-2/

Comments I received:

Comments I made:

Blog 3 explored the future of education by exploring the significance of technology in defining education. One of the critical aspects that it looked at is the concept of Open Pedagogy that facilitates interest-driven learning and incorporates education-oriented technology to facilitate the teaching of theories and contents of the class. Students are the key creators of knowledge.

Blog 3 link: https://ziyuzhou.opened.ca/topic-3/

Comments I recveived:

Comments I made:

My fourth blog, which focused on topic 4 of the syllabus, oriented that the internet has been an integral part of education because it facilitates interactions among students and between learners and their teachers. In this blog, I noted the internet’s importance in promoting information and resource sharing among learners.

Blog 4 link: https://ziyuzhou.opened.ca/topic-4/

Comments I received:

In all my blogs, I explored the importance of the internet and digital technology in facilitating learning. The readings in each week oriented the fact that digital technology is crucial in enhancing and simplifying learning by fostering an asynchronous learning environment where there is little need for real-time interaction among students. I demonstrated that through digital technologies, learners could determine the right time to pursue the courses, unlimited access to resources provided on the internet, participate in creating knowledge through technologies, and embrace interest-driven learning through education-oriented technologies. One of the issues that came out from the blogs is that technology assists in solving real-world problems and simplifying access to education and related resources. For instance, internet technology has enabled students to learn through online platforms during this Covid-19 global pandemic. Similarly, they have made it easier for learners to schedule their time and participate in educational activities without necessarily having to avail themselves in class as in the traditional learning environments. As a result, all four blogs noted that digital technology had opened virtual spaces for learners to pursue their courses effectively.

Importantly, I learned from this course’s activities that technology had created a virtual environment that learners no longer need to attend physical classrooms or spend much time in the libraries to get the resources that they desire as long as there is proper infrastructure, which involves computer devices and reliable internet access technologies. With technology, learners can attend their lessons in their free time regardless of the location and time. This perspective has made it easier to pursue education for full-time employees, students in other academic programs, and individuals having personal issues to attend to without interfering with their academic calendar. Besides, I learned that technology has broken the essential barriers, especially distance, and made it possible for someone in Asia, Africa, or Europe to enroll for a course in a United States university and pursue it successfully without necessarily traveling to the United States. As a result, digital technology is the driving force that shapes the future.

Part 2: “Showcase” Blog Post

Original version of the post: https://ziyuzhou.opened.ca/topic-3/

Updated version of the post: https://ziyuzhou.opened.ca/updated-topic-3-post/

The reasons for the change I made:

After reading further materials, I added one part to explain how open learning is reversed when some institutions virtually control access to what students search and I added another part to explain a bit more on the advantages and disadvantages of redlining. Also, I added some statements to provide some of the solutions that might be helpful in ensuring effective use of digital redlining in learning institutions.

References:

Learning spaces – ANU. (2019, April 11). ANU Press. https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p197731/html/ch04.html?referer=&page=10#toc_marker-11

Miyahara, M. (2017). Creating space for learning. Realizing Autonomy. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230358485.0012

Temesio, S. (2020). Accessible open educational resources and librarian involvement. International Journal of Open Educational Resources, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.18278/ijoer.3.1.7

After reading topic 4 readings, I realized that in the current state of the world, the use of the internet and some of the latest webs have helped in facilitating the interaction between the students, teachers, and many institutions and have created a forum for sharing new open educational resources.  It is therefore important to say that sharing resources and practices, available’ are learning teaching as well as research materials in any medium digital which is located in any public facility view or have been given out under very open license which allows minimal access, usage as well as adaptation and redistribution by others who do not  have any restrictions. Nevertheless, given the several of the users, creators, and those offering sponsorship of open educational resources, it is therefore not something new to identify various usage situations as well as needs. Some of the various tensions in reaching a consensus declaration of the sharing resources and practice is normally on how there should be an explicit stress on certain technological advancement. Open educational resources commonly involve issues which relates to some sought of intellectual property freedom. Some of the initial educational equipment, like textbooks, is normally guarded with some conventional copyright conditions and terms (Beaven, 2012). Even though there are other alternatives and more flexible licensing solutions and options that have become important because of the nature of the work of some very Creative Commons. This non-profit organization gives some available licensing solutions that are not that very restrictive as compared to the other reserved rights terms. Therefore, some of the best techniques have been considered very important in infrastructural service for sharing resources and practice open movement. Some of the importance of the sharing resources and practices ‘ available’ include;  they have got capability of reducing costs in that sharing resources and practices  normally look  well put to bringing down total expenses as well as being seeing as cost-free. Therefore the emergence of the new sharing resources and practices ‘open’ can be coordinated, reutilize and re-functioned from the available resources and this is   normally considered as primary strength of resource sharing and procedures  in that it can produce some critical cost savings.

