Handbook of Research on Innovations in Non-Traditional Educational Practices (Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design) [1 ed.] 1799843602, 9781799843603

Citation preview

Handbook of Research on Innovations in NonTraditional Educational Practices Jared Keengwe University of North Dakota, USA

A volume in the Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series

Published in the United States of America by IGI Global Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue Hershey PA, USA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com Copyright © 2021 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Keengwe, Jared, 1973- editor. Title: Handbook of research on innovations in non-traditional educational practices / Jared Keengwe. Description: Hershey, PA : Information Science Reference, [2021] | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This book aims examines various educational innovations, how they have developed workarounds to navigate traditional systems, and their potential to radically transform teaching and learning”-- Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2020025667 (print) | LCCN 2020025668 (ebook) | ISBN 9781799843603 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781799843610 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Educational innovations. | Educational change. | Inquiry-based learning. Classification: LCC LB1027 .H33511 2021 (print) | LCC LB1027 (ebook) | DDC 371.102--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020025667 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020025668 This book is published in the IGI Global book series Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID) (ISSN: 2326-8905; eISSN: 2326-8913) British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher. For electronic access to this publication, please contact: [email protected].

Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series Lawrence A. Tomei Robert Morris University, USA

ISSN:2326-8905 EISSN:2326-8913 Mission Education has undergone, and continues to undergo, immense changes in the way it is enacted and distributed to both child and adult learners. In modern education, the traditional classroom learning experience has evolved to include technological resources and to provide online classroom opportunities to students of all ages regardless of their geographical locations. From distance education, Massive-Open-Online-Courses (MOOCs), and electronic tablets in the classroom, technology is now an integral part of learning and is also affecting the way educators communicate information to students. The Advances in Educational Technologies & Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series explores new research and theories for facilitating learning and improving educational performance utilizing technological processes and resources. The series examines technologies that can be integrated into K-12 classrooms to improve skills and learning abilities in all subjects including STEM education and language learning. Additionally, it studies the emergence of fully online classrooms for young and adult learners alike, and the communication and accountability challenges that can arise. Trending topics that are covered include adaptive learning, game-based learning, virtual school environments, and social media effects. School administrators, educators, academicians, researchers, and students will find this series to be an excellent resource for the effective design and implementation of learning technologies in their classes.

Coverage • Curriculum Development • Classroom Response Systems • Collaboration Tools • Virtual School Environments • K-12 Educational Technologies • Hybrid Learning • Social Media Effects on Education • Educational Telecommunications • Digital Divide in Education • Bring-Your-Own-Device

IGI Global is currently accepting manuscripts for publication within this series. To submit a proposal for a volume in this series, please contact our Acquisition Editors at [email protected] or visit: http://www.igi-global.com/publish/.

The Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design (AETID) Book Series (ISSN 2326-8905) is published by IGI Global, 701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Hershey, PA 17033-1240, USA, www.igi-global.com. This series is composed of titles available for purchase individually; each title is edited to be contextually exclusive from any other title within the series. For pricing and ordering information please visit http://www.igi-global.com/book-series/advances-educational-technologies-instructional-design/73678. Postmaster: Send all address changes to above address. Copyright © 2021 IGI Global. All rights, including translation in other languages reserved by the publisher. No part of this series may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means – graphics, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information and retrieval systems – without written permission from the publisher, except for non commercial, educational use, including classroom teaching purposes. The views expressed in this series are those of the authors, but not necessarily of IGI Global.

Titles in this Series

For a list of additional titles in this series, please visit:

http://www.igi-global.com/book-series/advances-educational-technologies-instructional-design/73678

Designing, Deploying, and Evaluating Virtual and Augmented Reality in Education Gokce Akcayir (University of Alberta, Canada) and Carrie Demmans Epp (University of Alberta, Canada) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 404pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799850434) • US $185.00 IT and the Development of Digital Skills and Competences in Education Patricia Ordóñez de Pablos (University of Oviedo, Spain) Miltiadis D. Lytras (American College of Greece, Greece & Effat University, Saudi Arabia) and Xi Zhang (Tianjin University, China) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 332pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799849728) • US $195.00 Fostering Meaningful Learning Experiences Through Student Engagement Despo Ktoridou (University of Nicosia, Cyprus) Elli Doukanari (University of Nicosia, Cyprus) and Nikleia Eteokleous (Frederick University, Cyprus) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 325pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799846581) • US $195.00 Assessment Tools for Mapping Learning Outcomes With Learning Objectives G. R. Sinha (Myanmar Institute of Information Technology, Mandalay, Myanmar) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 327pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799847847) • US $185.00 Building STEM Skills Through Environmental Education Stephen T. Schroth (Towson University, USA) and Janese Daniels (Towson University, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 300pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799827115) • US $180.00 Redesigning Teaching, Leadership, and Indigenous Education in the 21st Century Leesha Nicole Roberts (University of Trinidad and Tobago, Trinidad and Tobago) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 350pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799855576) • US $185.00 Advancing Online Course Design and Pedagogy for the 21st Century Learning Environment Daniel Chatham (Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 315pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799855989) • US $195.00 Socioscientific Issues-Based Instruction for Scientific Literacy Development Wardell A. Powell (Framingham State University, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 359pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799845584) • US $185.00

701 East Chocolate Avenue, Hershey, PA 17033, USA Tel: 717-533-8845 x100 • Fax: 717-533-8661 E-Mail: [email protected] • www.igi-global.com

Editorial Advisory Board Joachim Agamba, Idaho State University, USA Douglas Agyei, University of Cape Coast, Ghana Susan Elwood, Texas A&M University, Corpus Christi, USA Frederick K. Iraki, United States International University-Africa, Kenya Kenneth Kungu, Clayton State University, USA Lydia Kyei-Blankson, Illinois State University, USA Philliph Mutisya, North Carolina Central University, USA Fredrick Nafukho, Texas A&M University, USA Robert Oboko, University of Nairobi, Kenya Patient Rambe, Central University of Technology, South Africa Jerono Rotich, North Carolina A&T State University, USA Peggy Semingson, The University of Texas at Arlington, USA



List of Contributors

Abrahams, Ilhaam / Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa................................. 327 Adjei-Boateng, Emmanuel / University of Ghana, Ghana............................................................... 379 Aliustaoğlu, Feyza / Kastamonu University, Turkey.......................................................................... 361 Alshaya, Khalifa / University of North Dakota, USA........................................................................ 237 Beck, Pamela / University of North Dakota, USA............................................................................. 237 Bressler, Denise / East Carolina University, USA............................................................................... 79 Brgoch, Shea / The Ohio State University, USA.................................................................................. 34 Bussert-Webb, Kathy / The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA....................................... 197 Carter, Alanna / Ryerson University, Canada.................................................................................. 107 Carter, Lorraine / McMaster University, Canada............................................................................ 107 Cerna, Nidia / McMaster University, Canada..................................................................................... 15 Chemosit, Caroline / Lincoln College, USA..................................................................................... 341 Chen, Yung-Ju / The Ohio State University, USA............................................................................... 34 Cobbinah, Joseph E. / University of Ghana, Ghana.......................................................................... 379 Ding, Qunxing / Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA........................................................ 155 Duggan, Molly H. / Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA............................................................................ 223 Flanigan, Abraham / Georgia Southern University, USA................................................................. 174 Harvey, Chris / Lehigh University, USA............................................................................................ 132 Howard, Barbara B. / Appalachian State University, USA............................................................... 287 Ilyashenko, Natalia / Novgorod State University, Russia.................................................................. 287 Ivala, Eunice N. / Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa....................................... 327 Kim, Jackie HeeYoung / Georgia Southern University, USA............................................................ 174 Lewis, Karin / The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA...................................................... 197 Lower-Hoppe, Leeann M. / The Ohio State University, USA.............................................................. 34 Maher, Damian / University of Technology Sydney, Australia............................................................ 60 Meda, Lawrence / Zayed University, UAE........................................................................................ 327 O’Brien-Richardson, Patricia / Rutgers University, USA................................................................ 270 Otieno, Daniel / Kenyatta University, Kenya..................................................................................... 311 Piedra, Daniel / McMaster University, Canada.............................................................................. 1, 15 Pollex, Heather / McMaster University, Canada................................................................................. 15 Rotich, Anne / University of Virginia, USA....................................................................................... 257 Rottmann, Amy K. / Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA......................................................................... 223 Rugutt, John / Illinois State University, USA.................................................................................... 341 Sutherland, Sue / The Ohio State University, USA............................................................................. 34 Tuna, Abdulkadir / Kastamonu University, Turkey.......................................................................... 361  



Tutwiler, Shane / University of Rhode Island, USA............................................................................ 79 Vallee, Nathalie / McMaster University, Canada................................................................................ 15 Vallera, Farah L. / Lehigh University, USA....................................................................................... 132 Zhu, Haiyan / Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA............................................................ 155

Table of Contents

Foreword.............................................................................................................................................. xix Preface.................................................................................................................................................. xxi Chapter 1 Open Digital Badges: The Future of Skill Validation and Credentialing................................................ 1 Daniel Piedra, McMaster University, Canada Chapter 2 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment............................................................... 15 Nidia Cerna, McMaster University, Canada Daniel Piedra, McMaster University, Canada Heather Pollex, McMaster University, Canada Nathalie Vallee, McMaster University, Canada Chapter 3 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action: Theory and Practice in Higher Education..................................... 34 Leeann M. Lower-Hoppe, The Ohio State University, USA Shea Brgoch, The Ohio State University, USA Yung-Ju Chen, The Ohio State University, USA Sue Sutherland, The Ohio State University, USA Chapter 4 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments................................. 60 Damian Maher, University of Technology Sydney, Australia Chapter 5 ‘Play Is Serious Learning’: Using Mobile Augmented Reality Gaming to Support Science Learning.79 Denise Bressler, East Carolina University, USA Shane Tutwiler, University of Rhode Island, USA

 



Chapter 6 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities: Duty of Care, Student Success, and Approaches to Learning........................................................................... 107 Lorraine Carter, McMaster University, Canada Alanna Carter, Ryerson University, Canada Chapter 7 Making and Modalities: Upending Traditional Teacher Education Course Delivery to Improve 21st Century Teaching and Learning................................................................................................... 132 Farah L. Vallera, Lehigh University, USA Chris Harvey, Lehigh University, USA Chapter 8 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education....................................................................................... 155 Qunxing Ding, Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA Haiyan Zhu, Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA Chapter 9 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies................................ 174 Abraham Flanigan, Georgia Southern University, USA Jackie HeeYoung Kim, Georgia Southern University, USA Chapter 10 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space............................................ 197 Kathy Bussert-Webb, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA Karin Lewis, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA Chapter 11 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education............................................................................................... 223 Amy K. Rottmann, Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA Molly H. Duggan, Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA Chapter 12 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games................................................................. 237 Khalifa Alshaya, University of North Dakota, USA Pamela Beck, University of North Dakota, USA Chapter 13 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya............................................................................... 257 Anne Rotich, University of Virginia, USA Chapter 14 Back to My Roots: Utilizing Hair to Build Student-Led Learning in the Classroom.......................... 270 Patricia O’Brien-Richardson, Rutgers University, USA



Chapter 15 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities in Higher Education................................................................................................................................. 287 Barbara B. Howard, Appalachian State University, USA Natalia Ilyashenko, Novgorod State University, Russia Chapter 16 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education........................................................ 311 Daniel Otieno, Kenyatta University, Kenya Chapter 17 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives......................................... 327 Ilhaam Abrahams, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Lawrence Meda, Zayed University, UAE Eunice N. Ivala, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Chapter 18 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies: A Logistic Regression Analysis Approach..................... 341 John Rugutt, Illinois State University, USA Caroline Chemosit, Lincoln College, USA Chapter 19 Brain-Based Learning: Using 4MAT Model for Teaching Transformations in Geometry.................. 361 Feyza Aliustaoğlu, Kastamonu University, Turkey Abdulkadir Tuna, Kastamonu University, Turkey Chapter 20 School-Based Professional Development of Teachers: The Role of School Heads as Leaders........... 379 Emmanuel Adjei-Boateng, University of Ghana, Ghana Joseph E. Cobbinah, University of Ghana, Ghana Compilation of References................................................................................................................ 395 About the Contributors..................................................................................................................... 451 Index.................................................................................................................................................... 460

Detailed Table of Contents

Foreword.............................................................................................................................................. xix Preface.................................................................................................................................................. xxi Chapter 1 Open Digital Badges: The Future of Skill Validation and Credentialing................................................ 1 Daniel Piedra, McMaster University, Canada This chapter examines the development and integration of open digital badges within today’s post-secondary education landscape. Two of the more common models for open digital badges are presented: open digital badges for standalone skill validation as well as the use of open digital badges within post-secondary programs. In addition, some of the benefits and challenges of open digital badges are illustrated using examples of their usage throughout the world. The predominant research on the subject suggests that open digital badges will play a positive role in skill validation and credentialing in the years to come. Institutions will need to evaluate various models, pros and cons of each, and through proper consultation, select the structure which best suits their needs. Chapter 2 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment............................................................... 15 Nidia Cerna, McMaster University, Canada Daniel Piedra, McMaster University, Canada Heather Pollex, McMaster University, Canada Nathalie Vallee, McMaster University, Canada This chapter provides a summary of the design and implementation of experiential learning at McMaster University’s Continuing Education Unit within the Human Resources Management Program between its initial launch in 2017 through 2020. The chapter highlights the evolution of the model, its challenges, and improvements over the three-year period through which three versions of the experiential learning project were adapted and improved. The chapter concludes with recommendations for institutions who may be considering the adoption of experiential learning for online adult audiences in post-secondary education. Among the recommendations identified are, to provide clear expectations of the work and roles required by students, industry partners, and instructors. To create a tight-knit design and an implementation team, to provide sufficient training to instructors who will facilitate the process of work-integrated learning, and to adopt an attitude of continuous improvement.





Chapter 3 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action: Theory and Practice in Higher Education..................................... 34 Leeann M. Lower-Hoppe, The Ohio State University, USA Shea Brgoch, The Ohio State University, USA Yung-Ju Chen, The Ohio State University, USA Sue Sutherland, The Ohio State University, USA Inquiry-based learning is a pedagogical strategy that shifts learning from an instructor-focused transfer of knowledge to learner-focused construction of knowledge. Based upon theoretical propositions that knowledge is constructed through social experiences, inquiry-based learning promotes greater understanding and integration of content. With instructors increasingly expected to utilize innovative teaching strategies and diversify the traditional lecture format, inquiry-based learning can cultivate complex learning experiences. This chapter reviews the theory of inquiry, experiential learning theory, and theory of social constructivism and describes the primary tenets of inquiry-based learning to provide theoretically grounded, evidence-based suggestions for instructors. Design, implementation, and evaluation of inquiry-based learning is discussed through examples of problem-based, project-based, and case-based pedagogical techniques. Outcomes and challenges of delivering inquiry-based lessons are presented as well as directions for future research to continue advancing educational practices. Chapter 4 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments................................. 60 Damian Maher, University of Technology Sydney, Australia There have been numerous changes to the design of learning spaces, inviting educators to innovate the way they teach. This chapter focuses on innovation and how this is shaping practices in primary and secondary schools with a focus on learning environments. The chapter begins with an examination of the notion of innovation exploring the role of leaders and technology-driven education. The focus of the chapter then shifts to frameworks that are used to guide teachers’ knowledge looking at the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework and the technology, pedagogy, content, and spaces (TPeCS) knowledge framework. The focus then moves to explore innovative learning environments and the innovative practices occurring in them with a consideration of pedagogy and flexibility. This is then followed by recommendations for further research. Chapter 5 ‘Play Is Serious Learning’: Using Mobile Augmented Reality Gaming to Support Science Learning.79 Denise Bressler, East Carolina University, USA Shane Tutwiler, University of Rhode Island, USA In this chapter, the authors report on a mobile augmented reality game designed to support serious science learning in a playful, collaborative way. School Scene Investigators: The Case of the Mystery Power immersed eighth grade students in a fictional crime scene investigation at their school. Gamebased learning was compared to business-as-usual. In the post-hoc analyses, the authors investigated how individual level factors affected learning. First, girls and boys both learned more during the game, yet boys seemed to experience a slightly bigger impact from the treatment. Second, students from both teachers learned more during gameplay; however, the game seemed to mitigate the novice teacher’s inexperience resulting in a teacher effect. Lastly, there is some evidence that treatment varies by prior knowledge; students with lower prior knowledge may have benefited more from the game. This study



demonstrates that the non-traditional practice of mobile augmented reality gaming promotes more effective learning than business-as-usual. Chapter 6 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities: Duty of Care, Student Success, and Approaches to Learning........................................................................... 107 Lorraine Carter, McMaster University, Canada Alanna Carter, Ryerson University, Canada McMaster University Continuing Education (Hamilton, Ontario) and the Real Institute in the Chang School, Ryerson University (Toronto, Ontario) are two university continuing education units that respond to the needs of adult learners from newcomer and international backgrounds. McMaster Continuing Education is known for its expertise in online education and support of adult learners as they seek professionally focused education. The Real Institute provides dedicated in-class programming and support strategies for younger adult learners. In this chapter, the experiences of older and younger adults from diverse cultural backgrounds studying at the two units are presented. The authors suggest that the needs of this learner group may be better met within the continuing education unit than within the mainstream academy. Innovative learning strategies and flexibility are key elements in this position. Finally, it is suggested that the two profiled units take their duty of care and commitment to student success seriously. Chapter 7 Making and Modalities: Upending Traditional Teacher Education Course Delivery to Improve 21st Century Teaching and Learning................................................................................................... 132 Farah L. Vallera, Lehigh University, USA Chris Harvey, Lehigh University, USA The World Economic Forum’s 2018 report indicated that students will need to be prepared for a rapidly changing, technology-filled world in which their future jobs likely do not yet exist. Recent education reform initiatives have focused on preparing the workforce for 21st century jobs by improving STEM literacy and acknowledging the importance of teacher preparation. Unfortunately, many teachers, designers, and technologists have not been trained in the same ways as they are expected to prepare students, and training opportunities are often delivered in traditional, business-as-usual formats. To better prepare individuals to prepare students, reimagining traditional educational delivery and modalities, while integrating STEM, making, and play to encourage the development and practice of 21st century skills may prepare those adult learners build toward the future. This chapter will discuss administrative and curricular changes we made geared toward meeting our adult audiences’ needs in a teacher education program following their learning preferences. Chapter 8 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education....................................................................................... 155 Qunxing Ding, Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA Haiyan Zhu, Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) holds a special position in higher education, and data indicated that online teaching may increase the rate of dropout in STEM courses. Meanwhile, much higher percentage of STEM courses require hands-on experience that cannot be satisfied by online teaching and the virtual reality (VR) techniques. Flipping classroom provides a unique approach to utilize



the components of online teaching and the advantage of traditional face-to-face classroom teaching. This chapter summarizes the development of flipping classroom and practical examples to explain the general principles to improve the design and conduction of flipping classroom, especially in STEM education. Chapter 9 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies................................ 174 Abraham Flanigan, Georgia Southern University, USA Jackie HeeYoung Kim, Georgia Southern University, USA Student use of mobile phones, laptop computers, and other digital devices for leisure purposes has become nearly omnipresent in college classrooms across the globe. The emergence of the digital distraction phenomenon has left many educators searching for strategies to curb the amount of habitual off-task behavior taking place in their classrooms. The chapter supplies educators with a menu of strategies to diminish the occurrence of student digital distraction in their classrooms. Specifically, the authors discuss evidence-based non-traditional strategies that can be applied to reduce student digital distraction in the traditional face-to-face setting, and they position the flipped classroom model as a viable approach for instructors who wish to curb student digital distraction while simultaneously boosting student engagement and learning. Finally, they discuss the importance of empowering students to take control over their digital device use and learning outcomes by training them to become autonomous, self-regulated learners. Chapter 10 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space............................................ 197 Kathy Bussert-Webb, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA Karin Lewis, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA The authors explore children’s and mothers’ perceptions and experiences regarding school and an afterschool tutorial agency. The latter serves a South Texas colonia, an unincorporated Southwestern settlement lacking basic services. They asked, “What are participants’ perceptions and experiences regarding this agency and school?” Latinx participants, who spoke Spanish as a mother tongue, included 19 children, their eight mothers, two agency staff, and 15 teacher candidates (TCs). TCs were Bussert-Webb’s university students who tutored the children and used iPads for multimodal, multilingual experiences. Using Third Space and social justice frameworks and qualitative analysis, these themes emerged: power, engagement, and diversity; participants described traditional educational experiences at school and nontraditional ones at the agency. Implications connect to hybridity and power redistributions in and out of schools to affirm and extend the languages, cultures, and modalities of nondominant children and families. Chapter 11 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education............................................................................................... 223 Amy K. Rottmann, Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA Molly H. Duggan, Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA Micro-credentials are becoming an efficient and financially sound method of delivering skills and content knowledge to adult learners. This chapter will define micro-credentials, explore how higher education and business organizations view and utilize them, and discuss the challenges of creating and implementing them. This chapter will conclude with a description of how a small private non-profit university created several micro-credentials by adapting components of their Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s program. It will also outline the reasons behind the implementation, the research conducted to



validate the change, and the process of creating the micro-credentials through template design. Chapter 12 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games................................................................. 237 Khalifa Alshaya, University of North Dakota, USA Pamela Beck, University of North Dakota, USA This qualitative study explored the perceived challenges ELL teachers encounter when using and implementing digital games as educational tools. Six ELL teachers were interviewed, and a phenomenological lens was used to analyze the data. The synthesis of textural and structural meanings and essences as a last step of phenomenological data analysis lead to two major findings of ELL teachers’ experiences with digital games: logistical and pedagogical. The findings indicate that there is a lack of resources, support, time, and overwhelming choices that characterize the logistical challenges. On the other hand, ELL teachers teaching philosophy, curriculum, and training highlights the pedagogical challenge of incorporating digital games. Chapter 13 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya............................................................................... 257 Anne Rotich, University of Virginia, USA Living in the 21 century has necessitated changes in pedagogical practices to fulfill the educational needs of learners. It is for this reason that earlier scholars such as Paulo Freire took issue with traditional education that promotes passivity in learners and pedagogical practices that are intended to fill or deposit knowledge rather than encourage critical thinking. This chapter, therefore, explores how Kenya’s curriculum is moving towards critical citizenship education with the implementation of a new revised curriculum. Also discussed is how citizenship education looked like before the newly revised curriculum, and what changes have been established in the new curriculum geared towards citizenship education. Finally, this chapter provides suggestions and pedagogical strategies for teachers that have potential of contributing to successfully enacting critical citizenship education in Kenya. Chapter 14 Back to My Roots: Utilizing Hair to Build Student-Led Learning in the Classroom.......................... 270 Patricia O’Brien-Richardson, Rutgers University, USA This chapter explores the use of hair, a common yet complex object, as an entry point to student-led practice. As students bring their personal, past, and present experiences into the classroom in a safe, supported space on a topic everyone can relate to, so they are able to engage in complex, opposing viewpoints. Students are supported by the educator who serves as a facilitator, and various outside guests from diverse backgrounds established in their careers via Zoom, a technological, virtual space who also share their experiences with hair in their career environment. In this setting, students are led by their own hair stories, collaboratively discuss and debate viewpoints, and are supported by professionals in their own workspaces. Combined, this multi-level layer of culturally based learning is both student-led, technologically supported, and provides opportunities to achieve both hard and soft skills, all through the lens of a single, unifying artifact, hair.



Chapter 15 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities in Higher Education................................................................................................................................. 287 Barbara B. Howard, Appalachian State University, USA Natalia Ilyashenko, Novgorod State University, Russia This approach to cross-cultural experiences for students in higher education offers greater accessibility to global experiences by engaging students and faculty in virtual international teams. Built on a partnership agreement between two universities, Appalachian State University in the United States and Novgorod State University in Russia, the ideas developed into a graduate certificate program of study currently composed of four online courses. Each course requires engagement of the students in virtual international teams to solve simulated problems. In this chapter, the authors explore the initial lessons learned in such collaboration from both student and faculty perspectives as well as providing specific course information and student outcomes. They also offer future plans for expanding the project to include other universities in other countries. This model of globalization in higher education challenges the traditional courses, study abroad programs, and student exchanges often found in higher education. Chapter 16 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education........................................................ 311 Daniel Otieno, Kenyatta University, Kenya This chapter focuses on evidence-based practices of virtual exchange in higher education (HE). The chapter opens with a discussion of exchange programs in HEIs. A cursory look at the nature of academic exchange programs reveals the traditional models involving faculty and student mobility programs between universities have been and continue to be the modus operandi of many higher education institutions (HEI). The discussion revolves around the application of this traditional approach and the benefits that have accrued. Later sections of the chapter shift the discussion to emerging models and discusses virtual exchange as the new paradigm in global academic exchanges. Various models of virtual exchange programs are discussed with a view of documenting evidence-based global practices. The chapter concludes with change and policy recommendations and suggestions for further reading. Chapter 17 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives......................................... 327 Ilhaam Abrahams, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Lawrence Meda, Zayed University, UAE Eunice N. Ivala, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Blended learning is one of the modalities used to enhance students’ learning experiences in the 21st century. South African educators who migrate to countries overseas have mixed feelings about their teaching using technology in schools. This chapter presents findings on implementation of blended learning in mathematics classrooms from the perspectives of two South African educators working in an international school in Saudi Arabia. The study was done using a qualitative case study within an interpretivist paradigm and it was guided by the technology acceptance model. Two South African educators teaching at an international school in Saudi Arabia were purposively selected to participate in the study. Data was collected using semi-structured interviews and document analysis. A significant contribution of the study was the development of a model which shows that perspectives of the educators on blended learning hinges on two entities: technology acceptance and educators’ self-efficacy.



Chapter 18 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies: A Logistic Regression Analysis Approach..................... 341 John Rugutt, Illinois State University, USA Caroline Chemosit, Lincoln College, USA The authors of this study utilized the logistic regression analysis using extreme student groups (top and bottom quartiles) defined by students’ collaborative learning scores to develop a model for predicting group membership of low and high levels of collaborative learning college students. The focus of the study was to identify characteristics of the learning environment that differentiate between high and low collaborative learning groups. Results of the logistic regression showed a statistically significant model that can be used to reliably predict student’s classification into low or high collaborative learning groups based on the selected institution and personal variables. The logistic regression model showed the lowest total percent correctly classified was at 98.1% while the highest total percent correctly classified was at 98.6%. Majority of the model variables made significant differences between the low and high collaborative learning groups. ANOVA results indicate significant group differences in all the predictor variables. Chapter 19 Brain-Based Learning: Using 4MAT Model for Teaching Transformations in Geometry.................. 361 Feyza Aliustaoğlu, Kastamonu University, Turkey Abdulkadir Tuna, Kastamonu University, Turkey Many models that take into account the learning styles have been developed with the formation of modern educational approaches. 4MAT model is a natural learning process moving sequentially through the learning cycle. According to the 4MAT model there are four learning styles and each student can learn more comfortable with their own learning styles. In consideration of neurological studies, also, the dominant hemisphere used by individuals in the information processing process is important in the 4MAT model. This chapter presents a lesson plan based on the 4MAT model as well as the results regarding the application of this lesson plan in a middle school located in the northern part of Turkey. The lesson plan was prepared by examining the books titled “4MAT 4 algebra: The system of mathematics” and “4 MAT 4 geometry teacher book” and receiving expert opinions. Chapter 20 School-Based Professional Development of Teachers: The Role of School Heads as Leaders........... 379 Emmanuel Adjei-Boateng, University of Ghana, Ghana Joseph E. Cobbinah, University of Ghana, Ghana School-based professional development of teachers is gradually gaining roots as an effective, relevant, and context-specific alternative to teacher learning and development. Apart from helping to update teachers’ knowledge, understanding, and skills, it promotes the establishment of learning communities and for that matter, a community of practice in schools. It is cost-effective and collaborative in approach. This chapter attempts to link school leadership with school effectiveness through the application of school-based professional development of teachers. It is aimed at introducing school heads/principals, especially those in developing countries, to school-based professional development of teachers, as a viable option to teacher learning and development, in terms of its nature, principles and processes, theoretical basis, and models that can be applied in different school contexts. It also examines the strategic role of school heads/principals in promoting the learning community in their schools through the adoption and implementation of school-based professional development of teachers.



