Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Openness as a ‘worldview’ or as a ‘way of being’

49 views

Published on

Helen Crump's presentation of her PhD research at the 7th GO-GN Seminar in Delft, April 21-22, 2018.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Openness as a ‘worldview’ or as a ‘way of being’

  1. 1. The Self as an Open Educational Resource by Helen Crump GO-GN Seminar, Delft, The Netherlands, 21st & 22nd April, 2018 Open Educational Practice as a ‘worldview’ or as a ‘way of being’ Openness
  2. 2. Wrong track When asked “what is most likely to knock governments off course?”, British Prime minister Harold Macmillan is alleged to have replied “Events, dear boy, events” and the same is true for PhD proposals.
  3. 3. SelfOER, the original concept Openness as a ‘worldview’ or as a ‘way of being’ Process and products as OER (relationships and texts) (Koseoglu & Bali, 2016; Bali & Koseoglu, 2016)
  4. 4. A sociomaterial literacies perspective enables an interrogation, analysis and explanation of material textual practice in terms of assemblages of texts, technologies and participants” (Goodfellow and Lea, 2016, p. 429). Moreover, it allows consideration of not just texts and technologies, but bodies, actions and objects as well (Fenwick and Edwards, 2010). literacies as social practices has focused on the social and not taken into account material aspects of textual production; it has seen right past the associated technologies (Gourlay et al., 2014) Sociomaterial literacies practice Literacies as social practice focuses on the social. It has not taken account of material aspects of textual production; it has seen right past the associated technologies (Gourlay et al., 2014) A sociomaterial literacies perspective enables interrogation, analysis and explanation of material textual practice in terms of human nonhuman assemblages of texts, technologies and participants (Goodfellow and Lea, 2016). Allows consideration of bodies, actions and objects (Fenwick and Edwards, 2010)
  5. 5. A sociomaterial literacies perspective enables an interrogation, analysis and explanation of material textual practice in terms of assemblages of texts, technologies and participants” (Goodfellow and Lea, 2016, p. 429). Moreover, it allows consideration of not just texts and technologies, but bodies, actions and objects as well (Fenwick and Edwards, 2010). literacies as social practices has focused on the social and not taken into account material aspects of textual production; it has seen right past the associated technologies (Gourlay et al., 2014) Discourse and subjectivity Subjectivity: “what the subject must be, to what condition he is subject, what status he must have, what position he must occupy in reality or in the imaginary, in order to become a legitimate subject of this or that type of knowledge” (Foucault, 2000, p. 459). Discourses: “groups of related statements which cohere in some way to produce meanings and effects in the real world” (Carabine, 2001, p.268); create subject positions that individuals can accordingly take up, in effect specifying ways of seeing and being in the world (Hall, 2001).
  6. 6. Material-discursive practice The relationship between the material and the discursive is one of mutual entailment. […] matter and meaning are mutually articulated. Neither discursive practices nor material phenomena are ontologically or epistemologically prior. Neither can be explained in terms of the other (Barad, 2003, p. 822).
  7. 7. Meeting the universe halfway: agential realism In Barad’s theory of agential realism phenomena are the ‘ontologically primitive’ relation (Barad, 2003, p. 815). Phenomena do not merely mark the epistemological inseparability of “observer” and “observed”; rather, phenomena are the ontological inseparability of agentially intra-acting “components” (Barad, 2003, p. 815). Onto-epistemology: ‘knowing in being’ (Barad, 2003, p.829).
  8. 8. Recap, RQs and methodology Conceptual Framework • Openness as a phenomena, as a material-discursive practice (Barad, 2003; 2007) • Foucauldian concepts of self (subjectivity), discourse, knowledge & power • Agential Realism (Barad, 2003; 2007) Research Questions • How is openness enacted? • How is subjectivity constructed within open practice? • To what ends open practice? Methodology • Interpretive case study (Stake, 1995) • ‘Talk around texts’ interviews, observation & documents • Aggregation, direct interpretation & Foucauldian discourse analysis
  9. 9. The emerging entanglement of openness • Little OER (Weller, 2010). • Narrow range of discursive resources; complex interplay between meanings of open, sharing and helping • Emerging themes: economy of open; lived experience or practice; value; helping or making a contribution • Network architecture • Contextualisation • Embodiment
  10. 10. What it means to be an open researcher “There’s another story here. There’s another side to this. Really, as scholars, we should be, we really should be, looking at both sides” (P4). “You receive support; you’re part of a community, part of a movement that seeks to open up access to education and advance social justice” (HC) BUT
  11. 11. helen.crump@open.ac.uk @crumphelen helencrump.net Thank you Images: unsplash.com References: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IUBhVGZfvTO6RmlMZhoLSwqv6kxWw11dh4VmAurYugQ/edit?usp=sharing

×