The release of China MOOCs Action Declaration signifies the strategic role of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in China’s national education. Compared with traditional face-to-face instruction, MOOCs have distinctive advantages, such as their large scale, openness, accessibility, flexibility and convenience, so they have shown great development momentum since the very beginning. However, translation and interpreting (TI) MOOCs in China have started relatively late, with limited numbers and types of courses offered and only sporadic studies, especially in-depth empirical research, on existing courses. By adopting a mixed-methods approach involving both desk research of TI MOOCs on 10 major MOOC platforms and in-depth interviews of two teachers and 10 students with TI MOOC teaching or learning experience, this study explores the status quo, problems, and future development of TI MOOCs in China. It is hoped that this paper will shed some light on the research and development (R&D), and application of TI MOOCs, as well as on reforms and innovations of TI education in China and other similar contexts.
{"title":"On Status Quo, Problems, and Future Development of Translation and Interpreting MOOCs in China—A Mixed Methods Approach","authors":"Mianjun Xu, Juntao Deng, Tianyuan Zhao","doi":"10.5334/jime.551","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.551","url":null,"abstract":"The release of China MOOCs Action Declaration signifies the strategic role of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) in China’s national education. Compared with traditional face-to-face instruction, MOOCs have distinctive advantages, such as their large scale, openness, accessibility, flexibility and convenience, so they have shown great development momentum since the very beginning. However, translation and interpreting (TI) MOOCs in China have started relatively late, with limited numbers and types of courses offered and only sporadic studies, especially in-depth empirical research, on existing courses. By adopting a mixed-methods approach involving both desk research of TI MOOCs on 10 major MOOC platforms and in-depth interviews of two teachers and 10 students with TI MOOC teaching or learning experience, this study explores the status quo, problems, and future development of TI MOOCs in China. It is hoped that this paper will shed some light on the research and development (R&D), and application of TI MOOCs, as well as on reforms and innovations of TI education in China and other similar contexts.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41264105","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Open educational resources (OER) have the potential to promote social justice imperatives in education, but because of the uneven provision of technical infrastructure across different countries, it remains uncertain whether the people who need OER the most are its primary beneficiaries. In K-12 education, educators play a major role in the effort to incorporate OER into classroom teaching but, even if they are able to source such resources (overcoming the “first-level digital divide”), many lack the practical capacity to effectively use (e.g., adapt) OER (the “second-level digital divide”). This exploratory research paper employs a cross-cultural perspective to interrogate how the second-level digital divide shapes K-12 teachers’ effective use of OER. With the goal of understanding how this divide influences OERs’ potential to enhance social justice, this research attempts to identify the factors accounting for teachers’ effective use of OER – and any reception gap – between different countries by conducting a series of stepwise logistic regressions applied to a largescale survey of K-12 educators. It does so by assessing OER use amongst 675 K-12 educators around the world in relation to their developmental and cultural contexts, as expressed through the Human Development Index, the Gender Development Index, and Hofstede’s six dimensions of national culture. The findings of this exploratory study provide new insights to support OER adoption in K-12 settings worldwide from a cultural perspective.
{"title":"Social Justice and K-12 Teachers’ Effective Use of OER: A Cross-Cultural Comparison by Nations","authors":"Hengtao Tang, Yu Bao","doi":"10.5334/jime.576","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.576","url":null,"abstract":"Open educational resources (OER) have the potential to promote social justice imperatives in education, but because of the uneven provision of technical infrastructure across different countries, it remains uncertain whether the people who need OER the most are its primary beneficiaries. In K-12 education, educators play a major role in the effort to incorporate OER into classroom teaching but, even if they are able to source such resources (overcoming the “first-level digital divide”), many lack the practical capacity to effectively use (e.g., adapt) OER (the “second-level digital divide”). This exploratory research paper employs a cross-cultural perspective to interrogate how the second-level digital divide shapes K-12 teachers’ effective use of OER. With the goal of understanding how this divide influences OERs’ potential to enhance social justice, this research attempts to identify the factors accounting for teachers’ effective use of OER – and any reception gap – between different countries by conducting a series of stepwise logistic regressions applied to a largescale survey of K-12 educators. It does so by assessing OER use amongst 675 K-12 educators around the world in relation to their developmental and cultural contexts, as expressed through the Human Development Index, the Gender Development Index, and Hofstede’s six dimensions of national culture. The findings of this exploratory study provide new insights to support OER adoption in K-12 settings worldwide from a cultural perspective.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48919740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Open social annotation, while offering opportunities for the creation of new knowledge, empowerment, and dynamic dialogue for learning, also contains inherent risk of safety for marginalized student populations navigating open knowledge practices. In this paper, we will explore both the opportunities for subverting traditional knowledge structures offered by open social annotation, while also bringing to the surface the critical tensions that may make engaging in social annotation more dangerous or ineffective for students from historically marginalized backgrounds. Finally, we will offer a framework for constructing social annotation assignments for the college classroom that functions to maximize the potential for equity while taking into account ways to minimize harm in the inevitable tensions of an inherently unsafe online environment. Critical social annotation will be explored as an alternative pedagogical approach.