Compilation of References................................................................................................................ 395 About the Contributors..................................................................................................................... 451 Index.................................................................................................................................................... 460

xix

Foreword

The timing of this handbook could not be more serendipitous, coming when it feels as though the world is on the brink of change. In the United States, the rumblings of a revolution are brewing as the global pandemic has laid bare inequities baked into our current systems and the repeated pattern of police brutalities caught on film give a glimpse into abuses stemming from systems founded in injustice. As more and more voices join the chorus demanding transformational change, people are starting to question the way things have always been done and reimagine a future where kindness undergirds our structures. As people vocalize the desire to upend organizations to make them work for all instead of for a few, every sector of society is being re-examined. In particular, education is ripe for reform. The switch to remote learning has revealed vast inequities in terms of access to the internet and to devices, the necessity of childcare in maintaining the workforce, and the vast amount of time, work, and energy teachers put into teaching. It has also shown that more flexible days, sleeping in, not overscheduling, and the freedom to pursue our own interests can benefit us all, but particularly benefit adolescents who have been pushed to the brink to perform on demand. The fact that so many were able to mobilize so quickly opens up possibilities to doing things differently. It is in this context that the out-of-the-box thinking promoted by the authors of this handbook have a real possibility of not just being dreams or one-offs in a lone school district, but a reality that change the ways we teach, learn, and live. In my own context, I have learned how hard it can be to change minds. After going to a conference for a hundred top educational technology thinkers, I left with one mantra drumming through my mind: “Change or die.” As a professor at a research university, I realized that if my university and others like it are going to survive in this world of online institutions who constantly adapt to students’ and industries’ needs, we need to become more nimble. Throwing off the mantles of business-as-usual, however, proved harder than I thought. As I honed an idea that bucked the arbitrary time limits imposed by traditional academic semesters, I quickly learned that others had difficulty thinking outside the only system they knew. I would see the puzzled looks on people’s faces and field questions about how could the institution handle logistics like how to determine course loads for professors instead of recognizing that these were rules people made up and that we can make up different rules in order to better promote student learning. I first went to the entity on campus that was supposed to be the engine of pedagogical innovation and the response I got was, “We don’t know how to do that.” I then worked my way up the administrative ladder. One administrator thought about my proposal for a while and then suggested a cohort system, thinking she was innovating on my idea instead of realizing what she was proposing was the exact opposite of what I was advocating for. Others really liked my idea but took no action. As I went higher and higher up the ladder, I was met with deafening silence. While I am currently using workarounds to implement



Foreword

pieces of my idea, I am hopeful that in this time of change, administrators will be willing to rewrite the rules so I can widen the scope and scale up my plans. The difficulties of bucking the “business-as-usual” attitude both within ourselves and in others is why I applaud these authors for being able to think outside the box by questioning assumptions and putting their ideas out there. These authors have reimagined what teaching, credentialing, and assessment can look like and have done so in ways that maximize student learning and engagement to help prepare them for the 21st century workforce. By centering the aims of education on the learner and recognizing that teaching to the world of today will not serve these students who will be living in the world of tomorrow, these ideas aim to promote cognitive flexibility, creativity thinking, and problem-solving. My hope is that at this time of upheaval, that these ideas catch fire and spread, offering up ways of teaching and learning that inspire and engage us all. Janna Jackson Kellinger University of Massachusetts, Boston, USA

Janna Jackson Kellinger is an associate professor at the University of Massachusetts Boston in the College of Education and Human Development where she is the program director of the Middle/Secondary Education program. She taught high school English outside of Atlanta, GA before earning her doctorate at Boston College in Curriculum and Instruction. In addition to numerous journal articles and book chapters, she has written two books: Unmasking Identities: An Exploration of the Lives of Gay and Lesbian Teachers and A Guide to Designing Curricular Games: How to “Game” the System. She has won awards in innovative teaching for both her online and her face-to-face teaching. Her latest creations are a course-long curricular game for a class designed to teach coding to non-coders and a video game called Zombie School designed to teach pedagogical skills to pre-service teachers.

xx

xxi

Preface

Educators and those who prepare teachers are facing increased scrutiny on their practice that include pressure to demonstrate their effectiveness, changing demographics and needs of our students, and everchanging learning environments. Thus, there is need for innovation and adoption of best educational practices to effectively serve the needs of 21st century digital learners. While many school districts and institutions of higher education still cling to the traditional agrarian school year with a factory model delivery of education and Carnegie units based on seat time when most people are no longer farmers, factory workers, or reliant on learning in a classroom, there are bursts of promising practices that buck the norm by questioning the educational value of these traditions. Back in the early 1990s, Lewis Perelman predicted that school buildings, which he pointed out are only used three-fourths of the year, will no longer be used and instead, students will learn in their own homes via personalized instruction delivered by computers, or even robots. Thirty years later, however, the status quo in education has remained stubbornly resistant to change. Even so, there are glimpses of non-traditional educational practices. Mixed-reality simulations, yearround schooling, grouping students by competencies instead of age, and game-based teaching are just a few of the educational innovations that seek to maximize learning by recognizing that, as Ian Jukes says, “That’s the way it’s always been done” does not mean it works. Therefore, Handbook of Research on Innovations in Non-Traditional Educational Practices is intended to provide innovative instructional strategies that will help to open up the learning possibilities for 21st century digital learners. Central to this volume is the belief that innovative pedagogical models supported by appropriate, selective and purposeful integration of digital tools has potential to promote cognitive flexibility, creativity thinking, and problem-solving for meaningful 21st century learning.

CHAPTER SYNOPSIS Chapter 1 examines the development and integration of open digital badges within today’s post-secondary education landscape. Chapter 2 provides a summary of the design and implementation of experiential learning at McMaster University’s Continuing Education unit within the Human Resources Management program between its initial launch in 2017 through 2020. Chapter 3 reviews the Theory of Inquiry (Dewey, 1938), Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1984) and Theory of Social Constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986) and describes the primary tenets of inquirybased learning to provide theoretically grounded, evidence-based suggestions for instructors. 

Preface

Chapter 4 focuses on innovation and how this is shaping practices in primary and secondary schools with a focus on learning environments. Chapter 5 explores mobile augmented reality game designed to support serious science learning in a playful, collaborative way. This study demonstrates that the non-traditional practice of mobile augmented reality gaming promotes more effective learning than business-as-usual. Chapter 6 presents the experiences of older and younger adults from diverse cultural backgrounds studying at two units – McMaster University Continuing Education (Hamilton, Ontario) and the Real Institute in the Chang School, Ryerson University (Toronto, Ontario). The authors suggest that the needs of this learner group may be better met within the continuing education unit than within the mainstream academy. Chapter 7 examines administrative and curricular changes the authors made geared toward meeting their adult audiences’ needs in a teacher education program following their learning preferences. These changes are based on recent education reform initiatives that focus on preparing the workforce for 21st century jobs by improving STEM literacy and acknowledging the importance of teacher preparation. Chapter 8 summarizes the development of flipping classroom and practical examples to explain the general principles to improve the design and conduction of flipping classroom, especially in STEM education. Chapter 9 supplies educators with a menu of strategies to diminish the occurrence of student digital distraction in their classrooms. Specifically, the authors discuss evidence-based non-traditional strategies that can be applied to reduce student digital distraction in the traditional face-to-face setting, with the flipped classroom model presented as a viable approach for instructors who wish to curb student digital distraction while simultaneously boosting student engagement and learning. Chapter 10 explores children’s and mothers’ perceptions and experiences regarding school and an after-school tutorial agency. The latter serves a South Texas colonia, an unincorporated Southwestern settlement lacking basic services. Using Third Space and social justice frameworks and qualitative analysis, these themes emerged: power, engagement, and diversity; participants described traditional educational experiences at school and nontraditional ones at the agency. Implications connect to hybridity and power redistributions in and out of schools to affirm and extend the languages, cultures, and modalities of nondominant children and families. Chapter 11 explores how higher education and business organizations view and utilize micro-credentials, and discusses the challenges of creating and implementing them. The chapter concludes with a description of how a small private non-profit university created several micro-credentials by adapting components of their Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s program. Chapter 12 explores the perceived challenges ELL teachers encounter when using and implementing digital games as educational tools. The findings indicate that there is a lack of resources, support, time, and overwhelming choices that characterize the logistical challenges. On the other hand, ELL teachers teaching philosophy, curriculum, and training highlights the pedagogical challenge of incorporating digital games. Chapter 13 explores how Kenya’s curriculum is moving towards critical citizenship education with the implementation of a new revised curriculum. Also, discussed is how citizenship education looked like before the newly revised curriculum, and what changes have been established in the new curriculum geared towards citizenship education. Finally, suggestions and pedagogical strategies are provided to assist teachers successfully enact critical citizenship education in Kenya.

xxii

Preface

Chapter 14 explores the use of hair, a common yet complex object, as an entry point to student-led practice. As students bring their personal, past and present experiences into the classroom in a safe, supported space on a topic everyone can relate to, they are able to engage in complex, opposing viewpoints. Combined, this multi-level layer of culturally-based learning is both student-led, technologically supported, and provides opportunities to achieve both hard and soft skills, all through lens of a single, unifying artifact, hair. Chapter 15 explores the initial cross-cultural experiences learned in collaboration from both student and faculty perspectives based on a partnership agreement between two universities as well as provides specific course information and student outcomes. The authors also offer future plans for expanding this project to include other universities in other countries. This model of globalization in higher education challenges the traditional courses, study abroad programs, and student exchanges often found in higher education. Chapter 16 focuses on evidence-based practices of Virtual Exchange in Higher Education (HE). The chapter opens with a discussion of exchange programs in HEIs. Various models of virtual exchange programs are discussed with a view of documenting evidence-based global practices. The chapter concludes with change and policy recommendations and suggestions for further reading. Chapter 17 presents findings on implementation of blended learning in mathematics classrooms from the perspectives of two South African educators working in an international school in Saudi Arabia. A significant contribution of the study was the development of a model which shows that perspectives of the educators on blended learning hinges on two entities: technology acceptance and educators’ self-efficacy. Chapter 18 focuses on identifying characteristics of the learning environment that differentiate between high and low collaborative learning groups. Results of the logistic regression showed a statistically significant model that can be used to reliably predict student’s classification into low or high collaborative learning groups based on the selected institution and personal variables. Chapter 19 presents a lesson plan based on the 4MAT model as well as the results regarding the application of this lesson plan in a middle school located in the northern part of Turkey. The lesson plan was prepared by examining the books titled “4MAT 4 algebra: The system of mathematics” (McCarthy, 2007) and “4 MAT 4 geometry teacher book” (McCarthy, 2010) and receiving expert opinions. Chapter 20 attempts to link school leadership with school effectiveness through the application of school-based professional development of teachers. It is aimed at introducing school heads/principals, especially those in developing countries, to school-based professional development of teachers, as a viable option to teacher learning and development, in terms of its nature, principles and processes, theoretical basis and models that can be applied in different school contexts. It also examines the strategic role of school heads/principals in promoting the learning community in their schools through the adoption and implementation of school-based professional development of teachers. This handbook examines various educational innovations, how they have developed workarounds to navigate traditional systems, and their potential to radically transform teaching and learning. Additionally, it offers multiple strategies and case studies to maximize active, engaged student learning through innovative non-traditional pedagogies and best practices in teacher education. This volume is intended for academicians, professionals, administrators, and researchers in education. The book will benefit academic deans, vice presidents of academic affairs, school administrators, faculty, graduate students, faculty technology leaders, directors of teaching and learning centers, curriculum and

xxiii

Preface

instructional designers, policy makers, principals, superintendents, teachers, and researchers interested in educational change. Jared Keengwe University of North Dakota, USA

xxiv

1

Chapter 1

Open Digital Badges:

The Future of Skill Validation and Credentialing Daniel Piedra McMaster University, Canada

ABSTRACT This chapter examines the development and integration of open digital badges within today’s postsecondary education landscape. Two of the more common models for open digital badges are presented: open digital badges for standalone skill validation as well as the use of open digital badges within post-secondary programs. In addition, some of the benefits and challenges of open digital badges are illustrated using examples of their usage throughout the world. The predominant research on the subject suggests that open digital badges will play a positive role in skill validation and credentialing in the years to come. Institutions will need to evaluate various models, pros and cons of each, and through proper consultation, select the structure which best suits their needs.

INTRODUCTION The world of academic credentials is going through a rapid change that has seen the emergence of alternate digital credentials (Matkin, 2018). Among these are open digital badges (ODBs) which have the possibility of altering the landscape of academic credentials and transforming the relationship between institutions of higher education, their learners, and society (Gooch, 2019). ODBs are a validated indicator of accomplishment, skill, and quality that can be earned within various learning environments (K. Carey, 2012). They can be added to a digital portfolio or a professional networking site such as LinkedIn for others to see. Because they contain meta data about what was accomplished in order to earn the badge, they provide more detailed information about what the recipient learned than traditional paper credentials and transcripts (Devedžić & Jovanović, 2015). The use of these digital credentials can provide an information-rich record of career relevant skills and competencies, which could in time, render traditional university transcripts increasingly irrelevant DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch001

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Open Digital Badges

and obsolete (Elliott, Clayton, & Iwata, 2014). While traditional degrees remain somewhat important to employers presently, alternative forms of learning attestations are quickly creating a new system of skill and knowledge evaluation for the marketplace (Matkin, 2018) which will allow for much more clarity and transparency as to what an individual has learned. Currently, institutional control over learning attestations and academic transcripts limits public access through transcript fees and confidential distribution rights. ODBs give students control over the choice of content and the avenues of dissemination of their individual learning accomplishments thereby being able to better communicate their skills to employers, colleagues, professional associations, or anyone else in the public realm (DeMillo, 2017). The open badge infrastructure currently allows for a wealth of metadata to be included with all badges. It is this aspect that makes ODBs distinctive when compared to other credentials. Metadata included with each badge now offers information on the following: who issued the badge (training body or academic institution), who earned the badge, when the badge was earned (badges can be set with expiration dates within a set period of time), details about the work that was required of the learner to earn the badge, alignment of the badge work with outcomes, standards, or professional frameworks, plus, the actual work, that is, the evidence the learner submitted to earn the badge (Rimland & Raish, 2019).

BACKGROUND A review of the literature related to open digital badges clearly reveals their use within three distinctive areas: standalone skills validation within academic programs, as credentials within post-secondary programs, and to validate soft skills acquisition.

Open Digital Badges for Standalone Skill Validation With more and more attention being placed on ODBs in the corporate space, (Ho, 2018; Murgatroyd, 2018) as a way to improve skill recognition and recruitment, academic institutions have also turned their attention to the use of badges as a means to certify or document very specific skills and knowledge acquired in the classroom. Hrastinski, Cleveland‐Innes, & Stenbom (2018) present an example of how an open digital badging system can be used to encourage the development of online tutoring skills. Their study found that using digital badges in the classroom motivated tutors to reflect more deeply on very specific teaching practices. Tutors gained a more comprehensive understanding of the tutoring process as a result of reflecting on conversations they had with students they were helping. In order to improve their online tutoring skills, participants of the study needed to develop an understanding of what highquality training looked like, and then be able to compare their own work to that baseline. Hrastinski et al. (2018) also supported the work of other scholars (Abramovich, Schunn, & Higashi, 2013; Tomić et al., 2019), confirming that one of the key benefit of digital badges is the opportunity to motivate learners to complete learning tasks. The educators in this study found that digital badges primarily motivated self-reflection of online tutoring practices and provided a means to better communicate one’s accomplishments in a way that is digitally validated by the accrediting institution. Another example of how ODBs are being used for specific skill validation can be seen in the area of professional development for academic staff, an area which typically lies outside of formal education and training, but is often delivered by academic departments within each institution (i.e. continuing edu2

 Open Digital Badges

cation). Fields (2015) provides an overview of how ODBs can provide new approaches to professional development within the library sciences. Fields argues that digital badging systems can articulate and verify the required skills for current librarian technicians as well as future graduates from foundational programs. Partnerships developed between library programs, professional associations, and library systems could use a badging program for connecting foundation learning gained in an undergraduatelevel library technician program to specific professional standards and emerging employment needs in a fast-paced industry which continues to see ongoing changes (Fields, 2015). A further example of ODBs being used to validate specific skills is in the delivery of professional development for teachers. Few instructors in higher education have completed a formal teaching program and therefore, rely on informal professional development opportunities to enhance their teaching practice. Many are hired for their industry experience and have never taught within academic programs. ODBs provide a system for these instructors to document non-credit learning and related accomplishments. As with most current badging systems, the instructor can provide a list of competencies attained, the date, and details of each accomplishment. They can also certify informal learning accomplishments received outside of credit programs (Dyjur & Lindstrom, 2017). In fact, it could be argued that digital badges can capture a more holistic and accurate picture of educational achievement in comparison to traditional degrees or certificates. Ahn, Pellicone, and Butler (2014) point out that detail is often missing or considered of lesser value in formal academic contexts where only the record of completed courses is communicated in a student’s transcript. The use of ODBs raise positive and negative observations. Dyjur and Lindstrom (2017) studied the use of ODBs within higher education instructors. In their study, the majority of participants had positive impressions of badges, finding them to be authentic and innovative. A minority had lukewarm or negative impressions of them, and some viewed their digital badge as less prestigious than a paper certificate. Their findings also suggest that the badge’s appearance also affects its perceived credibility. However, participants who indicated that they would use their digital badge identified a wide variety of uses, such as sharing them through social media and printing off a hard copy certificate. Others were uncertain about how they would use their digital badge pointing to the need to educate instructors on how they can communicate their accomplishments and micro-learning credentials. Many participants found the badges to be a motivator to continue the program, but not the sole reason to partake in professional learning development (Dyjur & Lindstrom, 2017). Davies, Randall, and West (2015) provide another example of where ODBs can be used to validate specific skills and knowledge. For some time, members of the American Evaluation Association (AEA) have discussed and debated the issue of an evaluator certification. An inability to agree on a certification solutions in the past may have been partially caused by the weaknesses of traditional certification systems, where certification candidates obtain a degree and then are expected to pass a comprehensive exam. In that model, very little specificity is known in terms of one’s capabilities. Davies et al. (2015) propose a certification system based on ODBs which would make AEA certification a reality existing outside of the traditional academic credential world. Such a system would provide individuals with evidence that they possess specific skills, have realized an accomplishment through work experience, or have completed specific training. It could be said that education may be following the granular path of music where purchases have moved the market from the album to the song. This same model is taking training of skills or expertise from the certificate or degree to the badge representing very specific skills (Davies et al., 2015).

3

 Open Digital Badges

Open Digital Badges Within Post-Secondary Programs Another approach to the use of ODBs involves embedding them within larger post-secondary programs. For example, engineering students at McMaster University in Ontario, have recently been given the opportunity to work on extra-curricular projects aimed at revitalizing the urban landscape in Hamilton, Ontario. Most of the work engages learners with community partners in an experiential learning opportunity in which participants may receive an ODB recognizing the skills demonstrated on the project. These skills include research, entrepreneurship, communication and collaboration (Lewington, 2019). Advocates of this approach within the Faculty of Engineering believe that this is an example of how an institution can paint a more complete picture of student achievement, recognizing skills and expertise demanded by employers (Lewington, 2019). As of the Fall 2019 term, McMaster Engineering students will have had an opportunity to earn an additional badge for completion of six designated courses tied to the United States National Academy of Engineering Grand Challenges Scholars Program aimed at equipping graduates to solve global problems and concerns. In addition, learners will be eligible to earn badges, based on pre-approved hands-on extra-curricular activities which meet course learning outcomes in areas of research, creativity, working in diverse groups, entrepreneurship and social consciousness. Working with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and others, McMaster plans to use a blockchain platform for students to store micro-credentials, making them accessible through most handheld devices. Additional Canadian post-secondary institutions have begun experimenting with micro-credentials and badges as a complement to the academic transcript. These opportunities often link to additional volunteer activities, internships and other activities that enable the student to build a more well-rounded view of their individual career-related capabilities. Western University, in London, Ontario recently completed a badging pilot project funded through eCampusOntario. In 2014, Ryerson University’s G. Raymond Chang School of Continuing Education, based in Toronto, Ontario issued badges to those who demonstrated a successful skill-set of building websites accessible to the impaired. In Finland, where the gaming industry has developed enormously over the past decade, the skills and competencies needed for employment in a gaming company are only partially provided by formal academic programs. Many individuals acquire these skills in a very informal manner, often outside of the bounds of academic institutions. However, the fact that the learning occurs outside of the traditional systems surrounding these institutions means that the skills are not usually captured properly, if they are even considered by traditional academic institutions. As a result, these competencies are not communicated to potential employers adequately. The work of Kuhmonen, Pöyry-Lassila, and Seppälä (2018) suggests that ODBs are a viable solution to this challenge. Working with institutions of gaming programs in Finland, their work highlights the important role of project management skills in the gaming industry. As with as technical skills, they urge capturing project management skills to improve one’s marketability towards future career growth. Similar examples of badges being used to recognize soft skills training within technical programs exist (Malczyk, 2019; Matturro, 2013; Tomić et al., 2019). Malczyk (2019) highlights an example of badges used within a Bachelor of Social Work program to recognize competency in self-care. Students who achieved this badge completed a number of academic projects which included finishing readings on self-care, self-assessments and worksheets, written self-care plans, and a final report on one’s own self-care practices. Overall, learners described the benefits of the badge and the fact that they were able to practice self-care rather than simply increasing their knowledge about self-care (Malczyk, 2019).

4

 Open Digital Badges

Matturro (2013) also underlined the success of ODBs in recognizing soft skills training in software engineering programs. His study considered soft skills in demand within the Uruguayan software industry. According to industry feedback, soft skills, such as interpersonal skills, teamwork, problem solving and customer orientation to name just a few, are as important as, or even more important, than traditional qualifications and technical skills (Matturro, 2013). The lessons gained in Finland noted previously, could lead to applying a similar badging system in Uruguay to better identify, recognize, and communicate soft skills in a comparable industry. Skills such as collaboration, solving real-world problems, teamwork, leadership, and communication can be the difference in landing a job (Murgatroyd, 2018). Tomić et al. (2019) indicates that these skills are rarely assessed and acknowledged in regular software engineering programs. Their work describes the results of a small case study involving an extracurricular Java programming course in which, in addition to knowledge and skills in relevant technologies, students’ soft skills were also assessed, and ODBs were awarded to those who demonstrated success therein. Findings suggest that students perceived soft skills and hard skills as equally important for their future career (Tomić et al., 2019). In fact, all soft skills taught were perceived as important for programmers; among these, the real-world problem-solving skill was rated as the most important (Khalil, Williams, & Hawkins, 2018). Further, student’s opinions about ODBs as a motivational mechanism is positive, which is in line with previous findings along the same lines (Abramovich et al., 2013). The need to capture soft skills that students may otherwise gain either inside or outside of the classroom has also been examined by other institutions within post-secondary education. According to Ippoliti and Baeza (2017), academic libraries can become campus leaders in digital badges, using the system to not only promote information literacy education to students and other members of the institution’s learning community, but to also deliver programming in soft skills. Ippoliti and Baeza (2017) focus their analysis on two institutions where ODBs are used to promote library programming and soft skills for graduate students. The first involves the University of Maryland Terrapin Learning Commons (TLC). Their open digital badging program yielded a number of lessons (Ippoliti & Baeza, 2017). First, according to the university, badges and the training programs they were attached to, addressed very specific needs. In order for badges to work within broader academic programs, there must be a deep perceived value for acquiring the skills a badge represents. Second, institutions must make sure to have institutional buyin. Third, it should be noted that the TLC experience revealed that without a larger entity to officially endorse these badges, students have to rely on intrinsic motivation to guide their efforts, something which when weighed against the realities of busy lives, often loses out. A fourth lesson from the TLC experience indicated that institutions should create a clear hierarchy for each badge and determine how badges will work together. It must be clear to all how the badge structure fits within other credentials. Finally, institutions must be prepared to make changes and not get locked into a system that corners an institution from adjusting as the process evolves (Ippoliti & Baeza, 2017). The above study went on to explore another example of badging in higher education: Oklahoma State University (OSU) Libraries. The OSU Graduate Digital Badges program emerged out of a desire to better coordinate the various workshops offered to graduate students from various support services on campus. The growth of the size and breadth of the program has created some lessons learned that should be addressed when developing a campus-wide digital badge program. It yielded further lessons on how to carry out a badging system (Ippoliti & Baeza, 2017). Lessons learned included that a trial period is needed when implementing ODBs. The authors emphasize that such an approach is essential to be able to discover and adapt to the unforeseen elements and complications that will arise. Another 5

 Open Digital Badges

observation emphasized an approach that begins simple and evolves over time. In the case of the OSU badge program, it grew to have six competencies, five levels, with two of the levels requiring two workshops to earn a badge. Other institutions that have found success in introducing ODBs within the context of soft skills include Purdue University in Indiana. Their experience (Bowen & Thomas, 2014) involved the development of a Purdue University LinkedIn Boot Camp, developed by student interns within the university’s Center for Career Opportunities. The program awards badges to students who creatively develop their professional brand and post it online. For example, the LinkedIn Leader badge, may be awarded to individuals who include a professional headline, profile photo, education showcase, work experience showcase, recommendations, and a resumé within their LinkedIn profile. Another example of what Purdue has done with ODBs includes the Purdue University’s Passport to Intercultural Learning (PUPIL) which comprises six specific knowledge, attitude, and skills badges, as well as a seventh capstone badge (Bowen & Thomas, 2014). To earn these badges, students must complete defined tasks that demonstrate intercultural openness, curiosity, cultural self-awareness, cultural worldview, empathy, and intercultural communication. Supporting documents, a final self-assessment, and a capstone intercultural learning quiz are attached to the badges to provide evidence of skills achieved and tasks completed.

Issues and Challenges of Open Digital Badges While the concept of ODBs is still relatively young all indicators point to their continued use. Alternative digital credentials are already being widely used in one form or another in many institutions. In June 2016, a study of a broad spectrum of 190 four-year institutions found that 94% of institutions were issuing some sort of alternative credential and 25% were issuing them digitally (Matkin, 2018). However, in order for it to become accepted as a valid option to the longer traditional credentials which have existed for over a century, it will be necessary to consider some of the challenges which academic institutions will undoubtedly face in wide-scale implementations. The concept itself will be a disruptive force which will threaten traditional learning, teaching, and credentialing as one has come to know it. Perception, acceptance, and interpretation of badges will depend deeply upon the ways badges are created, instituted, and issued (Casilli & Hickey, 2016). It is worth considering that the modern credentialing system was established over two centuries ago, alongside the establishment of modern schools and universities and their interconnected assessment techniques and credentialing systems. Academia has over one century of studying these modern practices and a great deal of research has been supported by multiple professional organizations, scholarly societies, academic journals, and the like. It will take some time to raise enough momentum for badging to comfortably settle into academic institutions of higher learning. Continued research, piloting, and observation will clarify what works and what does not, on route to finding badging systems, policies, and procedures that can be agreed-upon. Much of the work presented within this chapter presents a solid base of examples confirming that ODBs can play a major role in validating skills and credentialing. Another thing which has become obvious is that soft skills like creativity, teamwork, problem solving, design thinking, and many others are as important today as any technical skill which one can acquire through formal training programs (Murgatroyd, 2018). Traditionally, governments at all levels have struggled to anticipate what skills will be in demand in the coming years. In research conducted by Murgatroyd, (2018) in Finland and New Zealand, a variety of approaches are used to anticipate the coming economic disruptions of artificial intelligence, 3D manufacturing, nanotechnology and other 6

 Open Digital Badges

disruptive technologies. Experiments with micro-credentialing and ODBs in New Zealand give hope to be able to anticipate these future conditions, but limited funding and existing quality assurance and assessment models (to name but a few) pose difficulties to break through the traditional models to create truly flexible and adaptive assessment systems (Murgatroyd, 2018). Much of the work presented in this chapter supports the belief that learning will become more focused on competencies in response to what the modern world of work requires. Murgatroyd (2019) believes that those who are able to anticipate this and adjust their delivery to meet these needs, will thrive while others who maintain the status quo, will be limited in their growth. However, according to Young (2012), the principal push for badges will have to come from industry and education reformers, rather than from traditional educational institutions. Employers are beginning to move towards a preference for badges since traditional college diplomas contain very little detail about what the recipient learned (Raish & Rimland, 2016). For all practical purposes, an academic transcript is a static, standalone document that fails to communicate clearly what one has learned. It is kept in a secure location and only shown on rare occasions—to graduate school admissions offices or hiring managers in human resources departments—to verify attendance, grades, or degrees. The transcript does not capture what a student has learned nor does it capture the achievement outside of the classroom. Moreover, accrediting agencies are beginning to focus on learning outcomes. U.S. regional accreditation bodies are more and more requiring that universities evaluate their programs on the basis of defined student outcomes. Additionally, accrediting bodies are increasingly concerned about demonstrable impact of education and what happens to students once they graduate (Matkin, 2018). Add to that, the fact that adult learners across the world are pushing for shorter, more focused, and intense courses. ODBs and other forms of alternative digital credentials can reinforce the effectiveness of shorter learning by focusing on the certification of defined competencies. It is this demand for “better and faster” delivery of educational content that has led to the widespread practice of “modularizing” courses into shorter components and then “stacking” them into the larger context of the mastery of a subject (Murgatroyd, 2019). Another challenge that academics will face in relation to implementing an ODB system is the need to establish a consistent approach to describe, authenticate, and digitally store the skills represented in a badge or micro-credential. What is needed is a quality framework for micro-credentials (Lewington, 2019). Reports by some (e.g., Borrás-Gené, 2018), clearly point to a lack of knowledge on all aspects of badging. An earnest effort to raise the awareness of university staff with regards to creating and issuing badges, as well as how to make better use of the badges that they earn from the training courses in which they participate, needs further attention. Adoption issues will also have to be addressed. Many faculty members are already feeling great pressure to publish and present, so implementing a badge system will certainly be met with some resistance (K. L. Carey & Stefaniak, 2018). Many of the examples of badging referenced in this chapter will go a long way in illustrating their use and efficacy and in abating all fears and trepidation.