Even though the resource sharing and practices available should be put and separated in that most of them need spending. Open resource sharing and practices have also taken various directions, like the adoption, creation and adaptation as well as the period required. In addition, the availability of resource sharing and practices have been a major consideration in helping increase most of the learners understanding in schools while putting away some of the challenges of affordability as well as accessibility (Hölterhof, 2020). It has given also given the capacity for customization options thereby providing the best channel of network instead of being put together with some of the outdated techniques. Lastly through customization, there has been provision of faculty management over the quality of their course equipment as well as some of the various important resources required.

References

Beaven, A. (2012). Learning through sharing: Open resources, open practices, open communication: Teacher education and computer-mediated communication SIGs joint event. The Euro CALL Review, 20(2), 103. https://doi.org/10.4995/eurocall.2012.11382

Hölterhof, T. (2020). Open educational resources – practices of using and sharing digital resources in higher education. Social Globalization and Education, 297-302. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1bvnf0h.29

After going through this topic’s readings, the question on the future of education keep arising. I have come to realize that the modes of service delivery have evolved over the last century. Transportation, health care, communication, and so much more has morphed into new technology. However, how we deliver, information in our education systems remains rigid and rooted in the pioneering styles and designs. What is the hope for education, particularly for higher education (DeRosa & Jhangiani, 2017)? How do you see the learner and the teacher (DeRosa & Jhangiani, 2017)? These are two of the four questions that DeRosa & Jhangiani (2017), one of the readings I went through, posited in the book ”Open Pedagogy.” From it, I understood that open pedagogy is a modern model of education that suggests that students should be engaging in an actively constructive model of learning, where they are creators of knowledge, instead of a passive one, where they consume it. The readings I handled in topic 3 have elaborated this topic more presently by analyzing the conception and principles of the theory and the developmental stages. For instance, there is a discussion about David Wiley, the Lumen Learning Chief Academic Officer, one of the first scholars to suggest OERs (Open Educational Resources) and how they should be used (DeRosa & Jhangiani, 2017).

Similarly, in my second reading, the article by Gilliard & Culik (2016) takes a tour down memory lane to describe the technology of digital redlining used in the 90s. The article describes the attributed frustrations that came with digital redlining. In this reading, I found an argument on the concept of digital justice, presenting the need for a typical form of regulated access to information and an assessment of how this digital limitation affects the student’s academic opportunities (Gilliard & Culik, 2016). The article further criticizes technology policies at tertiary institutions that limit access to necessary knowledge. The argument suggests that most of these policies have erected invisible walls that have restricted the unlocking of an interest-driven learning model. I have discovered that the primary view of open pedagogy is to hand over the control of learning to the students in theory and implicitly in education-oriented technology. In another reading, I went through the Aboriginals’ case study which demonstrates through indigenous youth in remote Australia that engaging and acknowledging learners in projects can have sustainable outcomes as far as the learning agenda goes (“- Learning spaces – ANU,” 2019). I’ve found that the answers to the questions posed by DeRosa & Jhangiani (2017) lie in the transference of the risk element to learners and, by so doing, enhancing continuity, transformation, and innovation within the learning age set. Education can join other sectors in remodeling the delivery of service through open pedagogy.

References

DeRosa, R., & Jhangiani, R. (2017). Open pedagogy. A guide to making open textbooks with students, 6-21.

Gilliard, C., & Culik, H. (2016). Digital redlining, access, and privacy. Common Sense Education, 24.

Learning spaces – ANU. (2019, April 11). ANU Press. https://press-files.anu.edu.au/downloads/press/p197731/html/ch04.html?referer=&page=10#toc_marker-11

After I read topic 2 materials, these readings shall help me explore how digital technology is an integral part of education and it is also useful for a person who want to be a teacher in the future. The concept of open courses and e-learning paints a different perspective of looking at education beyond the traditional physical classroom with an instructor writing on the chalkboard as a means of giving instructions and engaging students. It explains that innovations that have taken place since 1994 have made it possible to have virtual classrooms and achieve the same or better results as the physical learning environment by focusing on technologies and theories that have influenced education since 1994 (Weller, 2020). Such content is relevant in finding appropriate ways for engaging technology in disseminating information and instructions to learners.

More importantly, I will apply Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) or open learning and e-learning analytics in my teaching activities. These technologies have made it easier to have both synchronous and asynchronous learning schedules. Synchronous ones make it easier to engage with the teacher through a scheduled timetable, while asynchronous allows the teacher to upload learning materials and allow students access at their preferred time (Major, 2015). As a teacher, I can leverage such flexibility to target individuals who have other commitments but can dedicate some time for education under a flexible learning environment and schedule. It is applicable in giving a flexible learning approach to those in full-time employment and students in active and full-time academic programs.