{"title":"Social Annotation and an Inclusive Praxis for Open Pedagogy in the College Classroom","authors":"Monica Brown, Benjamin Croft","doi":"10.5334/jime.561","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.561","url":null,"abstract":"Open social annotation, while offering opportunities for the creation of new knowledge, empowerment, and dynamic dialogue for learning, also contains inherent risk of safety for marginalized student populations navigating open knowledge practices. In this paper, we will explore both the opportunities for subverting traditional knowledge structures offered by open social annotation, while also bringing to the surface the critical tensions that may make engaging in social annotation more dangerous or ineffective for students from historically marginalized backgrounds. Finally, we will offer a framework for constructing social annotation assignments for the college classroom that functions to maximize the potential for equity while taking into account ways to minimize harm in the inevitable tensions of an inherently unsafe online environment. Critical social annotation will be explored as an alternative pedagogical approach.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47137227","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the virtues of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) is that, because of their scalability, temporal flexibility and digital mediation, they have the potential to increase learner numbers in higher education, boosting their general level of social inclusion. Whether a MOOC actually succeeds in enhancing students’ social inclusion, however, is shaped by two elements of the course: 1) the features of the online interface – the embedded linguistic, pedagogical and interactive features that direct students’ engagement with the course materials, the educator and their peers; and 2) the knowledge content of the course, especially its relevancy for equipping learners to be able to engage meaningfully with the world after completion of the MOOC. With this in mind, this paper focuses on the first element, exploring Turkish students’ experiences of taking a MOOC and their perceptions of how the MOOC interface shaped their sense of social inclusion. Fifteen university-level students registered for a five-week MOOC on how to improve their English language writing skills. They then completed a questionnaire about their views on the learning experience. Nine of the students also kept diaries reflecting on their learning through the MOOC. Findings reveal that these students had a positive view of the MOOC, with different elements of the online interface playing important roles in improving digital, educational and social inclusion. The paper ends by recommending that researchers should further investigate the relationship between social inclusion and MOOCs; that course designers should rethink the role of online interfaces within MOOCS; and that Turkish higher education institutions should develop more MOOCs with locally relevant features embedded within them.
{"title":"The Online Interface and Social Inclusion: A MOOC Study in Turkey","authors":"Serpil Meri Yilan","doi":"10.5334/jime.558","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.558","url":null,"abstract":"One of the virtues of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) is that, because of their scalability, temporal flexibility and digital mediation, they have the potential to increase learner numbers in higher education, boosting their general level of social inclusion. Whether a MOOC actually succeeds in enhancing students’ social inclusion, however, is shaped by two elements of the course: 1) the features of the online interface – the embedded linguistic, pedagogical and interactive features that direct students’ engagement with the course materials, the educator and their peers; and 2) the knowledge content of the course, especially its relevancy for equipping learners to be able to engage meaningfully with the world after completion of the MOOC. With this in mind, this paper focuses on the first element, exploring Turkish students’ experiences of taking a MOOC and their perceptions of how the MOOC interface shaped their sense of social inclusion. Fifteen university-level students registered for a five-week MOOC on how to improve their English language writing skills. They then completed a questionnaire about their views on the learning experience. Nine of the students also kept diaries reflecting on their learning through the MOOC. Findings reveal that these students had a positive view of the MOOC, with different elements of the online interface playing important roles in improving digital, educational and social inclusion. The paper ends by recommending that researchers should further investigate the relationship between social inclusion and MOOCs; that course designers should rethink the role of online interfaces within MOOCS; and that Turkish higher education institutions should develop more MOOCs with locally relevant features embedded within them.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46767560","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Approaches to Open Education and Social Justice Research","authors":"S. Lambert, L. Czerniewicz","doi":"10.5334/jime.584","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.584","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45638100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Koula Charitonos, C. Rodríguez, Gabi Witthaus, Carina Bossu
Britain’s asylum system fails the most vulnerable; it cannot ensure that people who are least able to protect themselves are provided with the legal assistance that they require to cope with the challenges with which they are inevitably faced. Against this background, the charity Refugee Action developed the Frontline Immigration Advice Programme (FIAP), a technology-supported capacity strengthening programme that aims to increase access to justice for those going through the asylum system in the UK. This paper is concerned with the design and implementation of the FIAP as a free digitally enabled programme that provides learning opportunities for organisations and frontline workers in the refugee sector and supports them in developing new forms of legal practice. It provides empirical data from interviews with members of staff from six participating organisations in the FIAP, and from Refugee Action and the Office of the UK’s Immigration Services Commissioner1 (n = 21). The paper adopts a view on social justice, which according to Fraser (2005) is understood as ‘parity of participation’. We draw on Fraser’s work, as well as work of other scholars such as Lambert (2018) and Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter (2018) to explore the relationship between social justice and open education by taking into consideration the context within which organisations and professionals operate. The analysis highlights six dimensions for social justice approaches for professional learning as demonstrated through the case of the FIAP: i. deliberate iterative design; ii. access to provision; iii. flexibility of provision; iv. development of resources; v. support and vi. advancing knowledge and skills whilst adapting the workplace. All these dimensions are discussed in the paper in relation to the concept of openness and are critical in developing open socially just programmes that aim to change work practice and address the needs of the most vulnerable.