CONCLUSION The influx of technology has infiltrated and shaped everything we do as humans. It should come as no surprise that education is not exempt from this effect. The vast resources of information in every digital corner of the internet has made it possible for individuals to learn at all hours and from anywhere. Academic institutions are no longer the sole holders of knowledge. Many of the works cited in this chapter 7

 Open Digital Badges

highlight a major challenge of traditional credentials: they do not always convey the fullness of learning achievement as fully as they could. However, ODBs contain the wherewithal to store and display many of the elements of learning because they are a digital record of achievement, embedded with data that makes it easy for organizations or employers to authenticate and understand how a skill was earned. As of 2017, more than 15 million ODBs have been issued across the globe by a variety of organizations and institutions (eCampusOntario, 2017). This increasing popularity speaks to their unique advantage, allowing learners and job seekers to display a more holistic view of their skills, interests, and achievements. However, in order for badges to become a recognized entity in the credential market, educators, students, and the public, along with industry must work together to reach a common language, process, and ecosystems. If the post-secondary education industry is going to truly transform from industrial age institutions to digital age compliant, it will be necessary to re-evaluate how learning is assessed (Murgatroyd, 2018). This includes not only a transformation of how academic institutions assess, but also, how they recognize learning. It does not require the industry to throw everything that has been established for more than a century out the door, but rather find ways to enhance what currently exists. ODBs have made it possible to view skills and the knowledge of individuals with a specificity that has never existed before. They provide a view to the inner potential and capacity of learners and help to answer the question of what an individual is capable of doing because they have proof of it which can be shared. The application in the models discussed in this chapter bear witness to their efficacy and advantages over more traditional credentials. The coming obsolescence of transcripts is both a symbol and a tangible reality of the changes at play—changes caused by demographics, technology, the place in society of higher and continuing education, and the way we think and learn (Matkin, 2018). ODBs are forcing us to look critically at the environment for learning in modern society, how learning is transformed into knowledge, and how that knowledge is certified and attributed to individuals. Academic institutions that adjust and evolve through this change, will find new opportunities in better serving the learner of tomorrow.

REFERENCES Abramovich, S., Schunn, C., & Higashi, R. (2013). Are badges useful in education?: It depends upon the type of badge and expertise of learner. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(2), 217–232. doi:10.100711423-013-9289-2 Ahn, J., Pellicone, A., & Butler, B. S. (2014). Open badges for education: What are the implications at the intersection of open systems and badging? Research in Learning Technology, 22. Advance online publication. doi:10.3402/rlt.v22.23563 Borrás-Gené, O. (2018). Use of digital badges for training in digital skills within higher education. Simposio Internacional de Informática Educativa, 8. Advance online publication. doi:10.29007/2pb3 Bowen, K., & Thomas, A. (2014). Badges: A Common Currency for Learning. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 46(1), 21–25. doi:10.1080/00091383.2014.867206 Carey, K. (2012, April 8). A Future Full of Badges. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/A-Future-Full-of-Badges/131455

8

 Open Digital Badges

Carey, K. L., & Stefaniak, J. E. (2018). An exploration of the utility of digital badging in higher education settings. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(5), 1211–1229. doi:10.100711423018-9602-1 Casilli, C., & Hickey, D. (2016). Transcending conventional credentialing and assessment paradigms with information-rich digital badges. The Information Society, 32(2), 117–129. doi:10.1080/01972243 .2016.1130500 Davies, R., Randall, D., & West, R. E. (2015). Using Open Badges to Certify Practicing Evaluators. The American Journal of Evaluation, 36(2), 151–163. doi:10.1177/1098214014565505 DeMillo, R. (2017, May 30). This Will Go on Your Permanent Record! How Blockchains Can Transform Colleges in a Networked World. Retrieved December 1, 2019, from The EvoLLLution website: https:// evolllution.com/programming/credentials/this-will-go-on-your-permanent-record-how-blockchains-cantransform-colleges-in-a-networked-world/ Devedžić, V., & Jovanović, J. (2015). Developing Open Badges: A comprehensive approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 603–620. doi:10.100711423-015-9388-3 Dyjur, P., & Lindstrom, G. (2017). Perceptions and uses of digital badges for professional learning development in higher education. TechTrends, 61(4), 386–392. doi:10.100711528-017-0168-2 eCampusOntario. (2017). Tracking Online and Distance Education in Canadian Universities and Colleges: 2017. Retrieved from https://onlinelearningsurveycanada.ca/ Elliott, R., Clayton, J., & Iwata, J. (2014). Exploring the use of micro-credentialing and digital badges in learning environments to encourage motivation to learn and achieve. In B. Hegarty, S. K. Loke, & J. McDonald (Eds.), Rhetoric and Reality: Critical perspectives on educational technology (pp. 703–707). Proceedings Ascilite Dunedin. Fields, E. (2015). Making Visible New Learning: Professional Development with Open Digital Badge Pathways. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research, 10(1). Advance online publication. doi:10.21083/partnership.v10i1.3282 Gooch, E. (2019). Micro-Certifications. Retrieved October 16, 2019, from ECampusOntario website: https://www.ecampusontario.ca/micro-certifications/ Ho, M. (2018). Executives Say Growth Is Ahead for Learning Technologies. TD: Talent Development, 72(12), 9–9. Hrastinski, S., Cleveland‐Innes, M., & Stenbom, S. (2018). Tutoring online tutors: Using digital badges to encourage the development of online tutoring skills. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 127–136. doi:10.1111/bjet.12525 Ippoliti, C., & Baeza, V. D. (2017). Using digital badges to organize student learning opportunities. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship, 29(4), 221–235. doi:10.1080/1941126X.2017.1378541 Jones, W. M., Hope, S., & Adams, B. (2018). Teachers’ perceptions of digital badges as recognition of professional development: Teachers’ perceptions of digital badges. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(3), 427–438. doi:10.1111/bjet.12557

9

 Open Digital Badges

Khalil, M. K., Williams, S. E., & Hawkins, H. G. (2018). Learning and study strategies correlate with medical students’ performance in anatomical sciences. Anatomical Sciences Education, 11(3), 236–242. doi:10.1002/ase.1742 PMID:28940743 Kuhmonen, A., Pöyry-Lassila, P., & Seppälä, H. (2018). Open badges: Experiences from a game development skills open badge co-creation process. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, 307–315. Lewington, J. (2019, April 10). University students can now earn badges to recognize their merits—Macleans.ca. Retrieved April 12, 2019, from https://www.macleans.ca/education/university-students-cannow-earn-badges-to-recognize-their-merits/ Malczyk, B. R. (2019). Self-care: There’s a badge for that. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 29(1), 76–84. doi:10.1080/10911359.2018.1476198 Matkin, G. W. (2018). Alternative Digital Credentials: An Imperative for Higher Education. Research and Occasional Papers Series (ROPS), 1–8. Matturro, G. (2013). Soft skills in software engineering: A study of its demand by software companies in Uruguay. 2013 6th International Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (CHASE), 133–136. 10.1109/CHASE.2013.6614749 Murgatroyd, S. (2018). ALBERTA 2030: Four possible futures for educational change. ATA Magazine, 98(4), 8–11. Murgatroyd, S. (2019). Recent Developments in Assessments. In D. Singh & M. Makhanva (Eds.), Essays in Online Education: A Global Perspective (p. 231). Unisa Press. Raish, V., & Rimland, E. (2016). Employer Perceptions of Critical Information Literacy Skills and Digital Badges. College & Research Libraries, 77(1), 87–113. doi:10.5860/crl.77.1.87 Rimland, E., & Raish, V. (Eds.). (2019). Micro-credentials and digital badges. Library Technology Reports, 55(3), 1–34. Tomić, B., Jovanović, J., Milikić, N., Devedžić, V., Dimitrijević, S., Đurić, D., & Ševarac, Z. (2019). Grading students’ programming and soft skills with open badges: A case study: Grading programming and soft skills with badges. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(2), 518–530. doi:10.1111/ bjet.12564 Young, J. R. (2012). “Badges” earned online pose challenge to traditional college diplomas. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 58(19), A1–A4.

ADDITIONAL READING Ady, K., Kinsella, K., & Paynter, A. (2015). Digital Distinction: Badges Add a New Dimension to Adult Learning. Journal of Staff Development, 36(4), 24–27.

10

 Open Digital Badges

Boyer, B. (2018). Badges for Information Literacy: Not Just Digital Stickers. Teacher Librarian, 45(5), 22–26. Brauer, S., Korhonen, A.-M., & Siklander, P. (2019). Online scaffolding in digital open badge-driven learning. Educational Research, 61(1), 53–69. doi:10.1080/00131881.2018.1562953 Brauer, S., Siklander, P., & Ruhalahti, S. (2017). Motivation in Digital Open Badge-Driven Learning in Vocational Teacher Education. 25. Buckwalter, V. (2017). Four Ways to Increase the Value of Short-term Credentials: A Guide for Community Colleges. Buckwalter, V. (2018, March 16). Why It Takes a Village to Boost Industry Demand for Short-Term Credentials. The EvoLLLution. https://evolllution.com/programming/credentials/why-it-takes-a-villageto-boost-industry-demand-for-short-term-credentials/ Carrillo, D. L., García, A. C., Laguna, T. R., Magán, G. R., Olalla, A. A., & Moreno, J. A. L. (2018). Game Based Learning in Laboratory Practice. Proceedings of the European Conference on E-Learning, 322–328. Cheng, Z., Watson, S. L., & Newby, T. J. (2018). Goal Setting and Open Digital Badges in Higher Education. TechTrends, 62(2), 190–196. doi:10.100711528-018-0249-x Chiang, F.-K., Chang, C.-H., Hu, D., Zhang, G., & Liu, Y. (2019). Design and Development of a Safety Educational Adventure Game. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(3), 201–219. doi:10.3991/ijet.v14i03.9268 Chow, C., & Otto, N. (2014, March 11). Recognizing Learning with Digital Badges. Design Principles Documentation Project. http://dpdproject.info/reports/recognizing/ Cluff, C. (2018). Micro-credentially. Education Canada, 58(1), 14–17. Coleman, J. D. (2018). Engaging undergraduate students in a co-curricular digital badging platform. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 211–224. doi:10.100710639-017-9595-0 Devedzic, V., Jovanovic, J., Tomić, B., Sevarac, Z., Milikic, N., Dimitrijevic, S., & Durić, D. (2015). Grading soft skills with open badges. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 1358, 24–29. Diaz, V., Finkelstein, J., & Manning, S. (n.d.). Developing a Higher Education Badging Initiative. 11. Ding, L. (2019). Applying gamifications to asynchronous online discussions: A mixed methods study. Computers in Human Behavior, 91, 1–11. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.09.022 Fanfarelli, J. R., & McDaniel, R. (2017). Exploring Digital Badges in University Courses: Relationships between Quantity, Engagement, and Performance. Online Learning, 21(2), 144–165. doi:10.24059/olj. v21i2.1007 Fong, J., Janzow, P., & Peck, D. K. (n.d.). Demographic Shifts in Educational Demand and the Rise of Alternative Credentials. 24. Freifeld, L. (2017). Badge Benefits. Training (New York, N.Y.), 54(5), 20–25.

11

 Open Digital Badges

Gallagher, S. (2019a, September 20). How the Value of Educational Credentials Is and Isn’t Changing. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/09/how-the-value-of-educational-credentials-is-andisnt-changing Gallagher, S. (2019b, September 20). How the Value of Educational Credentials Is and Isn’t Changing. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2019/09/how-the-value-of-educational-credentials-is-andisnt-changing Garnett, T., & Button, D. (2018). The use of digital badges by undergraduate nursing students: A threeyear study. Nurse Education in Practice, 32, 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2018.06.013 PMID:29981502 Gee, E., & Gee, J. P. (2017). Games as Distributed Teaching and Learning Systems. Teachers College Record, •••, 22. Gee,J.P.(2013).GamesforLearning. EducationalHorizons,91(4),16–20.doi:10.1177/0013175X1309100406 Gee, J. P. (2018). Affinity spaces: How young people live and learn online and out of school. (cover story). Phi Delta Kappan, 99(6), 8–13. doi:10.1177/0031721718762416 Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., & Knight, E. (2015). Digital badges in education. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 403–410. doi:10.100710639-013-9291-7 Hamari, J. (2017). Do badges increase user activity? A field experiment on the effects of gamification. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 469–478. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.036 Hensiek, S., DeKorver, B. K., Harwood, C. J., Fish, J., & Shea, O. (2017, January/February). Digital Badges in Science: A Novel Approach to the Assessment of Student Learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 46(3), 28–33. doi:10.2505/4/jcst17_046_03_28 ICDE. (2019). The Present and Future of Alternative Digital Credentials (ADCs) (p. 54). https://static1. squarespace.com/static/5b99664675f9eea7a3ecee82/t/5d9b348abf558c7eaa1c298f/1570452628204/ ICDE-ADC%2Breport-January%2B2019%2B%28002%29.pdf Itow, R. (2014, March 11). Assessing Learning in Digital Badge Systems. Design Principles Documentation Project. http://dpdproject.info/reports/assessing/ Jirgensons, M., & Kapenieks, J. (2018). Blockchain and the Future of Digital Learning Credential Assessment and Management. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 20(1), 145–156. doi:10.2478/ jtes-2018-0009 Kapp, K. M. (2012). Games, Gamification, and the Quest for Learner Engagement. T+D, 66(6), 64–68. Kyewski, E., & Krämer, N. C. (2018). To gamify or not to gamify? An experimental field study of the influence of badges on motivation, activity, and performance in an online learning course. Computers & Education, 118, 25–37. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.006 Lindstrom, G., & Dyjur, P. (2017). From Student to Instructor: Reflections on Receiving and Issuing Digital Badges for Educational Development. Transformative Dialogues. Teaching & Learning Journal, 9(3), 1–4.

12

 Open Digital Badges

Lippman, L. H., Ryberg, R., Carney, R., & Moore, K. A. (2015, June). Key soft skills that foster youth workforce success. Child Trends. https://www.childtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/201524WFCSoftSkills1.pdf Moore, A. (2018). Do you have a badge for that? TD: Talent Development, 72(2), 23–25. Mozilla. (2018, August 15). An Update on Badges and Backpack. Read, Write, Participate. https://medium.com/read-write-participate/an-update-on-badges-and-backpack-5a06fab252ea O’Byrne, W. I., Schenke, K., Willis, J. E., & Hickey, D. T. (2015). Digital Badges: Recognizing, Assessing, and Motivating Learners In and Out of School Contexts. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 58(6), 451–454. doi:10.1002/jaal.381 Parker, H. E. (2015). Digital Badges to Assess Bloom’s Affective Domain. The National Teaching & Learning Forum, 24(4), 9–11. doi:10.1002/ntlf.30031 Rimland, Emily1. (2019). The Making of a Microcredential: Penn State University Libraries evaluates badge steps with help from artificial intelligence. American Libraries, 50(1/2), 22–23. Schenke, K., & Tran, C. (2014). Motivating Learning with Digital Badges. Design Principles Documentation Project. http://dpdproject.info/reports/motivating/ Sitra, O., Katsigiannakis, V., Karagiannidis, C., & Mavropoulou, S. (2017). The effect of badges on the engagement of students with special educational needs: A case study. Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 3037–3046. doi:10.100710639-016-9550-5 Voogt, L., Dow, L., & Dobson, S. (2016). Open badges: A best-practice framework. 2016 SAI Computing Conference (SAI), 796–804. 10.1109/SAI.2016.7556070 Williams, S. A., Liyanagunawardena, T., R., & Scalzavara, S. (2017). Open badges: A systematic review of peer-reviewed published literature. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 20(2), 1–16. Yildrum, S., Kaban, A., Yildrum, G., & Celik, E. (2016). The Effect of Digital Badges Specialization Level of the Subject on the Achievement, Satisfaction and Motivation Levels of the Students. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 15(3), 169–182. Youssef, Y. (2015). Gamification in E-Learning. Unpublished. doi:10.13140/rg.2.1.4613.4162 Ziegler, A. (2019). Framework + digital badges = online instruction for today. Journal of Library & Information Services in Distance Learning, 13(1–2), 235–241. doi:10.1080/1533290X.2018.1499262

13

 Open Digital Badges

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Academic Transcript: A copy of a student’s permanent academic record, which confirms all courses taken, grades received, honors received, and degrees conferred to a student throughout their period with a particular institution. Alternative Digital Credentials: A digital equivalent of a traditional paper-based credential which can be easily shared and embedded in online platforms. Hard Skills: Specific knowledge and abilities required for success in a specific job. These skills are typically identified in the requirements of the job. Micro-Credentials: A competency-based digital form of certification. Typically issued for a variety of learning experiences that validate developing skills and acquiring knowledge. Micro-Learning: The design of small learning units and short-term learning activities. Open Digital Badges: A verifiable, portable digital indicator with embedded metadata about skills and achievements earned that can be shared on various online platforms. Soft Skills: Personal qualities that permit someone to interact effectively and harmoniously with other people. Examples include teamwork, problem-solving, critical thinking, empathy, collaboration, etc. Traditional Credential: An attestation of qualification, competence, or authority issued to an individual by an academic institution (i.e., diploma, bachelor degree, certificate, etc.), available in printed form.

14

15

Chapter 2

Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment Nidia Cerna McMaster University, Canada Daniel Piedra https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0636-4238 McMaster University, Canada Heather Pollex McMaster University, Canada Nathalie Vallee McMaster University, Canada

ABSTRACT This chapter provides a summary of the design and implementation of experiential learning at McMaster University’s Continuing Education Unit within the Human Resources Management Program between its initial launch in 2017 through 2020. The chapter highlights the evolution of the model, its challenges, and improvements over the three-year period through which three versions of the experiential learning project were adapted and improved. The chapter concludes with recommendations for institutions who may be considering the adoption of experiential learning for online adult audiences in post-secondary education. Among the recommendations identified are, to provide clear expectations of the work and roles required by students, industry partners, and instructors. To create a tight-knit design and an implementation team, to provide sufficient training to instructors who will facilitate the process of work-integrated learning, and to adopt an attitude of continuous improvement.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch002

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

INTRODUCTION Experiential learning can be described as knowledge that arises out of reflection from an experience, leading to purposeful action in order to test out theories that arise out of this reflection (Cano, 2005). Dewey (1938), Mezirow (1981), and Freire (2000), among others, emphasized that the core of all learning lies in the way we process experiences, in particular, how one reflects on a particular experience. Kolb (1984) developed the most established model of experiential learning. The model begins with an experience (“concrete experience”), followed by reflection (“reflection observation”). The reflection is then integrated into a theory (“abstract conceptualization”), and finally, these new (or reformulated) hypotheses are tested in new situations (“active experimentation”). The model reflects a recurring cycle which individuals encounter throughout formal and informal learning wherein a learner tests new concepts and modifies them as a result of the reflection and conceptualization (Cano, 2005). Experiential learning has become an important aspect of enhancing the engagement of learners in all levels of education (Piedra, 2019). Active and collaborative learning, participation in challenging academic activities, formative communication with academic staff, involvement in enriching educational experiences and, feeling legitimated and supported by learning communities are the five elements that form the basis of the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), an annual survey conducted among public and private higher education institutions in the United States and Canada (Beer et al., 2010) aimed at measuring student engagement. The Australasian Survey of Student Engagement (AUSSE) adds experiential or work-integrated learning in measuring student engagement (Coates, 2010). These six elements form the foundation of instructional design of courses at McMaster University Continuing Education, a philosophy that has guided the development and design of new courses and programs since 2016. This chapter explores the ongoing development of online experiential learning as one of the drivers of learner engagement from 2017 through 2019, within the Human Resources Management Diploma program.

LITERATURE REVIEW The literature points to several benefits of experiential learning. First, it makes learning more relatable to students. Students build on what they already know and are provided with opportunities to make connections between new concepts and existing ones. For the experience to be truly valuable, reflection on the experience, as well as application (Clark et al., 2010) is necessary. Experiential learning also facilitates a more direct link between theory and practice. Students have the chance to engage in the experience and practice what they have learned, see the application of the theoretical concepts in practice, process that application, and make generalizations. According to McKenzie (2013), education needs more experiential learning to restore a balance to school learning that has drifted more and more to theory and traditional assessments such as tests and exams. While there is a place for such learning, experiential learning focuses on “doing”, often outdoors and in groups, a vital solution to childhood and adolescent lifestyles that are increasingly virtual, insular, and lacking in social relations. McKenzie (2013) reiterates his strong belief that “some of the great challenges of our times, such as environmental degradation and the cultural clashes in globalization, need to be experienced to be fully grasped” (p. 24).

16

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

Experiential learning also increases student engagement by encouraging collaboration while providing interaction with professionals who can supplement and enhance the learners’ understanding of a particular topic (Cupit et al., 2014; Scogin et al., 2017). Further, experiential learning leads to the development of skills for lifelong learning by assisting in the acquisition of essential skills and encouraging students to reflect, conceptualize, and plan for next steps. Research by Bohn & Schmidt (2008) has shown that the metacognitive skills that students utilize while participating in experiential learning allow them to assess their true level of understanding and mastery of the subject matter. In terms of the validity of experiential learning as compared to more traditional assessment methods, Scogin et al. (2017) found a positive relationship between the experiential program and students’ enjoyment of school and growth in social skills. Students who engaged in experiential learning demonstrated acceptable progression on standardized tests and matched up favorably with their peers in traditional classrooms. For McMaster University, experiential learning provides a means for students to gain relevant work experience. Experiential learning allows students to acquire real-life experiences that promote success within the workforce both before and after graduation. This can play a positive role in reducing the graduate underemployment issue (Wilson & Mackie, 2018) by better preparing learners for the workforce as well as enhancing their ability to contribute to economic growth and prosperity. This can be achieved by increasing the time spent in work-integrated learning opportunities for students.

BACKGROUND Why an Experiential Learning Project? In Spring 2017, the Human Resources Management program, a long-standing certificate program offered by McMaster University Continuing Education went through a curriculum review process. Courses within this program had been designed to meet the requirements of the Human Resources Professional Association of Ontario (HRPAO) which mandated that student learning in each course be evaluated through a heavily weighted final exam. This final exam had proven to be stressful to students, timeconsuming for instructors, and a massive administrative endeavor for office staff. In 2017, the HRPAO eliminated the requirement for a final exam, thereby opening the opportunity to explore an alternative instructional design and correspondent assessment strategies as part of the upgrading and revision of all courses in the program. The curriculum reviewers recognized that most continuing education students fell into three categories: recent graduates entering the workforce, new immigrants seeking Canadian work experience, and mid-career professionals looking for a career change or advancement in their field. Based on student demographics and an extensive review of the literature, it was determined that the incorporation of a workplace integrated experiential learning project within some of the Human Resources Management courses would be of most benefit to continuing education students. Working in groups with an industry partner to complete a real-life project would enhance student engagement and provide students with the opportunity to apply theory learned in the course to an authentic company situation rather than a fictitious, text-based case study. Such a project would also help students develop employability skills

17

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

such as collaboration and teamwork, increase their networking opportunities, and expose them to online collaboration tools.

Partnering with Riipen In order to move forward with the plan to incorporate experiential learning, it was necessary to find a way to secure industry partners willing to work with groups of continuing education students. For McMaster University Continuing Education instructors or staff to find such partners would have been both costly and time-consuming. After much deliberation, it was decided to explore building a relationship with Riipen Networks Inc. (Riipen), a Vancouver-based company that provides a ready-made online platform that connects students and educators with companies seeking help with a real-time workplace issue.

How Does Riipen Work? The Riipen platform is accessible to instructors, students, and industry partners alike. The process begins with the instructor designing a final assignment that is aligned to the course learning objectives and involves working with an industry partner to address a specific, time-limited workplace challenge. The assignment is posted on the Riipen site where potential industry partners can review it and, if interested, can submit a project proposal for review and approval by the instructor. After further analysis and negotiation between the instructor and industry partner, the approved project becomes the final assignment for the course and is made accessible to students registered in the course. Students, working in groups, communicate with the industry partner throughout the course and submit their final work via the Riipen site. The industry partner provides the student groups with feedback on their work, while the instructor assigns an academic grade based on a pre-established rubric.

IMPLEMENTATION In 2017, McMaster University Continuing Education became the first university continuing education unit in Canada to partner with Riipen. This partnership began with the development and delivery of two pilot courses that concluded with an experiential learning project in the Human Resources Management Program during the Fall 2017 term. Based on initial positive feedback, this same program revised two additional courses to incorporate an experiential learning project as the course final assessment. By the end of the 2018/2019 academic year, experiential learning projects had been introduced into two other programs: Marketing and Web Design. In the 2019/2020 academic year, experiential learning projects expanded further into the Digital Marketing and Big Data Analytics programs. By Winter 2020, a total of 10 courses included an experiential learning project, with most of these courses being offered across three terms. Since the partnership’s inception, McMaster University Continuing Education has connected with 63 industry partners and more than 1,500 students have worked in teams to complete a workplace-related project.

18

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

Making it Happen: A Team Effort To implement experiential learning into online courses, the experiential learning team included program managers, instructors, and instructional designers who worked together with an experiential learning coordinator to make the development and implementation of these projects a journey of continuous improvement. The experiential learning coordinator liaises with program managers, familiarizes instructors with the Riipen platform and provides them with ongoing support as they adapt to a new way of teaching. She also posts all experiential learning assignments on the Riipen platform each term and works closely with company representatives to streamline processes for both students and instructors alike. Program managers are responsible for identifying courses suitable for an experiential learning project, managing change concerning student expectations and the role of the instructor, and for reviewing evaluation feedback from students and instructors. The instructor creates the assignment, reviews industry project submissions, liaises with potential industry partners to negotiate the final details of the project, manages group dynamics, and grades the final project deliverable. The instructional designer collaborates with the instructor to incorporate an experiential learning project within a given course, develops supporting resources for both instructors and students, and makes course revisions based on feedback provided by students and instructors.

Continuous Improvement Journey To incorporate an experiential learning project into the instructional design of the Human Resources Management online courses, the experiential learning team at McMaster University Continuing Education designed an experiential learning project model that has since gone through three iterations to address the main challenges identified by all stakeholders: balancing course workload, implementing experiential learning strategies for effective online learning, and managing group dynamics within an online environment.

METHODS Between each iteration of the experiential learning project model, feedback was gathered from students, instructors, and industry partners. The student feedback was gathered through mid- and post-course online evaluation surveys with an average return rate of 20-25%. The evaluation survey asked students for ratings on questions related to course delivery, online course resources, and instructor performance. Students were also prompted to submit written comments. Questions relating to the experiential learning project focused on workload balance, access to and clarity of project information, industry partner relationship, group communication, group learning, and division of labor amongst group members. The instructor feedback was gathered on an ongoing basis and at the end of each course through email and phone conversations with the program manager and experiential learning coordinator. As the pool of instructors grew, video conferencing sessions were held including the experiential learning team and up to seven instructors. During that session, every aspect of the experiential learning project was reviewed. Formal feedback was difficult to obtain from industry partners. However, informal feedback was received from industry partners, primarily through the instructors.