The technologies shall help in designing classrooms that encourage peer learning. Other than enrolling learners worldwide, as long as they have the desired technological infrastructure, they are applicable in facilitating peer learning through discussion boards and analytical aspects using artificial intelligence. This is much easier in giving materials, letting students comment on what they have learned, facilitate online learning, and analyzing possible areas of focus to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of courses that I will provide virtually.

However, there is a need for more clarification on courses that can be categorized as open and how technology can be integral in others, not categorized as open. For instance, there is a need for more research in teaching technical causes like engineering and architecture that require physical modeling and demonstration, which cannot be digitized. As a teacher, I would take the information from these readings as a foundation for more research and innovation to make e-learning and virtual teaching and access to materials easy and reliable. Such studies shall help seek clarification of these unclear contents and improve on the innovations that have occurred in open learning since 1994. In conclusion, the readings in this perspective reveal practical applications in open education and teaching but require more research to provide more clarification and guide innovations in the domain.

References

Major, C. H. (2015). Teaching online: A guide to theory, research, and practice. JHU Press.

Weller, M. (2020). 25 years of ed tech. Athabasca University Press.

The “Teaching in Blended Learning Environments” reading raises a highly relevant topic in today’s educational habitat. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many K12 and post-secondary institutions found themselves under severe lockdown restrictions for long stretches of time. These restrictions often drastically reduced class sizes and frequency, or even banning in-person teaching completely (Mishra et al., 2020). Educators scrambled to adopt online and distance learning technologies such as teleconferencing platforms (i.e., Zoom) to replace traditional pedagogical approaches (Mishra et al., 2020). Much of these decisions were made with the understanding that these technologies will be a temporary substitute, necessary only until such time that the pandemic has abated, and restrictions lifted (Mishra et al., 2020).

But now that the world is on the tail end of the pandemic, will everyone truly go back to formal, in-person classes? Whereas post-secondary schools often do contain some form of online instruction (recorded lectures, class discussion boards, online tutorials), K12 education in the West were still mostly taught in traditional, in-person, teacher-centric formats (Mishra et al., 2020). It is hard to envision transitioning back into the past entirely, especially when faced with the benefits of distance learning and the possibility of future COVID-19 outbreaks. The conceptual framework chapter of the “Teaching in Blended Learning Environments” reading provides many well-reasoned arguments for why a combined approach is best. I agree with many of the concepts of Lipman’s ‘communities of inquiry’, where higher level education is best realized as, “a collaborative and an individually constructivist learning experience (“Teaching in Blended Learning Environments”, n.d., p. 3). Indeed, we have seen that certain online learning activities not only offer students increased flexibility and the benefit of ‘anonymity’ (engaging teachers and classmates from behind a username), but also synergy with traditional lecture formats to enhance subject mastery. I would additionally argue that such a system could be extrapolated to high school students, where an emphasis on individual responsibility begins to represent a major component of the curriculum. Such blended learning environments would also make the education system more robust against future lockdowns.

Another topic regarding the rapid adoption of distance education technologies during the pandemic is safety and privacy. The age-old debate between modernization/accessibility and privacy/misuse has become a critical part of the discussion on blended learning environments and distance education. It is welcoming to see that policy makers across the spectrum place great care on the regulation of private data, even for educational purposes. Canada’s FIPPA act is a rather robust and comprehensive framework for the management of private information. I had an “a-ha!” moment and I was surprised to see that there is a list of social media sites/apps under Schedule 3 – Prescribed Social Media Sites (Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Regulation, 2021). I am curious to know if this list of sites is regularly updated with each amendment. Regan and Jesse (2018) also raise important issues in the education-information privacy debate, outlining multiple considerations that fall under a privacy umbrella. But I wonder if such rigorous scrutiny of third-party service providers (software, databasing, etc.) is perhaps hampering the effort to modernize education. Much of our private information, such as our age, gender, personal preferences, exact location, etc., is already accessible from our use of online platforms like Google Maps or Gmail (Shen et al., 2007). Rather than theoretical critiques, a comprehensive list of requirements that third-party companies must adhere to would be a more effective policy decision.

References

AU Press. (n.d.). Conceptual Framework. In Teaching in Blended Learning Environments (pp. 1–8). essay.

Mishra, L., Gupta, T., & Shree, A. (2020). Online teaching-learning in higher education DURING lockdown period of COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 1, 100012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100012

Queen’s Printer, FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PROTECTION OF PRIVACY ACY1–8 (2021). Victoria, BC.

Regan, P. M., & Jesse, J. (2018). Ethical challenges of edtech, big data and PERSONALIZED learning: Twenty-first century STUDENT sorting and tracking. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 167–179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9492-2

Shen, X., Tan, B., & Zhai, C. X. (2007). Privacy protection in personalized search. ACM SIGIR Forum, 41(1), 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/1273221.1273222