{"title":"Advancing Social Justice for Asylum Seekers and Refugees in the UK: An Open Education Approach to Strengthening Capacity through Refugee Action’s Frontline Immigration Advice Project","authors":"Koula Charitonos, C. Rodríguez, Gabi Witthaus, Carina Bossu","doi":"10.5334/jime.563","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.563","url":null,"abstract":"Britain’s asylum system fails the most vulnerable; it cannot ensure that people who are least able to protect themselves are provided with the legal assistance that they require to cope with the challenges with which they are inevitably faced. Against this background, the charity Refugee Action developed the Frontline Immigration Advice Programme (FIAP), a technology-supported capacity strengthening programme that aims to increase access to justice for those going through the asylum system in the UK. This paper is concerned with the design and implementation of the FIAP as a free digitally enabled programme that provides learning opportunities for organisations and frontline workers in the refugee sector and supports them in developing new forms of legal practice. It provides empirical data from interviews with members of staff from six participating organisations in the FIAP, and from Refugee Action and the Office of the UK’s Immigration Services Commissioner1 (n = 21). The paper adopts a view on social justice, which according to Fraser (2005) is understood as ‘parity of participation’. We draw on Fraser’s work, as well as work of other scholars such as Lambert (2018) and Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter (2018) to explore the relationship between social justice and open education by taking into consideration the context within which organisations and professionals operate. The analysis highlights six dimensions for social justice approaches for professional learning as demonstrated through the case of the FIAP: i. deliberate iterative design; ii. access to provision; iii. flexibility of provision; iv. development of resources; v. support and vi. advancing knowledge and skills whilst adapting the workplace. All these dimensions are discussed in the paper in relation to the concept of openness and are critical in developing open socially just programmes that aim to change work practice and address the needs of the most vulnerable.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45331314","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter’s (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser’s model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.
{"title":"Framing Open Educational Practices from a Social Justice Perspective","authors":"Maha Bali, C. Cronin, R. Jhangiani","doi":"10.5334/jime.565","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.565","url":null,"abstract":"OEP (open educational practices), inclusive of open pedagogy, is often understood with respect to the use of OER (open educational resources) but can be conceived with more expansive conceptualisations (see Cronin & McLaren 2018; DeRosa & Jhangiani 2017; Koseoglu & Bozkurt 2018). This article attempts to build on existing OEP research and practice in two ways. First, we provide a typology of OEP, giving examples of practices across a continuum of openness and along three axes: from content-centric to process-centric, teacher-centric to learner-centric, and practices that are primarily for pedagogical purposes to primarily for social justice (Bali 2017). Second, we employ Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotter’s (2018) conceptual framework, which builds on Fraser’s model of social justice, to critically analyse the ways in which the use/impact of OEP might be considered socially just, with a particular focus on expansive, process-centric OEP. We analyze for whom and in which contexts OEP can (i) support social justice along economic, cultural and political dimensions, and (ii) do so in transformative, ameliorative, neutral or even negative ways. We use the typology and framework to analyse specific process-centric forms of OEP including collaborative annotation, Wikipedia editing, open networked courses, Virtually Connecting, public scholarship, and learner-created OER. Analysing specific practices highlights diversity across the axes and subtle differences among them, such as when a particular practice is considered good pedagogy and how it can be modified to be more oriented towards social justice. We discuss limitations of each practice not just from its discourse and design, but also how it works in practice.