19

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

Experiential Learning Project Model: Version 1.0 The first version of the experiential learning project was deployed during the Fall 2017 and Winter 2018 terms as pilots in two Human Resources Management program courses. In its first version, the experiential learning project simply replaced the final exam in the course which accounted for 40% of a student’s grade. The grade for the experiential learning project was awarded to the group. Although the experiential learning project was introduced into the course to replace the exam, all other course assessments remained the same and each student accumulated their marks through discussion posts, quizzes, and smaller assignments. Students began working on the experiential learning project at week six of their 13-week course and worked on the project for seven weeks as they completed other course learning activities and assignments. McMaster University’s learning management system randomly assigned students to their experiential learning project groups of five students. Each group selected a project lead who was responsible for communicating with the industry partner on behalf of the group. Students were given instructions for accessing the project on the Riipen platform, completing each component of the experiential learning project, and submitting their final experiential learning project assignments. Students were provided with rubrics that outlined the grading expectations. As they worked in their groups, students were required to complete three components of the experiential learning project: 1. Interim report (10%) due at week 8 2. Final report (25%) due at week 11 3. Peer evaluation (5%) due at week 12 The interim report outlined the group’s progress to date and served as a first draft for the final report. Students were to identify the key background facts about the organization as well as the main challenges the organization faced. They were then expected to apply course concepts to the industry partner’s situation. As part of the assignment, they were asked to identify any challenges their group had faced and suggest potential ways to address those challenges. After receiving feedback from the instructor regarding their draft report, the students were to incorporate any necessary revisions, identify recommended solutions for each of the industry partner’s challenges, and then develop an action plan for the industry partner to follow. The project leads submitted their final reports to the instructor who graded them and forwarded the five best reports to the industry partner. The industry partner was asked to share their feedback with the instructor and each of the groups. All students were required to individually submit a confidential peer evaluation in which they rated each of their group members on a scale of 0 to 5 according to a performance rubric. Students were assessed on their participation in the group, the timeliness of the work they submitted, the quality of the work they submitted and their communication with their team members.

Feedback on Version 1.0 At the end of the Fall 2017 term, the experiential learning team reviewed the student post-course evaluations and gathered instructor feedback. Many written comments related specifically to the group experiential learning project. Although most students enjoyed the courses overall, many of the comments were negative. The main complaints centered around the weight of the experiential learning project, 20

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

work/study/life balance, difficulty working in groups online, and technical issues related to the use of the Riipen platform in addition to using McMaster University’s learning management system. Concerning the 40% weighting of the experiential learning project, students felt it unfair that the grade was dependent on the group submission, even though it included a 5% peer review component. Some students felt that they were penalized for poor quality work contributed by those who did not actively engage in the project and that individual effort was not being recognized as all team members received the same grade regardless of their participation or quality of their contribution. This point was summarized by one student’s comment below: As an online class, group reports are not practical in the best situations, and only having 5% of a grade be attributed to Peer Evaluation is grossly disproportionate, allowing some students to coast and not contribute. The concept of having a group report completed in a class discussing OB [Organizational Behaviour] concepts is not lost on me, what is lost is why it’s necessary? It provided no value other than contributing distress. Nobody should be hamstrung by other students. We don’t share GPAs, […]. Either remove the group requirement or increase the Peer Evaluation % so it is sufficient enough to discourage lack of effort, tardiness and poor quality. (McMaster University, HRM 821 C22 Course Evaluation, December 2017). Instructors also found challenges with the rubric for the experiential learning project in that there was nothing to capture the behaviors of non-participating students. Another issue related to the weighting of the experiential learning project was the number of work students had to dedicate to completing the project compared to the percentage of the course grade allocated to the project. In reviewing the student evaluations and after chatting with the instructors involved, it became apparent that the experiential learning project was very time consuming during the semester. Instructors suggested we increase its weight to balance the effort to grade ratio. Difficulty maintaining work/life/study balance was identified in the student feedback. Given that most continuing education students are adult learners with many other life priorities, it was apparent that courses with the experiential learning project added extra demands compared to those courses without an experiential learning project. A student in the HRM 821 C21 course stated that “The workload was three or four times that of other courses I’ve taken at McMaster.” (McMaster University, HRM 821 C21 Course Evaluation, April 2018). Another student noted: The course was well paced but it was a heavier workload than all the other classes I have taken. In itself, it is not an issue but when taking more than one course at a time as well as work, it did become a little hard to keep up. I would recommend that the course workload be noted. Other than that, it was a great and informative class. (McMaster University, HRM 821 C21 Course Evaluation, December 2017). The instructors provided the same feedback as the students for the weighting of the project as well as the time commitment required to complete it successfully. Instructors also noted that many groups had difficulties working together online and needed more support in organizing themselves, planning their project, and navigating online collaboration tools, and suggested revisions to the experiential learning project structure and timing of deliverables. The last theme generated through the comments in the student evaluations was related to technical issues in operationalizing the project. Students were using the McMaster University learning management 21

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

system for regular course work as well as the Riipen platform specifically for accessing the experiential learning project and communicating with the industry partner. Students were also using other online tools of their choosing to collaborate with their group members. One student commented: “IT platform: for an online group report [...] portal was completely unnecessary it was an additional layer with no added value. The facilitator used a work email anyways” (McMaster University, HRM 821 C22 Course Evaluation, December 2017). In general, students also mentioned having difficulties connecting and communicating effectively to produce a good quality report. One student said: The final [...] project had many issues for our group. It took one week to get everyone logged into the group project […] due to technical issues apparently on their end which required technical support. Our group then had communication issues with three methods being used until I requested that only emails were used. We then chose to use Google docs to work on the project since it could easily be shared however then had technical issues related to getting signed in and group members using never having used it before. More time was spent on some of these issues in the early stages which took away from the project. (McMaster University, HRM 821 C21 Course Evaluation, April 2018). The instructors also echoed these sentiments. They also mentioned spending some of their time addressing technical difficulties which they were not equipped to facilitate. In all, the feedback gathered was considered and shared with the experiential learning team members who reviewed more closely the structure of the experiential learning project, course design, and the entire learning experience. Some quick changes were made for the Spring 2018 term courses. The team then worked closely together during the term, along with the instructors to design an enhanced version of the experiential learning project framework to be implemented in the existing courses and new courses launched in Fall 2018.

Experiential Learning Project Model: Version 2.0 The second version of the experiential learning project model addressed the issues identified previously by instructors and students. It was deployed in the Fall 2018 term and used for two additional terms. Based on the premise that many students who had registered in courses with an experiential learning project were completely unaware of the requirements for group work and online collaboration, the experiential learning team took steps to address student expectations before registration. The program manager partnered with internal marketing specialists to increase the information available to students, thereby enabling them to make an informed decision before registering. Additionally, instructional designers developed instructor and student guides with step-by-step instructions for completing the tasks required to fulfill the requirements of the experiential learning project as well as the use of the two online platforms necessary for engaging in the project. Basic templates for submitting each experiential learning project component were also developed. To support communication during course delivery, each course incorporated live online sessions during which instructors provided information and answered student questions before and after each deliverable of the experiential learning project. These sessions were scheduled one at the start of the experiential learning project and another one before the interim report was due. Some instructors were able to include the industry partner in their webinars hoping to eliminate some of the repetitive questions received from 22

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

the student groups. A third synchronous meeting was organized between the instructor and each group before the final report was due so that each group could connect with the instructor privately and get answers to their specific questions. Webex Teams, a communication tool that allows for text messaging and exchange of files, was also added to the course as an optional tool to facilitate student collaboration. To achieve a more balanced workload for students, the course timeline and assessment strategy were revised. While the course content remained the same, the experiential learning team experimented with the starting time of the project. Some courses started the experiential learning project on the 2nd or 3rd week allowing students to work on the project throughout a course; other courses focused on allowing students to study the course content during the first eight weeks and then work solely on completing the project in the last five weeks of the course. In both formats, the number of other assessments (discussions, quizzes, small assignments) was reduced to account for the heavy time commitment required by the experiential learning project. In version 2.0, the weighting of the experiential learning project was increased to 50% of the final course grade and was once again awarded to the entire group. This weight increase was meant to recognize the group effort that the experiential learning project demands. For a 13-week course, the experiential learning project was structured into four deliverables: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Group contract (5%) due at week 2 Interim report (15%) due at week 7 Final report (25%) due at week 13 Peer evaluation (5%) due at week 13

In this version, the experiential learning project also included a group contract as the first deliverable. The group contract was designed to help the group identify a project lead, define roles and responsibilities, and determine the first steps for completing the experiential learning project.

Feedback on Version 2.0 Upon delivery of version 2.0, the experiential learning team proactively reached out to industry partners to gather their thoughts on the process, the students and the deliverables. As more instructors were working with experiential learning projects, feedback came from instructors teaching a variety of subjects within different programs. This supplemented the feedback that students provided via course evaluations, which were rich in both positive and negative comments. Students commented that they enjoyed working with an industry partner on a project in a real work setting. Some students also mentioned enjoying the group work experience as it differentiated those courses from other typical courses they took. A student commented that “the experiential learning project is great because of the experience other team members have as I can learn from them as well” (McMaster University, HRM 821 C21 Course Evaluation, December 2018). Others, however, commented again on difficulties working in groups as seen in Version 1.0. Interestingly, after the weight value of the project was increased to match the time and effort required, some students complained that a weight of 50% was “too high”. A student mentioned that they “agree that group projects are very important, however, I feel the portion of the course 50% is too much regarding not all team members are giving the same amount of effort” (McMaster University, HRM 902 C21 Course Evaluation, December 2018). Another student expressed “This has been extremely frustrating 23

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

and stressful as 50% of my mark in this course is this group project” (McMaster University, HRM 897 C21 Course Evaluation, December 2018). Finally, students also expressed having issues connecting with industry partners. One student commented: I feel the industry partner X are lacking in communicating with the students and not being specific enough of what they are looking for. Our group has been meeting online for 4 weeks now and we have not progressed beyond the group contract and mostly that is because we are being held up by our contact at X by not responding to our questions or taking a week or more to respond. We are also not progressing because we feel X is not answering our questions or providing enough specific information for us to work with to start coming up with a plan or they have provided very vague information. (McMaster University, HRM 821 C21 Course Evaluation, December 2018). Although this situation is not typical of all projects with an industry partner, the experiential learning team did find that some partners were more responsive and engaged than others and this has, in turn, impacted the quality of the students’ learning experience. Industry partners also shared some of their feedback with instructors and the experiential learning coordinator. They expressed that they were happy to receive such great quality reports from McMaster University students and that they were given several ideas to explore that they had not thought of previously. They also enjoyed the relationship they built with McMaster University Continuing Education and many have submitted projects for other McMaster University courses as a result. Industry partners also enjoyed the opportunity to participate in a webinar with the class to share information about their organization and to explain their project requirements in greater detail. Feedback from industry partners indicated that, despite their participation in a webinar session with the students, they were still receiving too many questions from all the groups, and some were the same questions. Some industry partners also commented on the unprofessional communication style of some of the students with whom they had interacted. They also commented on the unrealistic expectations some students had for email response time and availability to connect. Overall, instructors enjoyed facilitating their experiential learning project courses. They enjoyed developing a relationship with an industry partner and allowing students to have real-world experiences outside their traditional lecture and class activities. They felt that they were able to engage differently with their students and liked being able to experience new technologies and pedagogies as part of the course. Some issues were also identified. They mentioned sometimes having issues securing partners in advance of the course start date. Stress levels increased significantly when industry partner proposals were submitted to instructors at the last minute. Instructors also mentioned that the experiential learning project courses required a lot of time vetting potential industry partners ahead of the course and preparing the project and assignment templates for each partner project. When it came to their interaction with students, instructors found themselves dealing with group dynamic issues and having to support groups in their collaboration efforts. Given that the courses were mostly offered online, the conflict between students often played out as a “he says/she says” situation. Instructors often felt that they had to be ‘detectives’ as they tried to gather information or data to support lower marks for individuals that did not complete their work in their groups. Overall, analyzing the feedback from students, industry partners and instructors, the experiential learning team determined that, although several aspects of the experiential learning project had been 24

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

improved, there were still elements requiring change. This led the experiential learning team to further refine processes and revise the assignment templates used for the various experiential learning project components.

Experiential Learning Project Model: Version 3.0 The many challenges of working in groups within an online environment guided the re-design of the experiential learning project to support organization, planning, communication and accountability amongst group members. The third version of the experiential learning project model was deployed in the Spring of 2019. Strictly structured, version 3.0 incorporated detailed instructions for students to follow as they worked on each experiential learning project component, templates to develop the project, and rubrics for each deliverable of the experiential learning project to ensure effective group work, effective learning through experience and clear expectations for assessment. It maintained the three scheduled live online instructorled sessions to address students’ questions about the experiential learning project. Most importantly, individual marks were allocated not only to the peer evaluation but also to a self-reflection component that recognized individual contribution to the group as well as individual learning. The experiential learning project was structured into four deliverables: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Group contract (5%) due week 4 Project plan (5%) due week 6 Draft report (15%) due week 9 Final report (25%) due at week 12 (or at the end of the course)

Figure 1 illustrates the four experiential learning project deliverables and the issues they address as part of the implementation of a selection of instructional strategies for effective group work. Figure 1. Experiential Learning Project Model - Version 3.0

During the first week of the course, all students in the class are expected to introduce themselves in the discussion forum that is open to them in the learning management system and to describe their academic background as well as some of their interests, strengths, and weaknesses. Having a better understanding of how peers may contribute to a group assignment, students are asked to self-enroll in a group.

25

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

The first component of the experiential learning project is the group contract. Once in a group, students identify their fellow members, their contact information, their availability, their individual goals for the group project, their strengths and weaknesses in terms of group collaboration, and their preferred communication channels. They then select a project lead. As a group, students determine how the group will work together to complete the experiential learning project, how they will manage conflict within the group and what their immediate tasks and responsibilities should be. After reaching a consensus on how the group will work, members develop the project plan as their second deliverable in the experiential learning project. In this assignment, students are required to identify specific tasks for project completion, due dates for each task, individual group member responsibilities, and proposed group meeting dates. By adding the project plan to this version, the experiential learning team hoped to help groups communicate more thoroughly around their deliverables and identify their responsibilities and expectations of each other early on. This would hopefully set the tone for better group collaboration. The draft report assignment includes three sub-parts. First, it requires a group of students to apply new knowledge from the course to address a client’s needs. This part of the draft report varies per course and is designed by each instructor based on the industry partner’s requirements. The second part of the draft report invites students to evaluate the group’s dynamics (e.g., openness, trust, attitudes, decisionmaking, flexibility, and participation). By evaluating the group dynamics, both the instructor and group members can identify early on any issues that are best addressed at this point (e.g., lack of participation or collaboration on the part of any individual group member). This group evaluation component is to be completed as a group and agreed upon by all group members. Finally, the third part of the draft report is the peer evaluation that allows students to evaluate their fellow group members. This evaluation is confidential between the instructor and the individual student and provides instructors with information indicating when a student may require additional support with the course content or with managing team dynamics and relationships with their peers. The experiential learning project concludes with the final report, which also includes three sub-parts. First, it requires the incorporation of any feedback about the draft report that the instructor has provided. At the same time, students continue applying the new knowledge gathered towards the end of the course so they can complete the project successfully. In this section, they are asked to detail the issues at hand for the industry partner, their recommendations for improvement, and plan of action. The second part of the final report requires each student to write a reflection paper about their experience in the experiential learning project and their contribution to the group. This reflection allows students to evaluate what they did, what they learned, and how they would do things differently in the future. The third part of the final report is a peer evaluation that allows students to evaluate one another in the group for a second time. This adds to the information that instructors use to grade student performance.

Feedback on Version 3.0 The changes made in version 3.0 of the experiential learning project did generate improvement in the experience of students in those courses. Group issues were still present, but they no longer dominated the comments in the course evaluations. Although specific groups encountered team dynamic issues, most of these were readily addressed by the group itself. There was also a shift in the comments when it came to the work/life/study balance of students. This time, students complained more about the work

26

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

required in the course as being demanding and not the experiential learning project itself. Comments received from students were generally more positive. One student said: This by far was my favorite online course. I liked the structure. I liked the readings as they were practical and current. I like the overall content and how it was organized. I like the idea of a group experiential project. The flow and structure were excellent. [The instructor] provided input and feedback as required. She was responsive to our inquiries. (McMaster University, HRM 897 C21, Course Evaluation, July 2019). One observation made at this stage in the refinement of the experiential learning project is that the success and positive experience of students in the class is highly related to the exchanges with industry partners. When an industry partner is responsive, clear on their projects and forthcoming with useful information, students have a better experience in the course. One student commented: Overall, I enjoyed the course quite a bit and enjoyed the experiential learning project. I was really happy with the communication and interaction with the industry partner. It was a much better experience than what I have had compared to previous courses. (McMaster University, HRM 897 C21, Course Evaluation, December 2019). Students do not want to disappoint their partners and are seeking more opportunities to connect with the industry contacts, as this student explains: The experience felt mostly like a school project rather than a partnership in working with a client. Disappointing that the Draft was mainly for instructor overview and not shared with client for further collaboration especially since we were asked to pose further questions on the draft. – More interaction is needed with Industry partner that is not just via one project leader and a few emails. Suggestions: Perhaps they can attend the monthly calls at each stage of project. Please provide Draft marks & feedback prior to the Final report web meeting. - Allow predetermined amount of time with each group to review draft report in a web meeting to clarify any outstanding items - Feedback needs to be more detailed to further assist the student improve their work. Feedback was still too vague even after asking for more to build confidence that our group was proceeding in the right direction. (McMaster University, HRM 897 C21, Course Evaluation, July 2019). Instructors will need to build those opportunities and to set expectations with industry partners ahead of the course start to ensure that meaningful relationship occurs between student groups and the industry partners. Another observation from version 3.0 is that the assignment and projects developed between the industry partner and the instructor are at times confusing for students. Aside from the instructional design of the experiential learning project, each industry partner must come forth with a project which entails a real-work challenge for which they seek recommendations. When the industry partner has a good grasp of what they are looking for, it is easier for students to work on helpful recommendations. Some industry partners can be vague, and students have found this to be confusing. The assignments tied well into the course content, but the group project was confusing. The outline for the group project did not showcase the purpose of the project - to critique a Training and Development

27

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

program currently used by an organization and apply the ADDIE model (and other course work/theories) to suggest improvements. After the first online webinar my group still did not fully understand the purpose of the assignment. […] Fundamentally the group project was an example of problem-based learning which is challenging when individuals do not understand the very premise of the material. (McMaster University, HRM 902 C21, Course Evaluation, December 2019). The lack of knowledge in the area of study while working on a project seems to be problematic for students, especially when trying to understand the project. The stress students expressed may be related to the fact that the project is now introduced in week 2 of the course, at a time when the course content has been barely covered. One student commented: We aren’t really sure what we’re supposed to be doing, or at least I’m not. There are guidelines […] and the organization contact, but as we are just learning the material, and in most cases, not even through the modules yet, it’s difficult to apply what we are learning when we may not have even learned it yet! I feel a lot of pressure to impress the company we are “working” for, but I would like to receive more concrete information on how to proceed; obtaining this information from the company contact and the professor has proven difficult. (McMaster University, HRM 902 C21, Course Evaluation, July 2019). Moving forward, instructors will need to clarify the project further as well as manage the stress that students feel as they work on the project and learn the course material. As mentioned above, the overall feedback was positive following version 3.0, and it will be gathered in subsequent terms as work with industry partners continues. Version 3.0 has proved to be well received by students and more manageable for instructors to facilitate. The purpose of the experiential learning project was to provide a work-related project that integrates academic content with real-world work experience and the experiential learning team believes it has achieved that purpose. The comment from this student confirms that statement: The format within the written structure of the experiential learning project, specifically the group, peer and self-evaluation and the weekly course content supports the same reflection and both are entirely transferable to my professional career as well as successful tools for me to bring to the organization I currently work for. The sources that [the instructor] has provided are current, relevant as well as cover multiple opinions to allow for variable paths for an organization. As group involvement has increased within organizations having these tools allows the opportunity to identify and then make improvements not only in the educational format but I can bring these directly into my workplace for the same opportunities. (McMaster University, HRM 897 C21, Course Evaluation, July 2019).

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Overall, the implementation of experiential learning at McMaster University Continuing Education has enabled a large number of students to interact with industry partners and educators resulting in a more meaningful and engaging learning experience. The design of courses led by the experiential learning team has been built on a foundation of key strategies aimed at increasing student engagement. Every effort is made to design courses that rely on active and collaborative learning opportunities, participation in challenging academic activities, formative communication with academic staff and industry practitioners, 28

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

and involvement in enriching educational projects. All the while, the design enables students to feel supported by learning communities of colleagues, instructors, and others who come into contact with a course. As previously indicated, these elements form the five foundational principles of the National Survey of Student Engagement (Beer et al., 2010). However, courses have also been developed with an eye to experiential or work-integrated learning. The opportunity to include this experiential learning drives learning to a new level in what Young (2002) refers to as concrete experience which provides a solid foundation for the learning process; techniques that provide students with “hands-on” activities. However, such activities must be complemented with reflective observation and abstract conceptualization or “minds-on” exercises (Young, 2002) to complete the learning cycle which provides meaningful conceptual understanding (Kolb, 1984). The additional activities built around the experiential learning projects implemented by McMaster University over a series of project versions created a solid combination of “hands-on” and “minds-on” activities. The implementation of experiential learning across three years and the respective versions have identified several take-away points for those institutions that seek to implement similar experiential learning models. One of these is the need to provide clarity around all project requirements. Although technology surrounds everything one does in society, it should never be taken for granted that adult learners will feel comfortable in group work, particularly when asked to interact virtually. Individuals must be coached through the proper use of technology and group dynamics. It should also be noted that an experiential learning project will take a great deal of time and effort which must also be considered in properly balancing workload for adult learners. The success of an initiative of this magnitude must also rely on teamwork from the many stakeholders who have a part to play in the design and delivery of experiential learning. In the case of McMaster University Continuing Education, this includes instructional designers, learning technicians, program managers, an experiential learning coordinator, vendors (if applicable), industry partners, and the many instructors who will be called upon to navigate the process and lead learners through it. The key to the preparation of instructors is training as they will be asked to teach in a very different way from what one may be used to. The instructor becomes a facilitator of a work-integrated learning experience and must serve as a coach and motivator. In implementing an experiential learning model, it is also important to develop a system for continuous feedback and improvements. All innovative and solutions-focused ideas should be considered to improve the process throughout multiple versions. In looking back, McMaster University Continuing Education model has continually evolved, and it is the work of many which drove solutions and improvements to the experiential learning project process. The team demonstrated a willingness to improve every aspect of the experience while demonstrating excellent collaboration. It is an ongoing process that requires constant attention to improvement, and which must be sustainable for more than one rendition of the experience.

29

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

REFERENCES Beer, C., Clark, K., & Jones, D. (2010). Online Student Engagement. Proceedings Ascilite Sydney, 2010, 75–86. Bohn, D. M., & Schmidt, S. J. (2008). Implementing Experiential Learning Activities in a Large Enrollment Introductory Food Science and Human Nutrition Course. Journal of Food Science Education, 7(1), 5–13. doi:10.1111/j.1541-4329.2007.00042.x Cano, J. (2005). Creating Experiential Learning. Academic Press. Clark, R. W., Threeton, M. D., & Ewing, J. C. (2010). The Potential of Experiential Learning Models and Practices In Career and Technical Education & Career and Technical Teacher Education. Journal of Career and Technical Education, 25(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.21061/jcte.v25i2.479 Coates, H. (2010). Development of the Australasian survey of student engagement (AUSSE). Higher Education, 60(1), 1–17. doi:10.100710734-009-9281-2 Cupit, J., Jones, M., & Greer, R. (2014). Implementing Experiential Learning in an Introductory Fashion Merchandising Course. Review of Higher Education and Self-Learning, 7(24), 43–51. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Simon and Schuster. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed). Continuum. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience As The Source Of Learning And Development (Vol. 1). Prentice-Hall, Inc. McKenzie, M. (2013). Rescuing Education: The Rise of Experiential Learning. Independent School, 72(3), 24–28. Mezirow, J. (1981). Critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education, 32(1), 3–24. doi:10.1177/074171368103200101 Piedra, D. (2019). Experiential Learning Model for Online and F2F Programs in University Continuing Education. Handbook of Research on Innovative Pedagogies and Best Practices in Teacher Education, 276–290. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-9232-7.ch016 Scogin, S. C., Kruger, C. J., Jekkals, R. E., & Steinfeldt, C. (2017). Learning by Experience in a Standardized Testing Culture: Investigation of a Middle School Experiential Learning Program. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(1), 39–57. doi:10.1177/1053825916685737 Wilson, M., & Mackie, K. (2018). Principles of Experiential Education. Learning by Doing: Experiential Education in Post-Secondary Education. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/adultedpseee/chapter/ typologies-and-principles/ Young, M. R. (2002). Experiential Learning=Hands-On+Minds-On. Marketing Education Review, 12(1), 43–51. doi:10.1080/10528008.2002.11488770

30

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

ADDITIONAL READING Bevan, D., & Kipka, C. (2012). Experiential learning and management education. Journal of Management Development, 31(3), 193–197. doi:10.1108/02621711211208943 Bolick, C. M., Glazier, J., & Stutts, C. (2020). Disruptive Experiences as Tools for Teacher Education: Unearthing the Potential of Experiential Education. Journal of Experiential Education, 43(1), 21–36. doi:10.1177/1053825919877212 Bosworth, K. (1994). Developing Collaborative Skills in College Students. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 59. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp. 25-31. doi:10.1002/tl.37219945905 Burnard, P. (2013). Teaching Interpersonal Skills: A handbook of experiential learning for health professionals. Springer. Caffarella, R. S., & Barnett, B. G. (1994). Characteristics of adult learners and foundations of experiential learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1994(62), 29–42. doi:10.1002/ ace.36719946205 Chan, C. K. Y. (2012). Exploring an experiential learning project through Kolb’s Learning Theory using a qualitative research method. European Journal of Engineering Education, 37(4), 405–415. doi:10.1 080/03043797.2012.706596 Fowler, J. (2008). Experiential learning and its facilitation. Nurse Education Today, 28(4), 427–433. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2007.07.007 PMID:17881093 Gilbert, B. L., Banks, J., Houser, J. H. W., Rhodes, S. J., & Lees, N. D. (2014). Student Development in an Experiential Learning Program. Journal of College Student Development, 55(7), 707–713. doi:10.1353/ csd.2014.0072 Gross, Z., & Rutland, S. D. (2017). Experiential learning in informal educational settings. International Review of Education, 63(1), 1–8. doi:10.100711159-017-9625-6 Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2000). Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory and Its Application in Geography in Higher Education. The Journal of Geography, 99(5), 185–195. doi:10.1080/00221340008978967 Hesterman, S. (2016). The digital handshake: A group contract for authentic elearning in higher education. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(3), 1–24. Hills, H. (2001). Team-Based Learning. Gower. Hu, C. X. J., Abraham, A., Mitra, A. K., & Griffiths, S. M. (2016). The benefits of experiential learning in global public health. Public Health, 136, 196–199. doi:10.1016/j.puhe.2015.10.030 PMID:26715320 Kayes, A. B., Kayes, D. C., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Experiential learning in teams. Simulation & Gaming, 36(3), 330–354. doi:10.1177/1046878105279012 Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. doi:10.5465/ amle.2005.17268566

31

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). The Learning Way: Meta-cognitive Aspects of Experiential Learning. Simulation & Gaming, 40(3), 297–327. doi:10.1177/1046878108325713 Kuk, H.-S., & Holst, J. (2018). A Dissection of Experiential Learning Theory: Alternative Approaches to Reflection. Adult Learning, 29(4), 150–157. doi:10.1177/1045159518779138 Lewis, L. H., & Williams, C. J. (1994). Experiential learning: Past and present. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1994(62), 5–16. doi:10.1002/ace.36719946203 Miettinen, R. (2000). The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey’s theory of reflective thought and action. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 54–72. doi:10.1080/026013700293458 Oakley, B., Felder, R. M., Brent, R., & Elhaji, I. (2004). Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning, 2(1), 9–34. Pulsford, D. (1993). The reluctant participant in experiential learning. Nurse Education Today, 13(2), 139–144. doi:10.1016/0260-6917(93)90031-V PMID:8502206 Reynolds, M. (1994). Groupwork in Education and Training. Kogan Page. Simons, L., Fehr, L., Blank, N., Connell, H., Georganas, D., Fernandez, D., & Peterson, V. (2012). Lessons Learned from Experiential Learning: What Do Students Learn from a Practicum/Internship? International Journal on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(3), 325–334. Stevenson, S., & Hannaford, J. (2019). Workplace-Integrated Learning: Preparing tomorrow’s academic library workforce. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 45(3), 234–241. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2019.03.001 Tofade, T., Samimi-Gharai, M., & de Bittner, M. R. (2016). Strategies to grow an experiential learning program—The role of administrators. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching & Learning, 8(3), 429–436. doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2016.02.016 PMID:30070252 Williams, K., Woolliams, M., & Spiro, J. (2012). Reflective Writing. Palgrave MacMillan. doi:10.1007/9780-230-37724-0 Yardley, S., Teunissen, P. W., & Dornan, T. (2012). Experiential learning: Transforming theory into practice. Medical Teacher, 34(2), 161–164. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.643264 PMID:22288996 Young, M. R. (2002). Experiential Learning = Hands – On + Minds - On. Marketing Education Review, 12(1), 43–51. doi:10.1080/10528008.2002.11488770

32

 Improving Experiential Learning in the Online Environment

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Assessment: Involves the use of tools or methods to measure student learning. Continuous Improvement Process: Refers to ongoing efforts to improve a product, service, or process through incremental changes. Employability Skills: Transferable or “soft” skills that employers view as desirable in an employee. Evaluation: Refers to the systematic review of a process or initiative to determine areas for future improvement. Experiential Learning: The process whereby students are immersed in an experience and then encouraged to reflect on that experience to develop new knowledge, skills, or attitudes. Group Dynamics: Refers to the processes, both behavioural and psychological, that occur when members of a group interact. Industry Partner: Refers to a company that collaborates with an instructor to create a work-related project that enables students to gain real-world work experience. Work-Integrated Learning: The process whereby students learn through a combination of academic and work-related experiences.

33

34

Chapter 3

Inquiry-Based Learning in Action:

Theory and Practice in Higher Education Leeann M. Lower-Hoppe The Ohio State University, USA Shea Brgoch The Ohio State University, USA Yung-Ju Chen The Ohio State University, USA Sue Sutherland The Ohio State University, USA

ABSTRACT Inquiry-based learning is a pedagogical strategy that shifts learning from an instructor-focused transfer of knowledge to learner-focused construction of knowledge. Based upon theoretical propositions that knowledge is constructed through social experiences, inquiry-based learning promotes greater understanding and integration of content. With instructors increasingly expected to utilize innovative teaching strategies and diversify the traditional lecture format, inquiry-based learning can cultivate complex learning experiences. This chapter reviews the theory of inquiry, experiential learning theory, and theory of social constructivism and describes the primary tenets of inquiry-based learning to provide theoretically grounded, evidence-based suggestions for instructors. Design, implementation, and evaluation of inquiry-based learning is discussed through examples of problem-based, project-based, and case-based pedagogical techniques. Outcomes and challenges of delivering inquiry-based lessons are presented as well as directions for future research to continue advancing educational practices.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch003

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

INTRODUCTION Guided by the renowned Confucius statement, “I hear and I forget, I see and I remember, I do and I understand”, this book chapter presents inquiry-based learning as an innovative, non-traditional educational practice. In higher education, instructors are increasingly called to move away from the traditional lecture format and towards innovative pedagogy that capitalizes on emerging techniques to engage diverse learners (Garrison & Kanuka, 2004). Although pedagogical buzzwords such as experiential learning and active learning are suggested with the best of intentions (Manning et al., 2017), instructors are faced with the challenge of integrating content delivery and active instructional strategies intended to enhance pedagogy. Difficulties associated with implementing innovative, non-traditional educational practices include integrating multiple learning models, resigning control of the classroom, designing complex learning experiences, and the underlying limitation of an instructor’s workload and time (Lower-Hoppe et al., 2019). This chapter is intended to address these barriers by providing a theoretically grounded, evidence-based review of inquiry-based learning in action. Inquiry-based learning is grounded in experiential learning and constructivist theories, with the primary tenet of constructing knowledge through social experiences (Dewey, 1938). Within an inquiry-based learning classroom, the instructor role shifts from disseminating information to facilitating learner-centered experiences (Albion, 2015). Inquiry-based learning can be implemented within the classroom through a variety of approaches, including problem-based, project-based, and case-based learning strategies (Prince & Felder, 2007). Compared to the traditional didactic instructional approach, inquiry-based learning results in deeper understanding, greater integration of content, and translation of theory to practice (Justice et al., 2009). Through inquiry-based learning strategies, instructors can transform education. The chapter first reviews foundational theory guiding inquiry-based learning to explain how knowledge is socially constructed. Subsequently, the chapter reviews relevant scholarship pertaining to the scope, characteristics, outcomes, and challenges of inquiry-based learning to clarify the learning strategy. Upon review of the literature, the chapter proposes problem-based, project-based, and case-based pedagogical techniques - with examples from the authors’ implementation of those techniques - to enhance instructors’ design, delivery, and evaluation of inquiry-based learning. Lastly, the chapter concludes with recommendations for research to prompt future action.

BACKGROUND Tracing the evolution and foundational tenets of John Dewey’s Theory of Inquiry (1910, 1938) – the theoretical underpinning of inquiry-based learning – points to the central contribution of Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory (1984) and Vygotsky’s Theory of Social Constructivism (1978, 1986). The following section reviews these progressive theories guiding inquiry-based learning. The theoretical review explains how knowledge is created through inquiry and set the foundation for instructors to translate theory to practice.

Experiential Learning Theory David Kolb’s book Experiential Learning (1984) is a widely recognized, classic tome for experiential learning theory. Kolb (1984) cites John Dewey, Kurt Lewin, and Jean Piaget as the founding fathers of 35

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

experiential learning. In the 1930s, Dewey (1938) called for a ‘progressive approach’ to education, recognizing “an intimate and necessary relation between the processes of actual experience and education” (p. 20). His model of reflective thought and action outlines a process for learning in which the learner interacts with the physical and social environment (primary experience) and reflects upon artifacts from the interaction (secondary experience) to gain new knowledge. According to Dewey (1938), experience can be broadly conceived and involve “interaction between the self and another person, the material world, the natural world, an idea, or whatever constitutes the environment at hand” (Rodgers, 2002, p. 846). Moreover, Dewey (1916) proposes an experience can create a state of perplexity and disequilibrium within the learner – as the meaning of the experience has yet to be established – driving the learner to reflective thought and action to achieve equilibrium, initiating the experiential learning process. Lewin’s research on group dynamics in the 1940s extended the concept of experiential learning through his laboratory-training method that incorporated “T-Groups” (T = Training) – later to be recognized as the original experiential learning groups (Seaman et al., 2017). Through a workshop method, Lewin’s training program used different configurations of small groups (T-Groups) to facilitate discussion and psychodramatic role-play related to social conflict (Lippit, 1949). Lewin’s T-Groups collectively engaged the learning process by defining the social problem, formulating a plan for solving the problem, determining the first step to implement the plan, practicing skills needed to carry out the plan, and then evaluating the problem-solving activity (Miettinen, 2000). The interactions that took place within the T-Groups served as the concrete experience from which to develop human relations skills for the purpose of resolving future social conflict. Experiential learning continued to evolve in the 1950s through Piaget’s work on cognitive developmental processes in childhood. Piaget’s (1953) theory of cognitive development proposes intelligence is not innate, rather humans must construct their own knowledge through their interaction with the environment. Moreover, knowledge is constructed through a process of assimilation and accommodation (Powell & Kalina, 2009). The learner assimilates their interactions with the environment by organizing their experiences into existing mental schemas and accommodates their interactions with the environment by modifying existing schema to integrate new information gained from their experiences (Yardley et al., 2012). Through assimilation and accommodation, the learner can achieve equilibrium and make sense of their experiences. Kolb’s experiential learning theory (1984) provides the most recognized definition of experiential learning: “the process by which knowledge is created through the transformation of experience, [and] knowledge results from the combination of grasping and transforming experience” (p. 41). Kolb (1984) developed a cycle of experiential learning that portrays four modes of learning to grasp an experience (modes: concrete experience, abstract conceptualization) and transform the experience (modes: reflective observation, active experimentation). Within the learning cycle, the learner experiences, reflects, thinks, then acts in a recursive process that is responsive to the learning environment. The cycle begins with the learner’s involvement in a concrete experience that serves as the basis for reflective observation. Upon reflecting on and observing their experience, the learner assimilates their experience into abstract concepts from which new knowledge forms. The knowledge then can be actively tested and serve as a guide for future experiences. Ultimately, experience is the vehicle for inquiry-based learning.

36

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Theory of Social Constructivism Social constructivism comes under the umbrella of constructivism but emphasizes the social nature of learning. Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky is considered the father of social constructivism through his work in the 1920s and 30s. Vygotsky (1978) believed that learning cannot be separated from the social context and that knowledge is co-constructed through dialogue and interaction with others. Thus, within social constructivism, language, culture, and social interaction is of vital importance in the cognitive development of individuals. Vygotsky (1986) argued that language develops in a social environment and is the basis of the co-creation of knowledge and learning. Vygotsky (1978) believed all “higher functions originate as actual relationships between people” (p. 57), and was interested in the role of teachers and peers in the learning process as they co-constructed knowledge through conversation, questioning, and negotiated understanding (Fosnot & Perry, 2005). Learning is considered a process of active knowledge construction that cannot be separated from the social environment in which it occurs (Woolfolk, 2012). Vygotsky (1978) stated each function in a “child’s cultural development appears twice: first, on the social level, and later on the individual level” (p. 57). Differentiating between these levels, Vygotsky believed knowledge is co-constructed with others and occurs inter-psychologically while learning occurs intra-psychologically as it happens internally in each individual, although it may occur through collaboration. In other words, learning occurs at the individual level as a product of knowledge that has been co-created in a social environment. An integral part of Vygotsky’s social constructivism is his concept of the zone of proximal development (ZPD), which he defined as, “the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problemsolving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (1978, p. 86). He further distinguished between the two levels of development, elaborating that actual development is the level the learner has already reached, and potential development is the level the learner is capable of reaching. The level of potential development is where learning takes place (Vygotsky, 1978). Thus, understanding an individual’s ZPD in relation to specific concepts of content provides a “dynamic perspective on their capabilities but also can serve to guide teaching” (Moll, 2014, p. 34). Alt (2014) suggested three tenets of a contemporary social constructivist learning environment in higher education: constructive activity, teacher-student interaction, and social activity. •

•

•

Constructive activity is concerned with the process of learning to learn, and is comprised of the following ideas: ◦◦ learning occurs during “sustainable participation in inquiry practices focused on the advancement of knowledge” (p. 4) ◦◦ learning experiences should be authentic ◦◦ providing multiple perspectives and representations of content ◦◦ incorporating learner’s prior knowledge Teacher-student interaction involves structuring the environment to highlight the student’s internal control rather than the teacher’s external control for learning. Concepts such as developing meta-cognition, using scaffolding, and promoting reflection on learning processes are important in this tenet. Social activity recognizes that learning is a social activity with the interaction between a student’s existing knowledge and the social situation of the learning environment (Vygotsky, 1978). 37

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Learning environments that are grounded in these three tenets are strongly aligned with the theory of social constructivism.

Theory of Inquiry John Dewey’s theory of inquiry can be traced back to his seminal book How We Think (1910), later developed for the scientific context in his book Logic: The Theory of Inquiry (1938). According to Dewey (1938), “inquiry is the controlled or directed transformation of an indeterminate situation into one that is so determinate in its constituent distinctions and relations as to convert the elements of the original situation into a unified whole” (p. 108). Inquiry is the deliberate attempt to resolve a state of perplexity (Brown, 2012). Dewey’s theory of inquiry is two-dimensional, consisting of a sequence of inquiry (linear) and pattern of inquiry (circular; Burke, 1994). The sequence of inquiry starts with a situation, considered objects or events tied to a contextual whole (Festenstein, 2001). More simply, the situation consists of a person’s experience or interaction with the environment – which is why experiential learning is a foundational tenet of Dewey’s theory of inquiry. The situation is initially indeterminate – one that is “unclear, uncertain, ambiguous, doubtful, or precarious to what is going on and what is to be done” (Brown, 2012, p. 275-276). “Interdeterminancy” is the key characteristic of the situation that evokes the process of inquiry. Within the sequence of inquiry, to move from an indeterminate situation to inquiry requires recognition of the problematic situation and the decision to act – to resolve the perplexity through inquiry (Brown, 2012). Dewey conceptualizes inquiry as a complex pattern of stages (i.e., the pattern of inquiry). The pattern of inquiry involves: “(i) a felt difficulty; (ii) its location and definition; (iii) suggestion of possible solution; (iv) development by reasoning of the bearings of the suggestion; (v) further observation and experiment leading to its acceptance or rejection” (Dewey, 1997, p. 72). In the first stage, the learner questions conditions of the situation that inform the problem. The second stage prompts the learner to formulate a problem statement in which the indeterminant situation is specified. The third stage consists of the learner proposing ideas (or hypotheses) for solving the problem. The hypotheses are refined in the fourth stage, during which the learner positions the hypotheses in relation to relevant theories, conceptual frameworks, and facts. The fifth stage, concludes with the learner testing the hypotheses in the situation to determine effectiveness of the proposed solution. The pattern of inquiry is circular to accommodate rejected hypotheses (Dimova & Kamarska, 2015). If experimentation leads to hypothesis rejection, the leaner might need to circle back to the initial stages of inquiry to acquire new observations of the problem, revise the hypothesis, re-examine the facts, and test an alternative solution. The sequence of inquiry concludes once the pattern of inquiry has resulted in a judgment that resolves the problematic situation, moving the learner to a determinate situation. Judgment has “warranted assertability” as it not only alters the conditions of the situation, but also changes the learner’s beliefs, attitudes, and future interaction with the situation (Brown, 2012). A determinate situation does not necessarily constitute the end of the pattern of inquiry, as Dewey (1938) claims inquiry “institutes new environing conditions that occasion new problems,” therefore, “there is no such things as a final settlement” (p. 8).

38

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

CONCEPTUAL CONTROVERSY: WHAT IS INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING? One criticism of information delivery within the higher education classroom setting is that instructors frequently rely upon a lecture format. Disseminating large amounts of content in a condensed timeframe is certainly possible through the use of lectures. However, the effectiveness of this approach on student learning is lessened due to a lack of active engagement with the content (Wurdinger & Rudolph, 2009). A robust body of evidence, including several meta-analytic reviews (e.g., Freeman et al., 2014), supports utilizing student-centered approaches as opposed to exposition-centered, where the instructor serves as the source of information. Inquiry-based learning has gained traction in higher education as it is a student-centered approach that allows students to actively participate in the learning process (Loyens & Rikers, 2010).

The Scope of Inquiry-Based Learning Inquiry-based learning is defined in a variety of ways in the educational field (Spronken-Smith, 2010). For example, Keselman (2003) defines inquiry-based learning as educational scenarios where students design their own investigative activities to collect information, draw conclusions, and construct knowledge pertaining to a specific inquiry. For Prince and Felder (2007), inquiry-based learning is an inductive method in which the instructor posts a challenge, and students accomplish their desired learning by responding to the challenge through an inquiry process. Inquiry-based learning also can refer to a learning approach where students employ a variety of problem-solving skills to a particular problem (Pedaste & Sarapuu, 2006). A variety of terms are also used interchangeably with inquiry-based learning, such as inquiry-guided learning (Lee, 2012), inquiry learning (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007; Prince & Felder, 2006), and guided-inquiry (Prince & Felder, 2006). To further muddy the waters, inquiry-based learning has been conflated with other learning approaches. For example, some researchers believe inquiry-based learning and problem-based learning share similar characteristics but can be defined as two different approaches (Loyens & Rikers, 2010; Prince & Felder, 2006); others consider problem-based learning as a kind of inquiry-based learning (Lee, 2012; Levy, 2012; Spronken-Smith, 2010); still, others perceive inquiry-based learning has no clear boundary with problem-based learning (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). We assert problem-based, project-based, and case-based learning approaches are variations of inquiry-based learning (Prince & Felder, 2007), as they share characteristics of inquiry-based learning and adhere to the pattern of inquiry previously outlined in this chapter. Nevertheless, they are unique in their specific emphasis on certain features (Prince & Felder, 2007). In our work, we align with the perspectives of Lee (2012) and Levy (2012) in defining inquiry-based learning. Inquiry-based learning falls under the umbrella of inductive teaching and learning methods and is a form of active learning that encompasses pedagogical approaches where student inquiry guides the learning experience and knowledge construction (Lee, 2012; Levy, 2012). Inquiry-based learning, herein, includes a variety of learner-centered pedagogies that provide students with experiences in which they are actively engaged in an inquiry process. Therefore, it is an umbrella term for other pedagogies that have a more defined set of characteristics within the inquiry-based learning family (Lee, 2012; Levy et al., 2010). In other words, pedagogical approaches such as problem-, case-, and project-based learning are the subsets of inquiry-based learning (Levy, 2012).

39

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Characteristics of Inquiry-Based Learning The nature of inquiry-based learning as an umbrella term for a variety of different pedagogies necessitates a set of guiding principles. Spronken-Smith (2010) introduced the following five characteristics for inquiry-based learning: (a) learning initiated by a question or problem, (b) teaching is learner-centered and teacher-facilitated, (c) students learn through experiences (i.e., learning by doing), (d) self-directed learning is essential, and (e) students actively construct new knowledge. Loyens and Rikers (2010), on the other hand, proposed four steps in inquiry-based learning. First, the learning process starts with a research question that requires students to engage in investigation and data analysis in order to determine the answer. Second, the students’ role is to answer the inquiry question by searching for information, gathering data, analyzing the data, and constructing their own arguments based on the analyses. Third, the question may come from the students or the teacher. Fourth, the teacher’s role is to facilitate the inquiry process through the use of scaffolding. Based on the theoretical perspectives of experiential learning and social constructivism and the literature on inquiry-based learning, we propose the following three key characteristics for inquiry-based learning. Students are active learners and the center of instruction. The constructivist perspective of learning believes that students actively construct new knowledge and integrate new concepts with prior knowledge to enhance understanding of existing knowledge in the learning process (Bransford et al., 1999). Therefore, in student-centered instruction that facilitates active learning, the instructor should design learning tasks that are relevant and meaningful for students, empower students to self-direct the learning process, and encourage them to take responsibility for participating in the knowledge-construction and sense-making process through inquiry (Loyens & Rikers, 2010). Teachers create a scaffolded environment to facilitate student learning. As a social constructivist pedagogy, the instructor is the facilitator in inquiry-based learning (Lee, 2012). The instructor provides scaffolding to lead students through the ZPD (Berk & Winsler, 1995), where learning takes place (Vygotsky, 1978). A student’s ZPD is the difference between what tasks a learner can independently complete and those that can be completed through collaboration with a teacher and/or peer (Vygotsky, 1978). Scaffolding is necessary for inquiry-based learning since the process of inquiry includes a series of complex tasks (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). The instructor can establish a scaffolded learning environment through gradually progressive tasks, instructional guidance, facilitated discussions, peer support through group work, and expert models (Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007). Framing the problem or question. Inquiry-based learning begins with a problem or question to be solved (Loyens & Rikers, 2010; Spronken-Smith, 2010). Building the learner’s curiosity and interest in the topic is important to successfully set the stage for inquiry-based learning (Pedaste et al., 2015). Instructors should frame a question or problem that is: 1) meaningful for the learners, 2) requires a process of inquiry to obtain the answer or solution, and 3) leads to an open-ended answer or multiple possible solutions.

Outcomes of Inquiry-Based Learning Inquiry-based learning achieves multiple learning outcomes. Generally, this learning approach develops subject-related and interdisciplinary competencies, but also enables learning processes that are characterized by self-organization from learners. This self-organization requires students to progress through phases of analyzing learning tasks, selecting and implementing suitable learning strategies, and self40

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

reflecting on the outcomes (Wiemer, 2019). Through these processes, students exercise higher levels of independence and autonomy (Wiemer, 2019). By giving students control over aspects of their learning environment, inquiry-based learning promotes enhanced motivation and interest toward the subject matter (Wijnia et al., 2017), particularly when students’ needs, goals, and values are taken into consideration (Katz & Assor, 2007). Inquiry-based learning also presents meaningful tasks that are grounded in an applicable, real-life context. By using pedagogical strategies including problem-, project-, and case-based learning, students can master subject-matter content and acquire a variety of “soft skills” such as critical thinking, problemsolving, reasoning, communication, decision making, teamwork, taking responsibilities, and conflict resolution (Lee, 2012; Levy et al., 2010; Loyens & Rikers, 2010). Specifically, inquiry-based learning has been found effective in improving students’ learning achievement in science concepts (Minner et al., 2010; Wilson et al., 2010), science literacy and research skills (Gormally et al., 2009), and high-level reasoning and argumentation in science (Wilson et al., 2010). Moreover, inquiry-based learning has also been shown to develop cognitive skills such as metacognitive knowledge, self-regulated learning, critical thinking, reflection, and oral and written communication skills (Justice et al., 2007; SpronkenSmith & Walker, 2010).

Challenges of Inquiry-Based Instruction Despite apparent advantages of inquiry-based learning, some scholarship has criticized its efficacy, arguing these strategies introduce too much information for the cognitive processes to manage (Kirschner et al., 2006). According to cognitive load theory (Sweller, 2011), our cognitive structure includes working memory which manages conscious processing of information for storage and recall. Working memory has a limited capacity for processing new information, therefore, providing too much input overloads the working memory and minimizes the amount of material that is processed and transferred into longterm memory. Kirschner et al. (2006) suggested that conducting inquiry places higher demands on the working memory, leaving minimal capacity for novel information to be processed. Related to cognitive overload, another challenge associated with inquiry-based learning is determining the amount of instruction students should receive. Lazonder and Harmsen (2016) conducted a meta-analysis on 72 studies and concluded that guidance is a pivotal aspect of successful inquiry-based learning. As such, instructors must grapple with how much structure is necessary for an inquiry-based activity to successfully optimize learning outcomes, risking the possibility of providing inadequate guidance. Students may experience challenges adjusting to an inquiry-based learning approach compared to more traditional and familiar lecture formats. Additionally, the inquiry-based learning environment inherently assumes students have the foundational skills to develop an inquiry and pursue the knowledge necessary to formulate answers or solutions. Therefore, the learner’s age or previous knowledge can impact the efficacy of inquiry-based learning (Keselman, 2003). If a collaborative learning environment is required to complete inquiry-based learning tasks, students may also experience difficulties with group dynamics and expectations (Plowright & Watkins, 2004). Finally, there are concerns about practical and logistical difficulties associated with incorporating inquiry-based learning into a curriculum as well as whether these tasks authentically simulate knowledge building (Aditomo et al., 2013).

41

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PRACTICE: APPLYING INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING Problem-Based Learning Pedagogy Problem-based learning (PBL) encourages students to take ownership of their learning by creating an environment that presents students with a problem and allows them to authentically find a plausible solution (Duncan & Al-Nakeeb, 2006). The problem is either student-driven based on their personal interests or developed by the instructor. Whether the instructor or students identify the problem, it should be characteristically ill-structured – meaning all relevant information to solve the problem is not initially available – and there is no singular method or approach to finding a solution (Chin & Chia, 2008; Stepien & Gallagher, 1993). Through these ill-structured problems, students learn basic concepts by engaging in real-life simulations instead of a “basics first” structure characteristic of passive learning environments (Marra et al., 2014). Historically, the implementation of PBL started in medical education at McMaster University in Canada. Advocates of PBL criticized the traditional medical curriculum for emphasizing memorization in a lecture format over developing clinical problem-solving skills (Marra et al., 2014). Educators at McMaster University began designing programming which placed students into small tutorial groups that interacted with simulated patients presenting complex medical problems. The students utilized patient interviews, records, and laboratory information to identify a diagnosis and prescribe a treatment plan (Torp & Sage, 2002). These early PBL curriculums reflect the characteristics and suggested steps of contemporary PBL learning environments. Generally, PBL takes place in groups with students assuming roles of individuals that have a real-life stake in the problem (e.g., doctors, historians, environmentalists). Students then drive learning using an iterative process of questioning, researching, evaluating the evidence, and synthesizing information (English & Kitsantas, 2013). These steps have been structured in several ways, for example, Mergendoller et al. (2006) organized the activities into three phases: (a) problem launch, (b) guided inquiry and solution creation, and (c) problem conclusion. Chin and Chia (2008) described a five-stage implementation process that introduced PBL into a 16-week class. The stages included: (a) identifying the problem, (b) exploring the problem space, (c) carrying out the scientific inquiry, (d) putting the information together, and (e) presenting the findings and conducting evaluations. Ultimately, there are several formats to guide the design of PBL activities. However, literature suggests there are underlying characteristics that must be considered in the development of PBL activities or curricula, as summarized by Torp and Sage (2002): •

•

42

A problem situation is presented first: Whether students develop the question through their own inquiry or instructors present the question, this step initiates the PBL process. By identifying a problem early, students can explore the problem space and identify what information they need to collect and understand to develop a proposed solution. Vital characteristics of the problem situation: The quality of the problematic situation influences effectiveness of the learning that takes place. Questions should be ill-structured and messy, prone to change as new information is accumulated, and not easily solvable. For example, Stepien and Gallagher (1993) highlighted PBL as an innovative strategy that challenged high schoolers to develop options for handling thorium waste in West Chicago. This problem was multi-faceted as the stakeholders involved had differing opinions and there were several health concerns to consider while developing solutions.

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

• •

•

Self-directed student learning: PBL activities are student-centered, allowing students to be active participants in the construction of their knowledge. Students should be given space to actively probe the problem, using the instructor as a resource when necessary. Facilitative learning role for instructors: The instructor should act as a cognitive and metacognitive coach that allows students to ask questions, encourages students to take ownership of the learning, and prompts students to explore what knowledge is necessary to construct solutions. Some questions instructors should consider asking are (a) What is going on here? (b) What do you need to know? (c) How can you find out what you need to know? (d) What have we done so far during the problem-solving process that has been effective? Authentic assessment and evaluation: In the process of presenting final findings and solutions, students should reflect on the overall learning process and outcomes (English & Kitsantas, 2013). Additionally, instructors should be aware that the type of assessment can shape how students engage in the learning process (Duncan & Al-Nakeeb, 2006). For example, if students are assessed using methods that rely entirely on fact recall or recognition, then the efficacy of PBL will be minimized. Students should be provided with opportunities to monitor their learning and adjust strategies as needed. Further, assessments should align with the intended learning outcomes of the PBL experience.

While PBL was developed within a discipline that naturally experiences clinical problem-solving, it is applicable to a wide range of settings. Through PBL, students face an opportunity to guide their own learning and realize real-time challenges that are not confined by a classroom. Furthermore, PBL will increase students’ motivation as they take accountability for their learning and achieve higherorder learning (Duncan & Al-Nakeeb, 2006). PBL also provides an opportunity to make learning more relevant and applicable (Torp & Sage, 2002). Despite the positive aspects of PBL, instructors may face challenges, particularly if they are uncomfortable transitioning to a learner-centered approach. Students also may initially struggle with this unfamiliar environment of directing their own learning (Duncan & Al-Nakeeb, 2006). Finally, many skills obtained through PBL might be intangible, making assessment through standardized formats difficult (Bell, 2010). Therefore, instructors need to be cognizant of developing assessments that are reflective of the PBL environment prior to implementation. Problem-based learning in practice. PBL can be applied at various levels, such as structuring a single class to include PBL or designing an entire curriculum around this pedagogical strategy. Implementation at the curricular level requires considerable coordination of learning objectives and principles across classes. To demonstrate its application in a single class, a project developed for a master’s level sport finance class is described using Chin and Chia’s (2008) five stages of implementation and tools for enhancing the PBL environment. Stage 1: Identifying the problem. This assignment simulates challenges athletic departments face when managing athletic budgets and allocations. The problem describes an athletic department at a fictitious university facing budget cuts. Students are tasked with determining what cuts to make from the department budget to minimize operating expenses by $800,000. Each cut is accompanied by an appropriate rationale that considers impact to individual teams and the entire athletic department as well as maintaining compliance with regulatory factors (e.g., Title IX). Stage 2: Exploring the problem space. Students get access to an Excel spreadsheet that provides a highlevel assessment of each program’s budget including general revenue, expenses, and profit num43

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

bers as well as participation and scholarship information. Line-item breakdowns for each team’s revenues and expenses are provided in addition to general notes about the productivity and history of the teams. Capital and administrative expenses are also highlighted to give a complete financial profile of the fictitious university. Students must determine which National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) regulations affect budgeting decisions. Stage 3: Carrying out a scientific inquiry: Given the scenario for this particular PBL activity, carrying out the scientific process is related to proposing budget cuts and then exploring real-time examples that mirror these actions to analyze how the university and team responded. Other possibilities for supplementing this phase of the activity could include scheduling interviews with industry professionals to gain insight into managing this type of situation. Stage 4: Putting the information together. After compiling information and weighing the advantages and disadvantages of different budget cuts, the students submit a final budget summary indicating each cut and corresponding rationale. An official memorandum template is written that informs staff members about budget changes and the need to schedule official meetings with the administrative staff. This part of the exercise simulates how to manage situations that adversely affect personnel. Stage 5: Presenting findings, teacher evaluation, and self-evaluation. Findings for this project can be presented only to the instructor and other class members. Alternatively, the audience for these presentations can be expanded to increase authenticity of the exercise. For example, instructors can reach out to athletic department staff and solicit willingness to participate on a panel that hears the budget cut presentations and provides feedback about the decisions and subsequent impact. Teaching and learning tools. The budgeting materials and Excel documents are the only teaching and learning tools specifically associated with this project. However, several suggested tools could supplement the process: • • •

Knowledge worksheet: A three-column log sheet that organizes information based on what students know, what students need to know to move forward, and what resources students can utilize to find this information. Project planner form: Allows students to record individual group member roles and expectations. Learning log: Charts what students want to find out, concepts that have been learned, and how these concepts are explored.