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47283097","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Online digital platforms can increase access to educational opportunities for marginalised students, authors and communities, but digital platform design can further marginalise Indigenous knowledge because such platforms are structured according to western epistemological assumptions. They do not accommodate for Indigenous or alternative knowledge frameworks. In addition, the premium placed on openness by certain platforms and licenses contradicts the approaches preferred by Indigenous knowledge authorities who tie the sharing of some types of knowledge to the identity and authority level of the intended audience. Knowledge in this context is not understood as discrete units of information that can be abstracted from their communities, easily shared on public platforms, but rather as sensitive materials that can only be shared by recognized knowledge authorities for specific purposes. The processes by which Indigenous knowledge authorities engage with knowledge sharing on digital platforms comprise a complex landscape in which social justice concerns come into play. This paper discusses how, within institutional design contexts, open educational practice (OEP) by Northern Australian Indigenous authors can enable different forms of social justice and work incrementally towards achieving greater recognition of Indigenous intellectual sovereign acts with due respect to the wider significance of Indigenous Sovereignty (Rigney 2001). It examines three sets of Indigenous open resources to gauge the extent to which open digital platforms allow for the expression of Indigenous knowledge authority, one necessary feature for achieving social justice in the Australian context. It examines the resources using Fraser’s social justice framework (2005) as modelled by Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotters’ (2018) and Lambert’s (2018) approach to educational resources, and how design decisions can result in greater justice in knowledge affirmation and transformation but originate in offline decision making.
{"title":"Indigenous Authorship on Open and Digital Platforms: Social Justice Processes and Potential","authors":"Johanna Funk, Kathy Guthadjaka","doi":"10.5334/jime.560","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.560","url":null,"abstract":"Online digital platforms can increase access to educational opportunities for marginalised students, authors and communities, but digital platform design can further marginalise Indigenous knowledge because such platforms are structured according to western epistemological assumptions. They do not accommodate for Indigenous or alternative knowledge frameworks. In addition, the premium placed on openness by certain platforms and licenses contradicts the approaches preferred by Indigenous knowledge authorities who tie the sharing of some types of knowledge to the identity and authority level of the intended audience. Knowledge in this context is not understood as discrete units of information that can be abstracted from their communities, easily shared on public platforms, but rather as sensitive materials that can only be shared by recognized knowledge authorities for specific purposes. The processes by which Indigenous knowledge authorities engage with knowledge sharing on digital platforms comprise a complex landscape in which social justice concerns come into play. This paper discusses how, within institutional design contexts, open educational practice (OEP) by Northern Australian Indigenous authors can enable different forms of social justice and work incrementally towards achieving greater recognition of Indigenous intellectual sovereign acts with due respect to the wider significance of Indigenous Sovereignty (Rigney 2001). It examines three sets of Indigenous open resources to gauge the extent to which open digital platforms allow for the expression of Indigenous knowledge authority, one necessary feature for achieving social justice in the Australian context. It examines the resources using Fraser’s social justice framework (2005) as modelled by Hodgkinson-Williams and Trotters’ (2018) and Lambert’s (2018) approach to educational resources, and how design decisions can result in greater justice in knowledge affirmation and transformation but originate in offline decision making.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48961814","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
J. J. Jenkins, Luis A. Sánchez, M. A. Schraedley, J. Hannans, Nitzan Navick, Jade Young
In light of rising textbook prices, open education resources (OER) have been shown to decrease non-tuition costs, while simultaneously increasing academic access, student performance, and time-to-graduation rates. Yet very little research to date has explored OER’s specific impact on those who are presumed to benefit most from this potential: historically underserved students. This reality has left a significant gap of understanding in the current body of literature, resulting in calls for more empirically-based examinations of OER through a social justice lens. For each of these reasons, this study explored the impact of OER and textbook pricing among racial/ethnic minority students, low-income students, and first-generation college students at a four-year Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) in Southern California. Drawing upon more than 700 undergraduate surveys, our univariate, bivariate and multivariate results revealed textbook costs to be a substantial barrier for the vast majority of students. However, those barriers were even more significant among historically underserved college students; thus, confirming textbook affordability as a redistributive justice issue, and positing OER as a potential avenue for realizing a more socially just college experience.