Chin and Chia (2008) suggested other tools for implementing an effective PBL activity in the classroom including: group problem statements if students determine the problem; project task allocation forms to distribute and track the workload; survey and interview guides for real-time, unofficial data collection; and assessment rubrics. For more information about how to design and implement PBL within higher education, please see the Additional Reading Section.

Project-Based Learning Pedagogy Project-based learning (PjBL) has been referred to as, “the theory and practice of utilizing real-world work assignments on time-limited projects to achieve mandated performance objectives and to facilitate individual and collective learning” (DeFillippi, 2001, p. 5). PjBL shares several characteristics with PBL. They are both student-centered instructional techniques that engage students in authentic, real-world 44

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

simulations. Frequently, the line between these two strategies blurs as they both place the student in a position to drive knowledge construction while the instructor plays a facilitative and supportive role instead of simply transmitting knowledge. Additionally, these strategies often organize students into collaborative units that are encouraged to seek multiple sources of information. Despite these commonalities, there are subtle differences between the two pedagogical techniques that help determine which approach is most useful in a particular discipline or setting. When considering PjBL and PBL, there are two continua that distinguish the approaches (Donnelly & Fitzmaurice, 2005). The first continuum is the final product that results from each process and the extent to which the process is organized around creating this final product. PjBL involves producing a more elaborate, tangible outcome that requires considerable planning and essentially shapes the learning process. PBL lies on the opposite end of the spectrum where the end products are summative and may simply report the group’s findings. Secondarily, PjBL begins with the end products in mind, and the learning process involves generating knowledge and content necessary to develop that product (Donnelly & Fitzmaurice, 2005). This distinction between the final outputs of PjBL and PBL is important for aligning individual class objectives with the most appropriate teaching strategy. Disciplines where the production process and developing product can cause problems to arise, such as engineering, benefit from a learning process that combines technical knowledge with contextual and social input to holistically develop skills (De los Ríos-Carmenado et al., 2015). Furthermore, representations of constructed knowledge that emerge from PjBL, also called artifacts, externally demonstrate emerging understanding beyond the classroom (Krajcik & Blumenfeld, 2006). The artifacts that result from PjBL can be aggregated into a portfolio that physically demonstrates skills to potential employers. Ultimately, one advantage of a PjBL assignment is developing case-specific knowledge, project management skills, and tangible output materials that can be easily transferred to a future job search. Project-based learning in practice. As instructors strive to implement innovative teaching strategies, they also capitalize on new technologies to promote student interest in the classroom, such as remote clickers, video streaming, or blogs (Armstrong et al., 2009). Podcasts are more prevalent in higher education as a method for instructors to disseminate course content and supplement face-to-face or online classroom experiences (Guertin, 2010). However, student-produced podcasts are becoming popular assignments as they can be applied to a diverse range of topics, and the production experience develops teamwork, communication, technical literacy, planning, and the ability to research and write a podcast script (Armstrong et al., 2009; Guertin, 2010). The following section describes the application of PjBL to a sport sociology class through a podcast project. Sport sociology classes offer fertile ground for podcasting projects with multiple topics that can be investigated through the development of podcasts, which simultaneously allow students agency over their topic. For this project students critically assess a current issue related to sport and society. Each podcast group is responsible for writing and recording a podcast that accomplishes the following: • • •

Highlights the history and current state of the chosen social issue Identifies the sociological issues present and whom they affect Proposes possible solutions to begin mitigating the issues

The assignment is scaffolded using a series of individual outputs throughout the semester. Scaffolding encourages students to collect resources throughout the semester and develop enough familiarity with the topic to create a cohesive script. These steps are as follows: 45

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

1. Topic abstract: Students identify an issue in the sport industry that is related to any of the sociological concepts discussed in class. Each group must submit a short abstract (i.e., 150 words) presenting their topic and explaining its relevance to the sport management industry. 2. Fact sheets: Students begin collecting information about their topic using a fact sheet template that prompts them to research the history of the issue, the primary constituents involved, and the current state of the issue. 3. Interview candidates: Students select individuals they ideally want to interview to gain additional insight on their topic and create a series of questions to ask in the interview. Students also explain how this interview supplements their final product. 4. Script draft: Students create a verbatim draft of the script prior to recording their final full-length podcast. 5. Final recording: Final recorded submissions are expected to be at least 30 minutes. Considering the emphasis on the final outcome, rubrics are a primary point of communication that instructors can use to clarify expectations for the final product. Instructors can establish clear evaluation criteria to make students aware of how their work will be assessed from the beginning of the project. Rubrics can be holistic - which evaluates student work based fully on the final product - or analytical - which divides the work into several components for evaluation. For more information about how to design and implement PjBL within higher education, please see the Additional Reading Section.

Case-Based Learning Pedagogy Case-based learning (CBL) has been described as the, “use of storytelling to engage students in the problems or dilemmas faced by the character(s) in the narrative, calling upon the students’ use of information gathering and decision-making skills in identifying key issues and postulating possible solutions” (Carder et al., 2001, p. 181). The Harvard Business School (n.d.) adopts the following CBL method definition: When students are presented with a case, they place themselves in the role of the decision-maker as they read through the situation and identify the problem they are faced with. The next step is to perform the necessary analysis – examining the causes and considering alternative courses of actions to come to a set of recommendations (para. 4). Considered a guided inquiry method, CBL promotes debate, discussion, and exploration in a structured context (Lee et al., 2009; Srinivasan et al., 2007; Thistlethwaite et al., 2012). The foundational component of CBL is the case, which serves as the vehicle for student inquiry, however, PBL is also a key component of CBL. The literature contends cases should be relevant to the real world, broadly applicable, complex, interesting, educational, and controversial, creating empathy with the case characters and promoting decision making (Carder et al., 2001; Demetriadis et al., 2008; Garvey et al., 2000; Thistlethwaite et al., 2012). Cases can range from a brief vignette illustrating a point to elaborate case studies with supplemental materials, such as visual aids, statistical data, charts and graphs (Thomas et al., 2001). Instructors can generate case ideas from news media, research, practitioners, clients, or everyday occurrences. There are also a number of sources that offer free access to case studies, such as the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science (NCCSTS) database which provides free access to over 500 case studies (Bonney, 46

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

2015). Scholarship has found the case problem itself plays a significant role in students’ motivation and engagement in the activity (Choi & Lee, 2009), therefore, instructors may consider current issues, hot topics, or real-life events to inform case selection. Cases may be delivered through text, video, audio, simulation, or student-generation, with cases in text format most widely adopted (Lee et al., 2009). Cases are traditionally associated with discussion questions to guide students’ review, analysis, and synthesis of the case and ensure the learning objectives are achieved (Carder et al., 2001; Thomas et al., 2001). Discussion questions draw students’ attention to important aspects of the case, facilitating the problem-solving process (Demetriadis et al., 2008). Question prompts associated with cases provide cognitive and metacognitive support for students, guiding the learning process. Scholarship has found including questions such as, “why …?”, “how are … and … alike?”, “what are the strengths and weaknesses of …?”, or “how does … affect …?” can facilitate a deeper level of critical thinking by eliciting explanatory responses (McDaniel & Donnelly, 1996). Students are encouraged to integrate their knowledge and prior experiences to analyze the case problem and explore solutions through discussion (Choi & Lee, 2009; Lee et al., 2009). Formative and summative assessment of the case-based discussion encourages student engagement and provides timely constructive feedback. Esteban and Cañado (2004) suggest selfevaluation, peer and instructor feedback, and evaluation of student journals or note-taking as appropriate methods of assessment for CBL. Instructors should assess individual preparation, group participation, individual productivity, and group productivity throughout the discussion (Yadav et al., 2007). The degree of structure needed for a case-based activity is dependent on the maturity, experience, size, and delivery of the class (Carder et al., 2001; Srinivasan et al., 2007). For example, instructors may want to utilize a closed case for first-year students in which all the information is supplied, compared to an open case for fourth-year or graduate students in which students are expected to gather information to solve the problem (Esteban & Cañado, 2004). For online courses, instructors may need to provide more detailed instruction, coach students throughout the activity, manage student interactions, and provide regular, timely feedback (Lee et al., 2009). Within case-based activities, there are no right nor wrong solutions or answers, nor necessarily a clear ending point to the problem-solving, what is most important is engaging in the process of inquiry (Choi & Lee, 2009). Most often case-based activities are facilitated in groups, with students working collaboratively to analyze the case problem from multiple perspectives, discuss all possible solutions, and propose the most viable solution (Thistlethwaite et al., 2012). The literature suggests small group sizes ranging from three to nine students for CBL activities (Carder et al., 2001; Esteban & Cañado, 2004). However, instructors can successfully implement CBL with larger groups by directing the group to identify key aspects of the case problem then divide into smaller groups based upon those aspects to collectively work towards a solution as an entire class. For class sizes greater than 100, instructors can use audience response systems (e.g., clickers) in which the case is presented to the class and individual students use a “clicker” to provide a response to associated question prompts (Herreid, 2011). An online learning environment may warrant students exploring cases individually, with students reviewing the case materials, declaring their position or solution to the case topic, and providing justifications (Herreid, 2011; Lee et al., 2009; Thistlethwaite et al., 2012). CBL narrows the gap between theory and practice by facilitating opportunities for students to apply their knowledge in a practical situation (Esteban & Cañado, 2004; Garvey et al., 2000; Thistlethwaite et al., 2012). Through engaging in CBL students improve their information literacy, critical thinking, problem-solving, reasoning, decision making, diagnostic, and communication skills, increasing their ability to handle complex, real-world problems outside the classroom (Choi & Lee, 2009; Garvey et al., 47

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

2000; Thomas et al., 2001). CBL can be used to supplement clinical or practicum experiences (Srinivasan et al., 2007; Thomas et al., 2001), as instructors expose students to a spectrum of scenarios and issues they might experience in the field within the confines of the classroom (Garvey et al., 2000; Thomas et al., 2001). Further, instructors can help students transfer their learning by facilitating reflection on when, why, and how they would apply the skills developed to other scenarios or similar problems they may encounter in the field (Carder et al., 2001; Demetriadis et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2009). Scholarship outlines several practical guidelines for instructors’ future practice: • •

•

• • •

Consider training on creative writing (for developing the case materials) or management of dynamic group discussion (for implementing the case-based activity) to enhance your ability to implement CBL (Bonney, 2015). When selecting a case, less is more – choose richer qualitative information over larger quantities of information (Rippen et al., 2002). Provide sufficient information for students to make sense of the case and engage in problem-solving, while not giving too much information that might overwhelm the students. Scaffold question prompts – start by initiating the perception process through an “observe” prompt (asking learners to identify important information in the case), move to the memory recall process with a “recall” prompt (asking learners to apply content knowledge to the information identified in the case), and end with the reasoning process with a “conclude” prompt (asking learners to reach conclusions or decisions about the case; Demetriadis et al., 2008). For asynchronous online courses, consider disabling students from reading discussion posts of their peers until they have posted their opinions and ideas pertaining to the case problem to allow students the time and space to articulate their thinking clearly (Lee et al., 2009). Maintain the role of facilitator, providing structure and guiding group processes but relinquishing control over the case-based discussion and agenda for solving the case problem to the learners (Carder et al., 2001). If students appear to explore tangents irrelevant to the case during the process of problem-solving, use guiding questions to draw students’ attention back to the primary learning objectives of the activity (Thistlethwaite et al., 2012).

Case-based learning in practice – Case study. The authors have implemented a case study within their sport management undergraduate curriculum. The case study is an out-of-class assignment that includes a written and oral presentation. Students are directed to work in groups to identify, analyze, and address a critical issue in sport management for the purpose of applying creative problem solving to real-world problems in sport. Groups (approximately 5 students per group) are required to identify and submit three distinct case study topics that represent a current issue within the field. Example topics include sports jersey advertisements, professional sports team relocation, interscholastic transfer rules, the inclusion of transgender athletes, and Olympic venue viability. The instructor reviews the possible case topics and provides guidance on which case topic will provide the richest information for analysis. Once groups establish a case study topic, they work collaboratively to gather information relevant to the case study topic, analyze the case, and engage in problem-solving to develop a solution to the case problem. Within the written assignment, groups are expected to include the following information, with supporting references, which serves as a formative assessment for the assignment:

48

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

1. Description of the case study – Identify the problem of the case study and provide an in-depth description of the problem. 2. Identification of stakeholders – Identify at least three distinct key stakeholders relevant to the case study and provide a detailed description of their roles. Explain why the stakeholders are interested in the case study problem. 3. Significance of the problem – Outline the significance of the case study problem and justify why it is important to the field of sport management. 4. Connection to course concepts – Provide a comprehensive explanation of how the case study problem connects to at least three key concepts learned in the sport management major. 5. Position on case study topic – Explain the group’s collective position on the case study problem, providing detailed justification for your arguments. The group’s position statement should serve as foundational context for the subsequent solutions proposed. 6. Identification of solutions – Propose five to eight possible solutions for solving the case study problem, describing each in detail. 7. Analysis of solutions – Describe the pros, cons, and assumptions for each of the identified solutions. 8. Recommendation – Describe the group’s recommended solution, integrating information from the case study to justify the decision. In addition to developing the comprehensive case study, groups are responsible for presenting their case study to the class to expand their peers’ understanding of critical issues in sport management. A structured assessment rubric guiding the instructor’s evaluation of the students’ written assignments and oral presentations was also created. Through the case study assignment, students are expected to achieve the following learning objectives: • • • •

Value collaborative problem solving Analyze critical issues related to sport management Develop proactive strategies to address critical issues related to sport management Demonstrate proficiency in writing and public speaking

Throughout the case study assignment, the instructor relinquishes control to the student groups, serving as a facilitator by guiding students through the assignment format while allowing students to determine the case study content. For more information about how to design and implement a case study within higher education, please see the Additional Reading Section.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS To continue advancing innovative, non-traditional education practices in higher education, it is critical researchers engage in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Based upon the current knowledge pertaining to inquiry-based learning, the following future research directions are suggested: • •

Implementation and outcomes of training programs designed to educate instructors on innovative teaching pedagogy, such as inquiry-based learning Translation of inquiry-based learning methods across diverse disciplines 49

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

•

• • • • • •

Implementation and outcomes of inquiry-based learning in different settings ◦◦ Undergraduate versus graduate class ◦◦ Asynchronous versus synchronous class ◦◦ In-person versus blended versus online class ◦◦ Large versus small class size Assessment of the optimal design of problem-based, project-based, and case-based learning approaches Comparison of different inquiry-based learning approaches to identify varying outputs and outcomes associated with different approaches Integration of multiple inquiry-based learning approaches (e.g., problem-based, project-based, case-based) Perceptions of instructors and students evaluating the outcomes of inquiry-based learning Use of experimental research design to test the efficacy of inquiry-based learning strategies Use of technology to support inquiry-based learning activities

Through these efforts, scholars can improve inquiry-based learning design and implementation for enhanced student outcomes. Dissemination of this scholarship will serve as a useful tool for instructors seeking to incorporate inquiry-based learning in the classroom.

CONCLUSION Inquiry-based learning is an innovative, non-traditional educational practice rooted in the Theory of Inquiry (Dewey, 1910, 1938). In its simplest form, inquiry is a deliberate process whereby an individual is faced with an indeterminant situation (i.e., unclear, uncertain, ambiguous, doubtful, or precarious situation) and chooses to explore and identify the problem, propose ideas to solve the problem, test the effectiveness of proposed solutions, and form a judgment that resolves the problem and results in a determinant situation (Brown, 2012; Dewey, 1997). Inquiry adopts elements of Experiential Learning Theory (Kolb, 1984) and the Theory of Social Constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978, 1986) as the learner constructs new knowledge through the experience of testing proposed solutions in a social environment. As opposed to the traditional didactic instructional approach, inquiry-based learning engages students in active learning that is student-centered (Loyens & Rikers, 2010). Inquiry-based learning pedagogical approaches focus on student inquiry as the primary process for knowledge construction (Levy, 2012). Major characteristics of inquiry-based learning include: students are active learners and the center of instruction; teachers create a scaffolded environment to facilitate student learning; and teachers frame learning through a problem or question (Bransford et al., 1999; Hmelo-Silver et al., 2007; Loyens & Rikers, 2010). Outcomes of inquiry-based learning include: development of soft skills, metacognitive knowledge, self-regulated learning, and higher achievement (Justice et al., 2007; Spronken-Smith & Walker, 2010; Wilson et al., 2010). Comparatively, challenges of inquiry-based learning consist of cognitive overload, integration of content dissemination and learning, student readiness, and logistics of implementation (Aditomo et al., 2013; Keselman, 2003; Kirschner et al., 2006; Lazonder & Harmsen, 2016). Problem-based, project-based, and case-based learning approaches can facilitate inquiry-based learning in the classroom. Problem-based learning involves students working to develop solutions to a problem, and has been used for learning subject-matter knowledge, inquiry skills and knowledge, and life skills 50

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

(Wurdinger & Rudolph, 2009). In project-based learning, students’ learning experience is structured around a project, in which students learn key concepts and principles through the process of constructing an artifact (Helle et al., 2006). Case-based learning provides students with structured, contextually rich cases for the purpose of applying their knowledge to analyze the case, asking and answering questions, and constructing new knowledge and modifying existing knowledge through discussion (Aditomo et al., 2013; Prince & Felder, 2007). Examples of how to implement these learning approaches in higher education are provided in the chapter. Inquiry-based learning is an effective strategy to actively engage students in the co-construction of knowledge. The use of inquiry-based learning can range from a small activity to a semester-long assignment and can be implemented through a variety of approaches to fulfill the learning objectives of diverse curricula. Theory and scholarship can guide instructors’ implementation of inquiry-based learning to enhance the efficacy of the learning strategy and improve student outcomes. Instructors are encouraged to evaluate the logistics of implementing problem-based, project-based, and case-based learning approaches in their curriculum, as well as assess the affective experience of students and achievement of student outcomes to inform improvement strategies for future implementation. This book chapter serves as an initial guide for instructors seeking to utilize inquiry-based learning in higher education.

REFERENCES Aditomo, A., Goodyear, P., Bliuc, A. M., & Ellis, R. A. (2013). Inquiry-based learning in higher education: Principal forms, educational objectives, and disciplinary variations. Studies in Higher Education, 38(9), 1239–1258. doi:10.1080/03075079.2011.616584 Albion, P. (2015). Project-, problem-, and inquiry-based learning. In M. Henderson (Ed.), Teaching and digital technologies: Big issues and critical questions (pp. 240-252). Cambridge University Press. Alt, D. (2014). The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring features of constructivist learning environments in higher education. Frontline Learning Research, 3, 1–27. Armstrong, G., Tucker, J., & Massad, V. (2009). Interviewing the experts: Student produced podcast. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 8(1), 79–90. Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: Skills for the future. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(2), 39–43. doi:10.1080/00098650903505415 Berk, L., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding children’s learning: Vygotsky and early childhood learning. National Association for Education of Young Children. Bonney, K. M. (2015). Case study teaching method improves student performance and perceptions of learning gains. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, 16(1), 21–28. doi:10.1128/jmbe.v16i1.846 PMID:25949753 Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press. Brown, M. (2012). John Dewey’s logic of science. The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science, 2(2), 258–306.

51

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Burke, T. (1994). Dewey’s new logic: A reply to Russell. The University of Chicago Press. Carder, L., Willingham, P., & Bibb, D. (2001). Case-based, problem-based learning: Information literacy for the real world. Research Strategies, 18(3), 181–190. doi:10.1016/S0734-3310(02)00087-3 Chin, C., & Chia, L. G. (2008). Problem-based learning tools. Science Teacher (Normal, Ill.), 75(8), 44–49. Choi, I., & Lee, K. (2009). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for enhancing ill-structured problem solving: Classroom management problems for prospective teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(1), 99–129. doi:10.100711423-008-9089-2 De los Ríos-Carmenado, I, Lopez, F. R., & Garcia, C. P. (2015). Promoting professional project management skills in engineering higher education: Project-based learning (PBL) strategy. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31(1), 184–198. DeFillippi, R. J. (2001). Introduction: Project-based learning, reflective practices and learning. Management Learning, 32(1), 5–10. doi:10.1177/1350507601321001 Demetriadis, S. N., Papadopoulos, P. M., Stamelos, I. G., & Fischer, F. (2008). The effect of scaffolding students’ context-generating cognitive activity in technology-enhanced case-based learning. Computers & Education, 51(2), 939–954. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.012 Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Free Press. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic – The theory of inquiry. Henry Holt and Company. Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. Dover Publications, Inc. (Original work published 1910) Dimova, Y., & Kamarska, K. (2015). Rediscovering John Dewey’s model of learning through reflective inquiry. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 63, 29-39. Donnelly, R., & Fitzmaurice, M. (2005). Collaborative project-based learning and problem-based learning in higher education: A consideration of tutor and student role in learner-focused strategies. In G. O’Neill, S. Moore, & B. McMullin (Eds.), Emerging issues in the practice of university learning and teaching (pp. 87–98). AISHE/HEA. Duncan, M. J., & Al-Nakeeb, Y. (2006). Using problem-based learning in sports related courses: An overview of module development and student responses in an undergraduate Sports Studies module. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education, 5(1), 50–57. doi:10.3794/johlste.51.113 English, M. C., & Kitsantas, A. (2013). Supporting student self-regulated learning in problem-and project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based learning, 7(2), 128-150. Esteban, A. A., & Cañado, M. L. P. (2004). Making the case method work in teaching Business English: A case study. English for Specific Purposes, 23(2), 137–161. doi:10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00016-4 Festenstein, M. (2001). Inquiry as critique: On the legacy of Deweyan pragmatism for political theory. Political Studies, 49(4), 730–749. doi:10.1111/1467-9248.00339 Fosnot, C. T., & Perry, R. S. (2005). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 28–85). Teachers College Press.

52

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111 PMID:24821756 Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001 Garvey, M. T., O’Sullivan, M., & Blake, M. (2000). Multidisciplinary case-based learning for undergraduate students. European Journal of Dental Education, 4(4), 165–168. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0579.2000.040404.x PMID:11168482 Gormally, C., Brickman, P., Hallar, B., & Armstrong, N. (2009). Effects of inquiry-based learning on students’ science literacy skills and confidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 1–24. doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030216 Guertin, L. A. (2010). Creating and using podcasts across the disciplines. Currents in Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 4–12. Harvard Business School. (n.d.). The HBS case method. Retrieved from https://www.hbs.edu/mba/ academic-experience/Pages/the-hbs-case-method.aspx Helle, L., Tynjala, P., & Olkinuora, E. (2006). Project-based learning in secondary education: Theory, practice and rubber sling slots. Higher Education, 51(2), 287–314. doi:10.100710734-004-6386-5 Herreid, C. F. (2011). Case study teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2011(128), 31–40. doi:10.1002/tl.466 Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problembased and inquiry-based learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. doi:10.1080/00461520701263368 Justice, C., Rice, J., Roy, D., Hudspith, B., & Jenkins, H. (2009). Inquiry-based learning in higher education: Administrators’ perspectives on integrating inquiry pedagogy into the curriculum. Higher Education, 58(6), 841–855. doi:10.100710734-009-9228-7 Justice, C., Rice, J., Warry, W., Inglis, S., Miller, S., & Sammon, S. (2007). Inquiry in higher education: Reflections and directions on course design and teaching methods. Innovative Higher Education, 31(4), 201–214. doi:10.100710755-006-9021-9 Katz, I., & Assor, A. (2007). When choice motivates and when it does not. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 429–442. doi:10.100710648-006-9027-y Keselman, A. (2003). Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 898–921. doi:10.1002/tea.10115 Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why unguided learning does not work: An analysis of the failure of discovery learning, problem-based learning, experiential learning and inquiry-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. doi:10.120715326985ep4102_1

53

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning. Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall. Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. C. (2006). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 317–334). Cambridge University Press. Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. doi:10.3102/0034654315627366 Lee, S., Lee, J., Liu, X., Bonk, C. J., & Magjuka, R. J. (2009). A review of case-based learning practices in an online MBA program: A program-level case study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 178–190. Lee, V. S. (2012). What is inquiry-guided learning? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 129(129), 5–14. doi:10.1002/tl.20002 Levy, P. (2012). Developing inquiry-guided learning in a research university in the United Kingdom. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 129(129), 15–26. doi:10.1002/tl.20003 Levy, P., Little, S., McKinney, P., Nibbs, A., & Wood, J. (2010). The Sheffield companion to inquiry-based learning. Centre for Inquiry-based Learning in the Arts and Social Sciences, The University of Sheffield. Lippitt, R. (1949). Training in community relations: A research exploration toward new group skills. Harper & Brothers. Lower-Hoppe, L. M., Wanless, E. A., Aldridge, S. M., & Jones, D. W. (2019). Integrating blended learning within sport event management curriculum. Sport Management Education Journal, 13(2), 105–116. doi:10.1123mej.2018-0024 Loyens, S. M. M., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2010). Instruction based on inquiry. In R. A. Mayer & P. A. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 361–381). Routledge. Manning, R. D., Keiper, M. C., & Jenny, S. E. (2017). Pedagogical innovations for the millennial sport management student: Socrative and Twitter. Sport Management Education Journal, 11(1), 45–54. doi:10.1123mej.2016-0014 Marra, R. M., Jonassen, D. H., Palmer, B., & Luft, S. (2014). Why problem-based learning works: Theoretical foundations. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3-4), 221–238. McDaniel, M. A., & Donnelly, C. M. (1996). Learning with analogy and elaborative interrogation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(3), 508–519. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.88.3.508 Mergendoller, J. R., Maxwell, N. L., Bellisimo, J., & Kentfield, C. A. (2006). The effectiveness of problem-based instruction: A comparative study of instructional methods and student characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(2), 49–69. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1026 Miettinen, R. (2000). The concept of experiential learning and John Dewey’s theory of reflective thought and action. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 54–72. doi:10.1080/026013700293458

54

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction-what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474–496. doi:10.1002/tea.20347 Moll, L. C. (2014). L.S. Vygotsky and education. Routledge. Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T., van Riesen, S. A. N., Kamp, E. T., Manoli, C. C., Zacharia, Z. C., & Tsourlidaki, E. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47–61. doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003 Pedaste, M., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). Developing an effective support system for inquiry learning in a Web-based environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22(1), 47–62. doi:10.1111/j.13652729.2006.00159.x Piaget, J. (1953). The origins of intelligence in children. Basic Books. Plowright, D., & Watkins, M. (2004). There are no problems to be solved, only inquiries to be made, in social work education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41(2), 185–206. doi:10.1080/1470329042000208701 Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social constructivism: Developing tools for an effective classroom. Education, 130(2), 241–250. Prince, M., & Felder, R. (2007). The many faces of inductive teaching and learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(5), 14–20. Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123–138. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006. tb00884.x Rippen, A., Booth, C., Bowie, S., & Jordan, J. (2002). A complex case: Using the case study method to explore uncertainty and ambiguity in undergraduate business education. Teaching in Higher Education, 7(4), 429–441. doi:10.1080/135625102760553928 Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866. doi:10.1111/1467-9620.00181 Seaman, J., Brown, M., & Quay, J. (2017). The evolution of experiential learning theory: Tracing lines of research in the JEE. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(4), NP1–NP21. doi:10.1177/1053825916689268 Spronken-Smith, R. (2010). Undergraduate research and inquiry-based learning: Is there a difference? Insights from research in New Zealand. Council on Undergraduate Research, 30(4), 28–35. Spronken-Smith, R., & Walker, R. (2010). Can inquiry-based learning strengthen the links between teaching and disciplinary practice? Studies in Higher Education, 35(6), 723–740. doi:10.1080/03075070903315502 Srinivasan, M., Wilkes, M., Stevenson, F., Nguyen, T., & Slavin, S. (2007). Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions. Academic Medicine, 82(1), 74–82. doi:10.1097/01.ACM.0000249963.93776.aa PMID:17198294

55

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Stepien, W., & Gallagher, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: As authentic as it gets. Educational Leadership, 50, 25–28. Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 55, pp. 37–76). Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8 Thistlethwaite, J. E., Davies, D., Ekeocha, S., Kidd, J. M., MacDougall, C., Matthews, P., Purkis, J., & Clay, D. (2012). The effectiveness of case-based learning in health professional education. A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 23. Medical Teacher, 34(6), 421–444. doi:10.3109/014215 9X.2012.680939 PMID:22578051 Thomas, M. D., O’Connor, F. W., Albert, M. L., Boutain, D., & Brandt, P. A. (2001). Case-based teaching and learning experiences. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 22(5), 517–531. doi:10.1080/01612840152393708 PMID:11881513 Torp, L., & Sage, S. (2002). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K-16 education (2nd ed.). Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. MIT Press. Wiemer, M. (2019). Learning through research: Independent learning. Self-learning processes and selflearning abilities in inquiry-based learning. In H. A. Mieg (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning–undergraduate research (pp. 239–247). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0_3 Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M., Noordzij, G., Arends, L. R., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2017). The effects of problem‐based, project‐based, and case‐based learning on students’ motivation: A meta‐analysis. Eindrapport NRO-project 405-15-720. Wilson, C. D., Taylor, J. A., Kowalski, S. M., & Carlson, J. (2010). The relative effects and equity of inquiry‐based and commonplace science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(3), 276–301. Woolfolk, A. (2012). Educational psychology (12th ed.). Pearson. Wurdinger, S., & Rudolph, J. (2009). Teaching practices that improve student learning: Five experiential approaches. Journal of Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 1–13. doi:10.22329/jtl.v6i1.505 Yadav, A., Lundeberg, M., DeSchryver, M., Dirkin, K., Schiller, N. A., Maier, K., & Herreid, C. F. (2007). Teaching science with case studies: A national survey of faculty perceptions of the benefits and challenges of using cases. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37(1), 34–38. Yardley, S., Teunissen, P. W., & Dornan, T. (2012). Experiential learning: AMMEE Guide No. 63. Medical Teacher, 34(2), 102–115. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2012.650741

56

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

ADDITIONAL READING Acar, O. A., & Tuncdogan, A. (2019). Using the inquiry-based learning approach to enhance student innovativeness: A conceptual model. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(7), 895–909. doi:10.1080/135 62517.2018.1516636 Barrett, T., & Moore, S. (2014). New approaches to problem-based learning: Revitalising your practice in higher education. Routledge. Buchanan, S., Harlan, M. A., Bruce, C. S., & Edwards, S. L. (2016). Inquiry based learning models, information literacy, and student engagement: A literature review. School Libraries Worldwide, 22(2), 23–39. Chu, S. K. W., Reynolds, R. B., Tavares, N. J., Notari, M., & Lee, C. W. Y. (2017). 21st Century skills development through inquiry-based learning. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-2481-8 Grant, M. M. (2002). Getting a grip on project-based learning: Theory, cases and recommendations. Meridian: A Middle School Computer Technologies Journal, 5(1), 83. Guerra, A., & Kolmos, A. (2011). Comparing problem-based learning models: Suggestions for their implementation. In J. Davies, E. de Graaff, & A. Kolmos (Eds.), PBL across the disciplines: Research into best practice (pp. 3–14). Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Hu, S., Kuh, G. D., & Li, S. (2008). The effects of engagement in inquiry-oriented activities on student learning and personal development. Innovative Higher Education, 33(2), 71–81. doi:10.100710755008-9066-z Hunter-Doniger, T. (2018). Project-based learning: Utilizing artistic pedagogies for educational leadership. Art Education, 71(2), 46–51. doi:10.1080/00043125.2018.1414542 Kantar, L. D., & Massouh, A. (2015). Case-based learning: What traditional curricula fail to teach. Nurse Education Today, 35(8), e8–e14. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2015.03.010 PMID:25842004 Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2009). Experiential learning theory: A dynamic, holistic approach to management learning, education and development. In S. J. Armstrong & C. V. Fukami (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of management, learning, education and development (pp. 42–68). SAGE. doi:10.4135/9780857021038.n3 Kunselman, J. C., & Johnson, K. A. (2004). Using the case method to facilitate learning. College Teaching, 52(3), 87–92. doi:10.3200/CTCH.52.3.87-92 Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718. doi:10.3102/0034654315627366 Little, S. (2010). Inquiry-based learning in the social sciences: A meta-analytical study. CILASS: Centre for inquiry-based learning in the arts and social sciences, University of Sheffield. www.shef.ac.uk/ polopoly_fs/1.122795!/file/IBL_in_SocSci-FINAL.pdf Loyens, S. M. (2014). New approaches to problem-based learning: Revitalizing your practice in higher education. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 8(2), 85–87. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1519

57

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

Major, C. H., & Palmer, B. (2001). Assessing the effectiveness of problem-based learning in higher education: Lessons from the literature. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 5(1), 4–9. Martínez, F., Herrero, L. C., & De Pablo, S. (2010). Project-based learning and rubrics in the teaching of power supplies and photovoltaic electricity. IEEE Transactions on Education, 54(1), 87–96. doi:10.1109/ TE.2010.2044506 Nkhoma, M., Lam, T., Richardson, J., Kam, B.Z., & Lau, K. H. (2016). Developing case-based learning activities based on the revised Bloom’s taxonomy. Proceedings of Informing Science & IT Education Conference (InSITE), 85-93. Noblitt, L., Vance, D. E., & DePoy Smith, M. L. (2010). A comparison of case study and traditional teaching methods for improvement of oral communication and critical-thinking skills. Journal of College Science Teaching, 39(5), 26–32. Pierrakos, O., Zilberberg, A., & Anderson, R. (2010). Understanding undergraduate research experiences through the lens of problem-based learning: Implications for curriculum translation. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 4(2), 35–62. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1103 Popil, I. (2011). Promotion of critical thinking by using case studies as teaching method. Nurse Education Today, 31(2), 204–207. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2010.06.002 PMID:20655632 Saleewong, D., Suwannatthachote, P., & Kuhakran, S. (2013). Case-based learning on web in higher education: A review of empirical research. Creative Education, 3(8), 31–34. doi:10.4236/ce.2012.38B007 Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2004). Foundations of problem-based learning. McGraw-Hill Education. Schmidt, H. G., van der Molen, H. T., te Winkel, W. W. R., & Wijnen, W. H. F. W. (2009). Constructivist, problem-based learning does work: A meta-analysis of curricular comparisons involving a single medical school. Educational Psychologist, 44(4), 227–249. doi:10.1080/00461520903213592 Sockalingam, N., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Characteristics of problems for problem-based learning: The students’ perspective. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(1), 6–33. doi:10.7771/15415015.1135 Speck, K., & Schubarth, W. (2019). Prospects for the economy and society? The issue of employability and the implementation of inquiry-based learning. In H. A. Mieg (Ed.), Inquiry-based learning–undergraduate research (pp. 393–401). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14223-0_37 Tamim, S. R., & Grant, M. M. (2013). Definitions and uses: Case study of teachers implementing projectbased learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 7(2), 72–101. doi:10.7771/15415015.1323 Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Autodesk Foundation. Yakovleva, N. O., & Yakovlev, E. V. (2014). Interacting teaching methods in contemporary higher education. Pacific Science Review, 16(2), 75–80. doi:10.1016/j.pscr.2014.08.016

58

 Inquiry-Based Learning in Action

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Case-Based Learning: A learning process whereby students analyze and synthesize a real-world case to propose a recommended solution or course of action. Experiential Learning: A learning process whereby knowledge is created through grasping and transforming concrete experiences. Inquiry: The process of transforming an indeterminate situation into one that is determinate to deliberately resolve a state of perplexity. Inquiry-Based Learning: A learning process that encompasses a variety of pedagogical approaches where student inquiry guides the learning experience and knowledge construction. Problem-Based Learning: A learning process whereby students engage in reflective inquiry to solve a problem. Project-Based Learning: A learning process whereby students apply prior knowledge and experience to construct an artifact that solves a problem or fulfills a specific objective. Social Constructivism: The process of co-constructing knowledge through dialogue and interaction with others in the social environment.

59

60

Chapter 4

Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments Damian Maher University of Technology Sydney, Australia

ABSTRACT There have been numerous changes to the design of learning spaces, inviting educators to innovate the way they teach. This chapter focuses on innovation and how this is shaping practices in primary and secondary schools with a focus on learning environments. The chapter begins with an examination of the notion of innovation exploring the role of leaders and technology-driven education. The focus of the chapter then shifts to frameworks that are used to guide teachers’ knowledge looking at the technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) framework and the technology, pedagogy, content, and spaces (TPeCS) knowledge framework. The focus then moves to explore innovative learning environments and the innovative practices occurring in them with a consideration of pedagogy and flexibility. This is then followed by recommendations for further research.

INTRODUCTION The history of formal education can be traced to at least 3500 B.C. when various writing systems were developed. Mesopotamia is generally acknowledged as the place where schools first started. For a long period of time schools looked very similar- the teacher at the front of the class with the text book administering to the students who were then tested at the end of the cycle to measure understanding. This traditional system of education is still prominent in many classrooms around the world today. This broad structure of schooling has remained consistent with many schools today using what has been called the factory or industrial model of learning (Van Duzer, 2006). A main goal of public education was to prepare young people for factory jobs during the industrial revolution (Leland & Kasten, 2002). Young people being prepared for such jobs “had to be trained to comprehend and accept instructions, and then to implement them conscientiously. Discipline and reliability were the core virtues” (Reich, DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch004

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

1989, p. 97). School organisations have reflected this industrial mentality wherein students are viewed as “products” where they are grouped according to chronological age and processed according to set outcomes. However, there have been technological, societal, and pedagogical innovations, in primary schools through to tertiary educational settings over a number of decades, as well as impacts of globalisation and the proliferation of low-cost mobile devices (Osborn, 2016) that have led to current non-traditional and innovative educational practices. One of the main shifts in education is that it is no longer primarily about acquiring knowledge; instead that knowledge is obtainable anywhere. Increasingly education prioritises gaining skills, disciplines, capabilities and competencies (Wagner, 2014). The focus of this chapter is to investigate new technology-rich spaces, referred to as innovative learning environments (ILEs), also known as flexible learning spaces (FLSs), and the practices within them. ILEs may be considered the product of innovative space design and innovative teaching and learning practices (Mahat, Bradbeer, Byers, & Imms, 2018). “These spatio-pedagogical environments deviate from traditional classroom settings through an intention to facilitate a variety of collaborative, participatory, and independent teaching and learning approaches aimed at supporting the development of students’ twenty-first century skills …” (Young, Cleveland, & Imms, 2019, p. 2). The chapter begins by drawing on the contemporary literature to understand what it means to innovate in education. The focus of the chapter then moves to examine some of the theories and concepts that support the implementation of innovation. The theories that have been developed to understand the impacts on learning, such as TPACK (Koehler, & Mishra, 2009) and TPeCS (Sagy, Benichou, Atias, & Levin‐Peled (2019) are unpacked. Next is an examination of ILEs and their associated non-traditional practices that shape contemporary learning. Of interest in this section are the types of innovative teaching and learning practices that these new flexible and open spaces afford. Some of the practices in these new flexible learning spaces include facilitated interactions and collaboration (Kariippanon, Cliff, Lancaster, Okely, & Parrish, 2019). Also of interest in focusing on contemporary learning spaces in this chapter is the role that technology can play in helping to support innovative practices in ILEs. As a result of the use of technology, the modern learning spaces become blended learning spaces bringing together both the physical and the virtual learning spaces (Maher, 2019). This blended learning space affords non-traditional and innovative ways of learning and teaching. According to Prinsloo and Ainslie (2019), such technologies can change teaching practices and include distributed collaboration, technology enhanced learning and blended learning as approaches.

INNOVATION IN EDUCATION There are a number of definitions for educational innovation. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) defines it as a “new or improved product or process (or combination thereof) that differs significantly from the unit’s previous product or process and has been made available to potential users (product) and brought into use by the unit (process)” (OECD/Eurostat, 2018, p. 20). Sein-Echaluce, Fidalgo-Blanco, and Alves’s (2017) definition of educational innovation is “the application of one idea that produces a planned change in educational processes, services, or products, then leading to an improvement in learning goals” (p. 1).

61

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Common to both of these definitions is that innovation includes changes to both process and product. The notion of having an improved product means that there needs to be a planned process that leads to such an improved product. Thus, both process and product are closely intertwined with each other. However, having a clear process or product does not always lead to successful innovation. THE OECD (encompassing 36 countries) has been measuring innovation in education since 2014. Vincent-Lancrin et al. (2019) state that on average there has been a moderate level of innovation relating to educational practices in primary and secondary education in the OECD collective. A 2019 report that underscores the importance of measuring innovation in education includes the following statement: Monitoring systematically whether, and how, practices are changing within classrooms and educational organisations, how teachers develop professionally and use learning resources, how schools communicate with their communities, and to what extent change and innovation are linked to better educational outcomes would provide a substantial increase in the international education knowledge base. (Vincent-Lancrin, Urgel, Kar, & Jacotin, 2019) It is reported that more money being spent in education (as a way of innovating) does not always lead to improved learning outcomes (e.g., Coulson, 2014). Increased expenditure is not resulting in enhanced outcomes across many educational settings. Over the period of 2005 to 2013 for example, the average expenditure for students across the OECD countries for education rose by 17% (OECD, 2016a). At the same time, Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) data for 2003 to 2013 showed no significant changes in test scores and a decline in the percentage of top performers (OECD, 2016b). It should be noted PISA testing is not without its issues or critics. However, innovation (with or without extra funding) can lead to the improvement of learning outcomes and the quality of education provision (OECD, 2017). There are a number of different factors that impact on successful innovation. Among those factors that impact, and are impacted by, successful innovation include teachers’ skills/knowledge, attitudes, workload issues, time, cost (Nicholls, 2018) and leadership. “Learning leaders may include principals, curriculum specialists, technology coordinators, teacher team leaders, instructional technology specialists, teacher leaders or others charged with enhancing education” (Christensen et.al., 2018, p. 463). The Public Service Commission (2013) points to the importance of leadership in supporting a culture of innovation. The discussion paper states: Good leadership includes delivering positive messages that support innovation, giving permission to try new ideas, and making a commitment to being open-minded to suggestions about new ways of doing things. It is also important to change the perception that leadership just comes from the top. Authority should be delegated and people on the frontline trusted to make decisions. (Public Service Commission, 2013, p. 15) A leader can drive innovation using a top-down approach or facilitate innovation supporting a bottomup approach. However, there are challenges with a top-down approach where an emphasis on detailed planning may limit the identification of options and impede innovation. An over-emphasis on hierarchy can inhibit staff members from freely contributing their ideas and expertise to projects, and can hamper communications (Green, Agarwal, Roos, & Scott-Kemmis, 2013). Bottom-up approaches are also not without problems where they are often impeded by policymakers (Honig, 2004) who do not have an understanding of localised needs. Often, those using this approach are reliant on an individual and once 62

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

the person leaves the organisation, the innovation disappears. Fullan (1994) suggests that drawing on a top-down and bottom-up approach in isolation does not work. What is needed is a combination of both of these practices.

Technology-Driven Innovation In relation to technology, innovation (in the availability of devices and in the use of information and communication technology (ICT)) has been an important driver of change over the past decade. A high percentage of students use technology in class or for their school work at home although Vincent-Lancrin et al. (2019) state in almost all OECD countries there have been decreases in the availability of desktop computers and tablets for student use in lessons. The introduction of networked technology in and beyond schools has had a big impact on learning and this has necessitated innovation. An important reason for innovating is so that education at school remains relevant for young people in the context of rapid societal changes, ICT being one such change. Another important reason for innovating in education is so that young people can be prepared to enter the workforce and continue to develop skills and knowledge. Nations and trade unions are recognising the important role of technology in helping to drive innovation and the need to innovate so that technology is part of the educational process. The European Commission (2018) for example, has developed an action plan, which sets out a three priority areas which are: 1: Making better use of digital technology for teaching and learning 2: Developing relevant digital competences and skills for the digital transformation 3: Improving education through better data analysis and foresight In setting out the three areas, the authors of the action plan believe that artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing and block chain will be some of the key technological advances. Like previous major technological advances, digitisation affects how people live, interact, study and work. “Access to and the use of digital technologies can help reduce the learning gap between students from high and low socioeconomic backgrounds” (The European Commission 2018, p. 2). Further to this, personalised teaching and learning, facilitated through the use of online platforms, can result in increased motivation by focusing on individual learners. A point made by the authors is that approximately 80% of young people use the internet for social purposes in the home. This figure is similar for students in other developed countries such as Australia and the United States. A problem identified in the report by the European Union is that technology use in schools lags behind home use. Problems identified include the fact that not all schools are connected to broadband and that not all educators have the competences and confidence to use digital tools to support their teaching. Teachers’ digital sills are an important aspect in ensuring that students develop the types of skills and knowledge envisaged in the report. As regards to what constitutes teachers’ digital skills, Krumsvik (2012) argues that proficiency in using digital technologies with sound pedagogical and theoretical underpinnings, and being mindful of the implications of such use in schools defines a teacher’s digital competence. Krumsvik (2008) suggests that teachers’ technological capability also comprise knowledge of socially, culturally ethical and responsible use of technology.

63

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

One of the ways digital skills have been conceptualised for students is through the umbrella term of 21st century learning skills. The types of skills that fall under this umbrella term include digital competence, digital literacy, digital skills, e-skills, internet skills, as well as information literacy media literacy, and technology literacy (Netwong, 2019). Along with these technology-related skills are also skills related to critical thinking, problem solving, communication and collaboration (Kivunja, 2014). Earlier, the role of the leader was argued as being important in driving innovation in schools. Christensen et al. (2018) set out a number of characteristics related to technology that a good leader should possess. One characteristic is having a current understanding of technology relevant to pedagogy. Another valuable attribute is the ability to suggest suitable technology for specific content and contexts. A further characteristic is the leader should demonstrate skills related to 21st century learning, which include lifelong-learning strategies, technology-related skills, information literacy, computational thinking and other related abilities.

THEORITCAL FOCI In understanding innovation in educational settings related to ILEs it is important to understand the types of knowledge needed by educators. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) (Koehler & Mishra, 2009) is a theoretical framework used to identify the nature of knowledge required by teachers for technology integration in their teaching while addressing the complex, multifaceted and situated nature of teacher knowledge. The TPACK framework builds on Shulman’s (1986; 1987) Pedagogical Content Knowledge framework. This framework explores the intersection of pedagogies and content with an understanding that teachers draw on different types of knowledge as part of their job. As technological advances begun to have greater impact on education it was apparent that Shulman’s model was no longer sufficient to understand the types of knowledge teachers needed to draw upon to support their practice and so TPACK was developed. The TPACK model extends Schulman’s model to include the aspect of technology. As the image in Figure 1 shows, the TPACK model comprises three sections which include Technological Knowledge, Content Knowledge, and Pedagogical Knowledge. It is the intersection of these three areas that provides for Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) as set out in figure 1:

Technological Knowledge The growth of digital technologies has required that teachers develop knowledge of the various technologies and that can be used to support learning. This technology can be characterised as part of what is called fourth industrial revolution, which involves smart systems known as cyber physical systems (CPS) that can record information and communicate independently among themselves (Dombrowski & Wagner, 2014). As such, teachers need to be innovative in their teaching in line with the latest technology (Naziri, Rasul, & Affandi, 2019). Along with the knowledge of how technologies support learning is an understanding of the legal, social, and ethical implications of using technologies as well as the linguistic implications of using emerging technologies.

64

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Figure 1. TPACK Reproduced by permission of the publisher, © 2012 by tpack.org

Pedagogical Knowledge Pedagogy is at the heart of teaching and learning and includes specific configurations of teaching and learning in interaction. These configurations combine theory and practice, ways of thinking and implementing learning designs (Paniagua & Istance, 2018). There are a myriad of different pedagogical approaches in use across education systems today. Some of these include inquiry-based learning, collaborative learning, experiential learning, project-based learning, and problem-based learning. These pedagogical practices are required to keep education relevant and to engage young people. “Thus, teachers’ pedagogical knowledge base is not static. New knowledge emerges from research or is shared through professional communities, and this knowledge needs to be accessed, processed and evaluated, and transformed into knowledge for practice” (Guerriero, 2017, p. 30).

Content Knowledge Content knowledge is teachers’ knowledge about the subject matter to be learned or taught and is of critical importance for teachers (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). As noted by Shulman (1986), this knowledge typically includes knowledge of ideas, concepts, theories, organisational frameworks, knowledge of evidence and proof, as well as established practices and approaches toward developing such knowledge.

65

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Given the changing nature of knowledge, school curricular continues to expand, which requires teachers to continually up-date their knowledge accordingly. The area of Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) is now a major priority for politicians, economists and educators where it is recognised that professionals will be needed for worldwide innovation and global economics (Eisenhart, Weis, Allen, Cipollone, & Stich, 2015). The TPACK framework has recently also been extended to include the aspect of space. Kali, Sagy, Benichou, Atias, and Levin‐Peled, (2019) have developed a framework they call the Technology Pedagogy Content and Spaces (TPeCS) Knowledge Framework. This framework has been developed as the design of classroom spaces, which once were square boxes with desks facing the front, have started to have a greater impact on the types of teaching and learning practices that are being undertaken in schools. Research indicates that learning spaces significantly affect the way humans learn (Beckers, Van der Voordt, & Dewulf, 2016). A social constructivist perspective, which is underpinned by the theories of John Dewey (1929), Piaget (2005), and Vygotsky (1978) is useful to understand learning and the spaces that facilitate this. Social constructivism is premised on the idea that interactions between the learner and situations or environments lead to individuals constructing their own knowledge (Vygotsky, 1978). Another important aspect of social constructivism is that the learner is actively involved in the construction of knowledge, as opposed to being a passive recipient thereof (Jaworski, 1996). Proponents of social constructivism argue that learning is primarily a social process mediated through interactions using tools and artefacts (Leont’ev 1981, Vygotsky, 1978). For example, children learn as a result of interacting with each other, their teachers, subject material as well as using the computer and other cultural tools. Lantolf (2000) believed that the way we learn is mediated. That is, humans do not act directly on the physical world, but rather use tools as a way of indirectly mediating actions. Space is viewed as one mediator of learning among others (Hod, 2017). One of the aspects linked to future learning spaces is the technology that now supports such spaces (and vice versa), which provides links beyond the immediate physical learning space. The technology that now supports contemporary spaces provides connectivity for students and teachers to the wider world including field experts, through the use of video conferencing and other similar communicative technologies (Maher, 2019). ILEs support a blended use of both physical and online spaces, which creates opportunities for new content to be covered by students which in turn, requires new pedagogical approaches by teachers.

INNOVATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS Up until the advent of computers, if you entered many classrooms around the world, the chances are that they would look very similar to classrooms 100 years earlier. The teacher’s desk would be at the front along with a black or white board and the students’ desks would be facing the front in rows. The teacher would stand at the front and deliver the content, which the students would dutifully write down and then later, they would be tested to understand how much of this content they remembered. The architectural impact of space and learning was not an aspect considered in great detail until recently. New technology-rich spaces are being developed with a more focused understanding of the activities that will take place in them and the types of technologies that will support learning. A one size fits all approach is now no longer the norm. The importance of space is such that constructing built environments that respond to student needs through the creation of new learning spaces “has become government 66

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

policy in England, Australia, Portugal, Finland and the Netherlands, amongst other nations” (Loughlin, 2013, p. 536). These policies are being developed with an understanding that the physical characteristics of buildings influence learning. Barrett, Zhang, Davies, and Barrett (2015) for example, found that the physical characteristics of primary school environments impacted pupils’ learning progress in reading, writing and mathematics. However, it is more than the space that supports learning. Blackmore, Bateman, Loughlin, O’Mara, and Aranda observe: “buildings alone are not enough; it is about relationships and changing cultures and practices” (p. 37). It is through innovation that such changes are realised.

Pedagogy One of the practices typical of ILEs is teaching/learning activities underpinned by a student-centred approach, whereby students are engaged in the learning process as co-creators of the learning experience, both independently and collaboratively, with the latter fostering the learning principles of social constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978). An example of this has been seen with secondary education reforms in Portugal where a shift is occurring from learning environments based on knowledge transmission to those designed for knowledge construction (Veloso, Marques, & Duarte, 2014). This student-centred practice means that the role of the teacher/s and the pedagogical approaches used to support learning differ from those adopting a teacher-focused approach (Campbell, 2019). Because students are more in control of their own learning, they can choose what they want to focus on, when they want to focus on it, and with whom they want to work. Given that technology is being used to support teaching and learning both with and beyond ILEs, student collaboration may be outside of the classroom, potentially anywhere in the world. This means that the teacher does not necessarily need to have the same level of content knowledge that is needed in a traditional classroom. The role of the teacher is to help create links with individuals and organisations that can then provide content knowledge for the students. Teachers’ pedagogical skills can be more closely related to a supportive role rather than a teaching role. Whilst student-centred activities might assume more prominence in ILEs, there are occasions where it is desirable to bring all students together in one large group where explicit instruction can occur. It is therefore important that ILEs provide a space where all students can gather. When teachers are not engaging in explicit instruction, they are likely to be engaged in conversations with groups of students or individuals. The complexity of the learning environment increases as students tend to focus on a broader set of projects and this means that teachers need to develop skills and strategies to help them manage this process. It is also important to note that the types of pedagogical approaches employed in ILEs can also be employed in traditional leaning spaces. ILEs feature physical space where students can spread out in different configurations to work on projects, which don’t need to be packed away at the end of the day as the space is needed for another purpose or by another class the following day. Given this increased physical space of ILEs, they tend to be more expensive to build, and some school systems may not be able to afford to build them. Some teaching approaches supported by ILEs have been outlined earlier. One innovative teaching approach that is being employed in many schools is project–based learning (PBL). This approach to learning employed in flexible learning spaces can provide opportunities for teaching across more than one subject simultaneously (Kariippanon, Cliff, Okely, & Parrish, 2019). In undertaking PBL, students and teachers are able to engage in actual and real situations (rather than ideal or theoretical situations)

67

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

through contacting communities with specialist knowledge (Leask & Younie, 2001), and in doing so, a community of practice can be formed, where the social aspect of learning supports participants. One of the ways that ILEs is supporting pedagogy is by allowing teachers to work together in teams more than has traditionally been the case, but there needs to be a culture of group work for successful planning to occur (Cardellino & Woolner, 2019). “For teachers in primary schools, the new learning spaces are spaces in which they can work together as a team and plan together” (Mulcahy, Cleveland, & Aberton, 2015, p. 591). The close way of working together means that teachers can draw on the social aspect of learning to develop a curriculum that is suited to an ILE. As a result of working in teams in ILEs, the pedagogical roles that individual teachers (both primary and secondary) take on can vary or be more specialised than those in traditional classrooms. Using a collaborative approach to planning and teaching allows teachers to draw on specific skills and knowledge that they may not have to support learning. Additionally, teachers without such skills can develop these skills and knowledge through observation of other teachers in-situ and then trial these themselves in their own teaching with support from the team of teachers. Whilst such an approach can support the development of teachers’ skills and knowledge through experimentation and innovation, extra planning time is needed.