{"title":"Textbook Broke: Textbook Affordability as a Social Justice Issue","authors":"J. J. Jenkins, Luis A. Sánchez, M. A. Schraedley, J. Hannans, Nitzan Navick, Jade Young","doi":"10.5334/jime.549","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.549","url":null,"abstract":"In light of rising textbook prices, open education resources (OER) have been shown to decrease non-tuition costs, while simultaneously increasing academic access, student performance, and time-to-graduation rates. Yet very little research to date has explored OER’s specific impact on those who are presumed to benefit most from this potential: historically underserved students. This reality has left a significant gap of understanding in the current body of literature, resulting in calls for more empirically-based examinations of OER through a social justice lens. For each of these reasons, this study explored the impact of OER and textbook pricing among racial/ethnic minority students, low-income students, and first-generation college students at a four-year Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) in Southern California. Drawing upon more than 700 undergraduate surveys, our univariate, bivariate and multivariate results revealed textbook costs to be a substantial barrier for the vast majority of students. However, those barriers were even more significant among historically underserved college students; thus, confirming textbook affordability as a redistributive justice issue, and positing OER as a potential avenue for realizing a more socially just college experience.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46488939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
1In many academic fields Western/white/male/cishetero2/abled perspectives are often centered, while other perspectives are presented as “other.” Implicitly, this sends messages to students that success looks like one type of person, knowledge is generated in one kind of way, and their background is not worth being centered. While open educational resources (OER) are often marketed as a tool for social justice, due to their ability to neutralize class-based differences (e.g., Okamoto 2013), there is no evidence that OER are any better than commercial texts at addressing issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion (see Mishra 2017 for a discussion of context). However, OER do present a good opportunity for diversification, due to the relatively simple nature of updating the content. This project takes a crowdsourcing approach to diversify OpenStax Psychology (OpenStax College 2014), an OER for Introductory Psychology courses. Contributors were asked to read areas of the textbook they were comfortable with and make suggestions to diversify the content. The author then used some of the suggestions to create modified chapters and conducted a study investigating the impact of the revisions. Participants read either the original chapter or the diversified chapter and completed a questionnaire assessing their sense of belongingness in the classroom/on campus. Overall, first-generation students had a reduced sense of belonging related to their financial circumstances. However, this effect was ameliorated for first-generation students who read the diversified chapter, compared to those who read the original chapter.
1在许多学术领域，西方/白人/男性/异性恋2/能力视角往往是集中的，而其他视角则被称为“其他”。这向学生传递了一个信息，即成功看起来像一种类型的人，知识是以一种方式产生的，他们的背景不值得集中。尽管开放教育资源（OER）通常被作为社会正义的工具进行营销，因为它们能够消除基于阶级的差异（例如，Okamoto 2013），但没有证据表明开放教育资源在解决多样性、公平性和包容性问题方面比商业文本更好（背景讨论见Mishra 2017）。然而，由于内容更新相对简单，OER确实为多样化提供了一个很好的机会。该项目采用众包方式使OpenStax心理学（OpenStax College 2014）多样化，这是一项心理学入门课程的OER。参与者被要求阅读他们熟悉的教科书区域，并提出多样化内容的建议。然后，作者使用了一些建议来创建修改后的章节，并对修改后的影响进行了研究。参与者阅读了原始章节或多样化章节，并完成了一份问卷，评估他们在课堂/校园中的归属感。总的来说，第一代学生的归属感与他们的经济状况有关。然而，与阅读原始章节的学生相比，阅读多样化章节的第一代学生的这种效果有所改善。
{"title":"Who Gets to Wield Academic Mjolnir?: On Worthiness, Knowledge Curation, and Using the Power of the People to Diversify OER","authors":"Amy T Nusbaum","doi":"10.5334/jime.559","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5334/jime.559","url":null,"abstract":"1In many academic fields Western/white/male/cishetero2/abled perspectives are often centered, while other perspectives are presented as “other.” Implicitly, this sends messages to students that success looks like one type of person, knowledge is generated in one kind of way, and their background is not worth being centered. While open educational resources (OER) are often marketed as a tool for social justice, due to their ability to neutralize class-based differences (e.g., Okamoto 2013), there is no evidence that OER are any better than commercial texts at addressing issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion (see Mishra 2017 for a discussion of context). However, OER do present a good opportunity for diversification, due to the relatively simple nature of updating the content. This project takes a crowdsourcing approach to diversify OpenStax Psychology (OpenStax College 2014), an OER for Introductory Psychology courses. Contributors were asked to read areas of the textbook they were comfortable with and make suggestions to diversify the content. The author then used some of the suggestions to create modified chapters and conducted a study investigating the impact of the revisions. Participants read either the original chapter or the diversified chapter and completed a questionnaire assessing their sense of belongingness in the classroom/on campus. Overall, first-generation students had a reduced sense of belonging related to their financial circumstances. However, this effect was ameliorated for first-generation students who read the diversified chapter, compared to those who read the original chapter.","PeriodicalId":45406,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Interactive Media in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0,"publicationDate":"2020-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46946192","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：