Flexibility One feature of ILEs is their flexible nature in that they can be reconfigured as required, which enables the spaces to be used for different purposes (Morrone & Workman, 2014). Part of the flexibility is realised through the different zones that cam make up ILEs. These zones typically includes a breakout space, which generally accommodates between 10-15 students and allows teachers to run small group workshops or assign small groups of students to work independently. The configuration of innovative teaching spaces which are spacious, flexible, and supported with technology, is directly linked with the expectation that they will be utilised not only as social learning spaces but also for collaborative teaching (Campbell, 2019). Other zones can include wet spaces (which include taps and sinks), green screen rooms (where students can produce digital movies), computer pods (where students can work independently) and a makerspace (where students can work on construction projects) (Bernade, 2019). Another consideration is where communication technologies will be housed. Portable devices such as laptops, tablets and mobile phones allow for flexibility of use in ILEs as the devices can be used where the students are. Larger screens that allow for either whole group or small group video conferencing activities need to be considered more carefully. Some of these screens can be transported easily but the placement of larger screens mounted on walls needs to be considered in the initial design of the learning space. In considering flexibility of use, one of the main considerations in ILEs has been noise. As noted by Kariippanon, Cliff, Lancaster, Okely, and Parrish (2017): “Flexible learning spaces often have the capacity to hold more students than a traditional classroom, can be more open plan, and do not have walls or dividers to provide isolated spaces” (p. 10). These factors can lead to increased noise levels. Breakout rooms are thus very important as they allow for quiet work to be undertaken as needed. Other strategies that have been suggested as a way of minimising noise issues include; teacher positioning optimally when speaking, strategic seating of students, use of carpeting to dampen sounds, and using visuals to support instruction (Robinson & Bellert, 2019). There are mixed research results on the impact of noise in ILEs. Mulcahy and Morrison (2017) conducted research in two primary and two secondary schools in 68

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Victoria, Australia. Results of the study showed that noise was a concern for some students. Cardellino and Woolner (2019), on the other hand, who conducted research at a primary school in the UK, found that noise was not an issue. There is currently no clear consensus concerning noise levels and context plays an important part in relation to noise in ILEs. ILEs can also bring together outside and inside spaces where the design facilitates a transition that is seamless, much like in many modern house designs. Part of the outside space can include an undercover area where students can work in groups using flexible furniture as well as open areas. Both of these outside spaces allow students to work on environmental projects and can include planter beds, etc. Outside spaces can also include areas dedicated to physical activities for students. Conversely, indoor spaces can also be developed to allow for physical activities. In larger cities, where there is limited space, and schools are being built with multiple storeys, some physical activities will necessarily be indoors. One example is Arthur Phillip High School in Parramatta Australia, which is 17 stories high. On each floor is a gym, a playground and play space. Another important outcome of flexible spaces is that they can provide for more movement of students. Kariippanon, Cliff, Okely, and Parrish (2019) conducted research into converted spaces where existing classrooms were joined together to create one large space and found that by stealth, “elements of such spaces including the incorporation of a variety of furniture and resources, accompanied by greater use of student-centered pedagogies, can facilitate significant improvement in adolescents’ sedentary behaviour profiles during class time” (p. 922). This movement by students is important as research is showing that sitting for long periods can have negative health consequences including diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and premature mortality (Dunstan, Howard, Healy, & Owen, 2012). Allowing students to choose where they want to work, the option of how long they wish to stay in one place, and providing a range of options in furniture (both seats and standing desks), can have positive health effects not possible in traditional classrooms. It is important to note that the discretion of the teacher is important here in deciding who might sit with whom. It is also important to note that not all ILEs are new purpose-built spaces. A number of schools are reconfiguring existing classrooms or combining a number of classrooms to create a larger space. For these converted spaces, there is not always the possibility to create the types of dedicated spaces that are possible in new purpose built structures. However, whilst converted spaces may lack the flexibility of use of new purpose-built spaces, if they a equipped with a variety of furniture and resources (including technologies), accompanied by greater use of student-centered pedagogies, they can provide many of the benefits possible that can be realised in newly built ILEs.

FUTURE RESEACRH DIRECTIONS A systematic review was undertaken by the Innovative Learning Environments and Teacher Change (ILETC) project team members consisting of 5 521 articles retrieved since 1960, (of which only 21 studies examined impacts of the physical environment of primary and secondary schools on measurable student learning outcomes). Byers and Lippman (2018), who conducted the review suggest that there is limited understanding about the long-term impacts of learning spaces. Clearly, more research is needed to examine how these innovative learning environments impact on learning outcomes, both in the short and long-term and the role that the teacher plays.

69

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

There needs to be careful consideration about the possible benefits of ILEs in relation to learning outcomes. However, the suggestion that different learning spaces can or should improve learning outcomes can be naïve. Such a supposition implies a simple input/output model underpins innovative education, which is not the case. The ways humans learn is complex so it is important that the different factors that impact on learning in ILEs are examined carefully with more than a focus on learning outcomes. Lee, Tan, and Tout (2011) make the point that different stakeholders have varying interests and that they should be involved in evaluative strategies. As noted by Young, Cleveland, and Imms (2019): “New school buildings are generally designed by architects and inhabited by teachers and students—often without extensive consultation between parties” (p. 1). To date, there is limited research on learning spaces that takes into account the different stakeholders’ views. This is an important focus for future research that can be used to influence the design and use of ILEs. There is limited current research into ways teachers are being supported through professional learning to adapt their practices to leverage the opportunities of ILEs and develop effective student-centred teaching approaches (Young, Cleveland, & Imms, 2019). Much of the research that has been conducted focuses on the actions that occur within the ILEs. To gain a fuller understanding of the roles of the teacher in supporting learning in ILEs, more research on the professional learning opportunities being provided and how these translate to innovative practices is needed.

CONCLUSION The focus of this chapter has been to explore the innovative practices being undertaken in innovative learning environments. As was highlighted in the first section, there has been much work done on understanding the role and impact of innovation in education. Aspects such as the learning spaces, technology, teacher knowledge, and leadership are all important aspects that can influence outcomes of innovation. Money is also essential but does not guarantee that successful innovation will occur. The focus of the later part of the chapter was exploring ways that learning is occurring in ILEs. Given the flexible nature of learning in the ILEs, teacher knowledge is something that needs to be considered carefully. From a TPACK perspective, aspects of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge that are needed can be different compared to traditional teaching spaces. Additionally, from a TPeCS perspective the issue of space is an aspect of teacher knowledge that is important to support student learning. The aspect of collaboration has been explored in this chapter. The flexible design of ILEs has impacts on both student and teacher collaboration. Students are able to work in more flexible ways in different groups in different spaces, or individually if desired. Given that many flexible learning spaces tend to accommodate more students than a traditional classroom, teachers are more likely to work together on a day-to-day basis in collaborative teams. This means that their role can become more focused than in a traditional classroom. The inclusion of communication technologies also provides for outside expertise, which allows for innovative teaching and learning practices to be undertaken. As old school buildings are knocked down and new schools are built the design of them is likely to be one incorporating aspects of ILE design, which may be different to what is being designed today. This on-going of evolution of ILE, technology, and pedagogical practices means that the role of innovating in education will be on-going.

70

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

REFERENCES Barrett, P., Zhang, Y., Davies, F., & Barrett, L. (2015). Clever Classrooms- Summary Report of the HEAD Project. Retrieved from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/id/eprint/35221/1/120515%20Clever%20Classrooms.pdf Beckers, R., Van der Voordt, T., & Dewulf, G. (2016). Learning space preferences of higher education students. Building and Environment, 104, 243–252. doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.05.013 Bernade, L. (2019). Pedagogy in flexible learning spaces. In M. Hill & M. Thrupp (Eds.), The Professional practice of teaching in New Zealand. Cengage. Blackmore, J., Bateman, D., Loughlin, J., O’Mara, J., & Aranda, G. (2011). Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes. Victoria Department of Education and Early Childhood. Byers, T., & Lippman, P. (2018, February 7). Classroom design should follow evidence, not architectural fads. The Conversation. Campbell, L. (2019). Teaching in an inspiring learning space: An investigation of the extent to which one school’s innovative learning environment has impacted on teachers’ pedagogy and practice. Research Papers in Education, 1–20. Cardellino, P., & Woolner, P. (2019). Designing for transformation–a case study of open learning spaces and educational change. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1, 1–20. doi:10.1080/14681366.2019.1649297 Christensen, R., Eichhorn, K., Prestridge, S., Petko, D., Sligte, H., Baker, R., Alayyar, G., & Knezek, G. (2018). Supporting learning leaders for the effective integration of technology into schools. Technology. Knowledge and Learning, 23(3), 457–472. doi:10.100710758-018-9385-9 Coulson, A. (2014). State education trends: Academic performance and spending over the past 40 years. Cato Institute Policy Analysis, (746). Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. Minton, Balch. Dombrowski, U., & Wagner, T. (2014). Mental strain as field of action in the 4th industrial revolution. Procedia CIRP, 17, 100–105. doi:10.1016/j.procir.2014.01.077 Dunstan, D. W., Howard, B., Healy, G. N., & Owen, N. (2012). Too much sitting–a health hazard. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, 97(3), 368–376. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2012.05.020 PMID:22682948 Eisenhart, M., Weis, L., Allen, C. D., Cipollone, K., Stich, A., & Dominguez, R. (2015). High school opportunities for STEM: Comparing inclusive STEM-focused and comprehensive high schools in two U.S. cities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(6), 763–789. doi:10.1002/tea.21213 Fullan, M. (1994). Coordinating top-down and bottom-up strategies for educational reform. In A. Anson (Ed.), Systemic reform: Perspectives on personalizing education (pp. 7–24). Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Guerriero, S. (Ed.). (2017). Pedagogical Knowledge and the Changing Nature of the Teaching Profession. OECD Publishing.

71

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Green, R., Agarwal, R., Roos, G., & Scott-Kemmis, D. (2013). Australian public sector innovation: Shaping the future through co-creation. Report for the Institute of Public Administration Australia. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/10453/35799 Hod, Y. (2017). Future learning spaces in schools: Concepts and designs from the learning sciences. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 1(2), 99–109. doi:10.100741686-017-0008-y Honig, M. I. (2004). Where’s the “up” in bottom-up reform? Educational Policy, 18(4), 527–561. doi:10.1177/0895904804266640 Jaworski, B. (1996). Investigating mathematics teaching: A constructivist enquiry. The Falmer Press. Kali, Y., Sagy, O., Benichou, M., Atias, O., & Levin‐Peled, R. (2019). Teaching expertise reconsidered: The Technology, Pedagogy, Content and Space (TPeCS) knowledge framework. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2162–2177. doi:10.1111/bjet.12847 Kariippanon, K. E., Cliff, D. P., Okely, A. D., & Parrish, A. M. (2019). Flexible learning spaces reduce sedentary time in adolescents. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, 22(8), 198–923. doi:10.1016/j. jsams.2019.02.007 PMID:30898513 Kariippanon, K. E., Cliff, D. P., Okely, A. D., & Parrish, A. M. (2019). The ‘why’ and ‘how’ of flexible learning spaces: A complex adaptive systems analysis. Journal of Educational Change, 1–25. doi:10.100710833-019-09364-0 Kariippanon, K. E., Cliff, D. P., Lancaster, S. J., Okely, A. D., & Parrish, A. M. (2019). Flexible learning spaces facilitate interaction, collaboration and behavioural engagement in secondary school. PLoS One, 14(10), e0223607. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0223607 PMID:31584994 Kariippanon, K. E., Cliff, D. P., Lancaster, S. L., Okely, A. D., & Parrish, A. M. (2017). Perceived interplay between flexible learning spaces and teaching, learning and student wellbeing. Learning Environments Research, 1–20. Kivunja, C. (2014). Do you want your students to be job-ready with 21st century skills? change pedagogies: A pedagogical paradigm shift from Vygotskyian social constructivism to critical thinking, problem solving and Siemens’ digital connectivism. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(3), 81–91. doi:10.5430/ijhe.v3n3p81 Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70. Krumsvik, R. J. (2012). The Digital School and teacher education in Norway. In R. Schultz-Zander, B. Eickelmann, H. Mozer, H. Niesyto, & P. Grell (Eds.), Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 9 [The annual book of Mediapedagogy 9] (pp. 455–480). Springer VS. doi:10.1007/978-3-531-94219-3_20 Krumsvik, R. J. (2008). Situated learning and teachers’ digital competence. Education and Information Technologies, 13(4), 279–290. doi:10.100710639-008-9069-5 Lantolf, J. (2000). introducing sociocultural theory. In J. Lantolf (Ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

72

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Lee, N., Tan, S., & Tout, D. (2011). Evaluating learning spaces literature review. Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd. Retrieved from http://swinburne.edu.au/ Spl/learningspacesproject Leland, C. H., & Kasten, W. C. (2002). Literacy education for the 21st century: It’s time to close the factory. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 18(1), 5–15. doi:10.1080/105735602753386315 Leask, M., & Younie, S. (2001). Communal constructivist theory: Information and communications technology pedagogy and internationalisation of the curriculum. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(1-2), 117–134. doi:10.1080/14759390100200106 Leont’ev, A. (1981). Language of and in the classroom: Constructing the patterns of social life. Linguistics and Education, 5, 367–409. Loughlin, J. (2013). How photography as field notes helps in understanding the building the education revolution. Australian Educational Researcher, 40(5), 535–548. doi:10.100713384-013-0112-1 Mahat, M., Bradbeer, C., Byers, T., & Imms, W. (2018). Innovative learning environments and teacher change: Defining key concepts. Melbourne: LEaRN, University of Melbourne. Maher, D. (2020). Pre-service teachers’ digital competencies to support school students’ digital literacies. In Handbook of Research on Literacy and Digital Technology Integration in Teacher Education. IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-1461-0.ch002 Maher, D. (2019). Digitally enhanced learning spaces: A new innovation? In R. Nata (Ed.), Progress in Education (Vol. 55). Nova Science Publishers. Morrone, A., & Workman, S. B. (2014). Keeping pace with the rapid evolution of learning spaces. In K. Frasdser (Ed.), The future of learning and teaching in next generation learning spaces (pp. 47–62). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. doi:10.1108/S1479-362820140000012006 Mulcahy, D., & Morrison, C. (2017). Re/assembling ‘innovative’ learning environments: Affective practice and its politics. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(8), 749–758. doi:10.1080/00131857. 2016.1278354 Mulcahy, D., Cleveland, B., & Aberton, H. (2015). Learning spaces and pedagogic change: Envisioned, enacted and experienced. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23(4), 575–595. doi:10.1080/14681366.2015. 1055128 Netwong, T. (2019). The school library roles in information services through mainstreaming for enhance 21 st century learning skills. International Journal of Information and Education Technology (IJIET), 9(2), 154–158. doi:10.18178/ijiet.2019.9.2.1191 Nicholls, A. (2018). Managing educational innovations. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781351040860 OECD. (2017). Schools at the Crossroads of Innovation in Cities and Regions. OECD Publishing. OECD. (2016a). Education at a Glance 2016: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing. OECD. (2016b). PISA 2015 Results: Vol. I. Excellence and Equity in Education, PISA. OECD Publishing.

73

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

OECD/Eurostat. (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th Edition. The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities, Paris/ Eurostat, Luxembourg: OECD Publishing. Osborne, M. (2016). Innovative learning environments. CORE Education White Paper. Retrieved from https://www.core-ed.org/assets/PDFs/Innovative-Learning- Environments.pdf Paniagua, A., & Istance, D. (2018). Teachers as Designers of Learning Environments: The Importance of Innovative Pedagogies, Educational Research and Innovation. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264085374-en Piaget, J. (2005). Language and Thought of the Child: Selected Works (Vol. 5). Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203992739 Prinsloo, T., & Ainslie, A. (2019). A thematic literature review of the implementation of MOOCS- 2008 to 2018, 2018 Proceedings. Retrieved from http://elibrary.aisnet.org/Default.aspx?url=https://aisel.aisnet. org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?arti cle=1000&context=siged2018 Public Service Commission. (2013). Ideas at Work. Creating an Innovative Public Sector Discussion Paper. Retrieved from https://www.psc.nsw.gov.au/ArticleDocuments/ 1499/IDEAS_AT_WORKInnovation_Doc_Full.pdf.aspx Reich, R. B. (1989). The resurgent liberal (and other unfashionable prophecies). Random House. Robinson, A., & Bellert, A. (2019, November). Co-teaching in (refurbished) flexible learning spaces: Promoting quality acoustics for learning and collaboration. In Proceedings of ACOUSTICS (Vol. 10, No. 13). Academic Press. Sein-Echaluce, M. L., Fidalgo-Blanco, Á., & Alves, G. (2017). Technology behaviors in education innovation. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.049 Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X015002004 Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–22. doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 Skill, T. D., & Young, B. A. (2002). Embracing the hybrid model: Working at the intersections of virtual and physical learning spaces. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2002(92), 23–32. doi:10.1002/ tl.76 The European Commission. (2018). Communication from the commission to the European parliament, council, the European economic and social committee and the committee of the regions on the digital action plan. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52018 DC0022&from=EN Van Duzer, E. (2006). Overcoming the limitations of the factory system of education. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED490530.pdf

74

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Veloso, L., Marques, J. S., & Duarte, A. (2014). Changing education through learning spaces: Impacts of the Portuguese school buildings’ renovation programme. Cambridge Journal of Education, 44(3), 401–423. doi:10.1080/0305764X.2014.921280 Vincent-Lancrin, S., Urgel, J., Kar, S., & Jacotin, G. (2019). Measuring Innovation in Education 2019: What Has Changed in the Classroom? Educational Research and Innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/9789264311671-en Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press. Wagner, T. (2014). The global achievement gap. Assessment, 20–21. Young, F., Cleveland, B., & Imms, W. (2019). The affordances of innovative learning environments for deep learning: Educators’ and architects’ perceptions. Australian Educational Researcher, 1–28.

ADDITIONAL READING Benade, L. (2019). Effective teaching in flexible learning spaces. In M. Hill & M. Thrupp (Eds.), The professional practice of teaching (6th ed.). Cengage Learning. Buchanan, J., Pressick-Kilborn, K., & Maher, D. (2019). Promoting environmental education for primary school-aged students using digital technologies. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(2), 1–15. Budiyono, M., Haryono, M., Utanto, Y., & Subkhan, E. (2018, February). Educational technologist competencies at school. In 1st International Conference on Education Innovation (ICEI 2017). Atlantis Press. 10.2991/icei-17.2018.14 Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018). Comparative analysis of the impact of traditional versus innovative learning environment on student attitudes and learning outcomes. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 167–177. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.003 Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018). Evaluating teacher and student spatial transition from a traditional classroom to an innovative learning environment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 156–166. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.004 Chang, I. H., Hsu, C. M., & Hu, C. C. (2019, June). The relationships among principals’ technology leadership, teachers’ learning community and innovation management of junior high schools. In EdMedia+ Innovate Learning (pp. 453-465). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Charteris, J., Smardon, D., & Nelson, E. (2017). Innovative learning environments and new materialism: A conjunctural analysis of pedagogic spaces. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(8), 808–821. do i:10.1080/00131857.2017.1298035 Charteris, J., Smardon, D., & Page, A. (2018). Spatialised practices in ILEs: Pedagogical transformations and learner agency. In L. Benade & M. Jackson (Eds.), Transforming education: Design & governance in global contexts (pp. 19–32). Springer Nature. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-5678-9_2

75

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Dooly, M. (2018). “I do which the question”: Students’ innovative use of technology resources in the language classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 22(1), 184–217. Flogie, A., Aberšek, B., & Pesek, I. (2019). The impact of innovative learning environments on social competences of youth. Research in Learning Technology, 27(0), 27. doi:10.25304/rlt.v27.2214 Imms, W. (2016). New generation learning environments: How can we find out if what works is working? In W. Imms, B. Cleveland, & K. Fisher (Eds.), Evaluating learning environments: Snapshots of emerging issues, methods and knowledge (pp. 21–34). Sense Publishers. doi:10.1007/978-94-6300-537-1_2 Jaatinen, J., & Lindfors, E. (2019). Makerspaces for pedagogical innovation processes: How Finnish comprehensive schools create space for makers. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 24(2), n2. Kearney, M., Maher, D., & Pham, L. (2019). Investigating pre-service teachers’ use of digital professional learning networks. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 20–35. Kearney, M., & Maher, D. (2019). Mobile learning in pre-service teacher education: Examining the use of professional learning networks. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 135–158. doi:10.14742/ajet.4073 Koh, J. H. L. (2019). TPACK design scaffolds for supporting teacher pedagogical change. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(3), 577–595. doi:10.100711423-018-9627-5 Lachney, M., Babbitt, W., Bennett, A., & Eglash, R. (2019). A voice to talk about it: Cosmetologists as STEM experts in educational technology design and implementation. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 22(2), 41–55. doi:10.2478/eurodl-2019-0009 Maher, D. (2020). Altered Realities: How virtual and augmented realities are supporting learning. In J. Keengwe (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Innovative Pedagogies and Best Practices in Teacher Education. IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-9232-7.ch003 Maher, D. (2019). The use of Course Management Systems in pre-service teacher education. In J. Keengwe (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Blended Learning Pedagogies and Professional Development in Higher Education. IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5557-5.ch011 Maher, D. (2018). Supporting pre-service teachers’ understanding and use of mobile devices. In J. Keengwe (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mobile Technology, Constructivism and Meaningful Learning. IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-3949-0.ch009 Maher, D., & Prescott, A. (2017). Professional development for rural and remote teachers using video conferencing. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 45(5), 1–19. doi:10.1080/1359866X.2017.1296930 Maher, D., & Twining, P. (2017). Bring your own device – a snapshot of two Australian primary schools. Educational Research, 59(1), 73–88. doi:10.1080/00131881.2016.1239509 Maher, D., & Young, K. (2017). The use of mobile devices to support young people with disabilities. Advances in Communications and Media Research (Vol. 12). Nova Science Publishers. Maher, D. (2013). Pre-service primary teachers’ use of iPads to support teaching: Implications for teacher education. Educational Research for Social Change, 1(2), 48–63.

76

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

Malik, S., Rohendi, D., & Widiaty, I. (2019, February). Technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) with information and communication technology (ICT) integration: A literature review. In 5th UPI International Conference on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (ICTVET 2018). Atlantis Press. 10.2991/ictvet-18.2019.114 Naziri, F., Rasul, M. S., & Affandi, H. M. (2019). Importance of Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) in Design and Technology Subject. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 9(1), 99–108. doi:10.6007/IJARBSS/v9-i1/5366 Prescott, A., & Maher, D. (2018). The use of mobile technologies in the primary school mathematics classroom- developing ‘create-alouds’. Using Mobile Technologies in the Learning of Mathematics. Springer. Richards-Schuster, K., Ruffolo, M., & Hiltz, B. (2019). Innovating practices to prepare students for graduate school: Lessons from a social work MOOC. Journal of Social Work Education, 55(2), 1–13. doi:10.1080/10437797.2018.1548986 Salas-Rueda, R. A. (2019). TPACK: Technological, pedagogical and content model necessary to improve the educational process on mathematics through a web application? International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), 1–13. doi:10.29333/iejme/5887 Sardinha, L., Almeida, A. M. P., & Pedro, N. (2020). A multidimensional space approach to innovative learning environments. In M. Rehm, J. Saldien, & S. Manca (Eds.), Project and design literacy as cornerstones of smart education (pp. 109–117). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-981-13-9652-6_10 Schuck, S., & Maher, D. (2018). Creating opportunities for untethered learning. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 27(4), 473–484. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2018.1510788 Sickel, J. L. (2019). The great media debate and TPACK: A multidisciplinary examination of the role of technology in teaching and learning. Journal of Research on Technology in \ Education, 1-14. Skill, T. D., & Young, B. A. (2002). Embracing the hybrid model: Working at the intersections of virtual and physical learning spaces. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 92(92), 23–32. doi:10.1002/tl.76 Temple, P., & Fillippakou, O. (2007). Learning spaces for the 21 st century: A review of the literature. Centre for Higher Education Studies, University of London. Retrieved from https://www.heacademy. ac.uk/system/files/Learning_spaces_v3.pdf Zipke, M. (2018). Preparing teachers to teach with technology: Examining the effectiveness of a course in educational technology. New Educator, 14(4), 342–362. doi:10.1080/1547688X.2017.1401191

77

 Innovative Practices in Primary and Secondary School Learning Environments

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Flexible Learning Spaces (FLSs): These spaces provide new opportunities for students and teachers to work together supported by a student-centred approach to learning. Innovation: Experimental activities undertaken in educational contexts that test new approaches to teaching and learning. Innovative Learning Environments (ILEs): These are flexible spaces that support students and teachers to work in a variety of different groupings, supported by technology. Social Constructivism: A theory of learning that sets out learning is socially constructed and supported by the use of tools. TPACK: This framework builds on Shulman’s (1986, 1987) model of Pedagogical Content Knowledge and focuses on teachers’ understanding of educational practices based around technological knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, content knowledge and the interaction of these. TPeCS: This framework builds on the TPACK framework to include the use of space as a factor that is part of teacher’s knowledge that needs to be considered.

78

79

Chapter 5

‘Play Is Serious Learning’:

Using Mobile Augmented Reality Gaming to Support Science Learning Denise Bressler https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5978-8902 East Carolina University, USA Shane Tutwiler University of Rhode Island, USA

ABSTRACT In this chapter, the authors report on a mobile augmented reality game designed to support serious science learning in a playful, collaborative way. School Scene Investigators: The Case of the Mystery Power immersed eighth grade students in a fictional crime scene investigation at their school. Gamebased learning was compared to business-as-usual. In the post-hoc analyses, the authors investigated how individual level factors affected learning. First, girls and boys both learned more during the game, yet boys seemed to experience a slightly bigger impact from the treatment. Second, students from both teachers learned more during gameplay; however, the game seemed to mitigate the novice teacher’s inexperience resulting in a teacher effect. Lastly, there is some evidence that treatment varies by prior knowledge; students with lower prior knowledge may have benefited more from the game. This study demonstrates that the non-traditional practice of mobile augmented reality gaming promotes more effective learning than business-as-usual.

INTRODUCTION In the past century, we have seen a societal paradigm shift that has rendered the traditional educational system obsolete; we need a system that prepares students for working in the Information Age, not the Industrial Age (Reigeluth, 1994). To work in the Information Age, students need 21st century skills; today’s work-life requires professionals who can think critically, communicate clearly, and collaborate effectively (Battelle for Kids, 2019). Unfortunately, research has found that workers are drastically illDOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch005

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

prepared with such skills; in fact, companies often need to train their employees in not only 21st century skills but also foundational skills such as reading and math (Casner-Lotto, Rosenblum, & Wright, 2009). Beyond lack of effective preparation, kids are bored at school (Willingham, 2010). Traditional practices of teaching and learning leave students disengaged because young people learn differently—they want active, exploratory learning (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004). To compete in the global economy, our schools need to provide learning environments that engage students and encourage 21st century skills. Non-traditional educational practices such as well-designed educational games hold great promise to satisfy this extraordinarily unique but critically important set of requirements. James Paul Gee, a preeminent scholar on games and learning, argued that while school has set aside some of the best learning principles, games have embraced and incorporated them (Gee, 2007). In this chapter, we will report on a mobile augmented reality game designed to support serious science learning in a playful and collaborative way. Developed for eighth grade science students, School Scene Investigators: The Case of the Mystery Power (SSI: Mystery Powder) immersed students in a fictional crime scene investigation that took place at their school. Students played on iPads with quick-response (QR) codes posted around the school. Learning in the game was compared to a ‘tried and true’ hands-on laboratory experiment where students determined the components of a mystery powder by testing three known powders (cornstarch, baking soda, and sugar) with iodine, pH paper, vinegar, and heat. In the sections that follow, we will explore the game design choices we made in order to create a serious learning game that was also enjoyable and playful. We will make the case that several factors including gender, teacher, and prior knowledge play a role in how well students learn in game-based learning (GBL) environments. We will report on a quasi-experimental research study comparing learning outcomes from SSI: Mystery Powder to learning outcomes from a traditional science experiment. Prior research reported that SSI: Mystery Powder promotes collaborative learning (Bressler, 2014; Bressler & Bodzin, 2016); therefore, the goal of this study was to control for group level effects and investigate whether individual level factors affected student’s learning of scientific practices. We examine our research questions using Bayesian multilevel modeling (Gelman & Hill, 2006; Gelman, Hill, & Yajima, 2012) to conduct post-hoc analyses of a subset of data previously reported in Bressler and Bodzin (2016).

BACKGROUND People enjoy learning…learning new things makes us feel good. Unfortunately, the way today’s schools treat learning, you wouldn’t know that learning is supposed to be enjoyable (Gee, 2007). One way to bring joy back to learning is through play; according to Stuart Brown (2009), a contemporary expert on play, the ability to play is critical to being happy and to being a creative, innovative person. Brown (2009) is adamant about the relationship between play and learning—learning is enhanced by play. Unfortunately, in today’s society, play is often seen as an unproductive waste of time. To use a famous quote from Mister Rogers (2002), “play is often talked about as if it were a relief from serious learning. But for children, play is serious learning” (p.47). Fortunately, we can bring play back to schools. When a learning game is designed effectively, students have a strong perception of playing (Lu & Lien, 2020). The experience afforded by GBL is not only playful but also serious learning. Research has shown that GBL can promote a deeper learning experience than non-game learning (Bressler & Bodzin, 2016; Clark, Tanner-Smith, Hostetler, Fradkin & Polikov, 2018). Games are particularly effective learning environments; students demonstrate higher learning

80

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

gains in games than in simulations and virtual worlds (Merchant, Goetz, Cifuentes, Keeney-Kennicutt, & Davis, 2014). One might argue that games offer higher learning gains because games are more playful.

Game Design To bring playful learning back to science education, we designed a mobile augmented reality (AR) science game.

Why Mobile? According to an extensive literature review conducted by Koutromanos and Avraamidou (2014), mobile games offer several advantages; mobile games support engagement, promote collaboration, and foster the development of various scientific skills. Engagement. Since the early days of mobile learning games, high levels of engagement have been documented (Bressler & Bodzin, 2013; Dunleavy, Dede, & Mitchell, 2009; Facer et al., 2004; Perry et al., 2008). From their literature review on mobile games, Koutromanos and Avraamidou (2014) concluded that the most prevalent finding was that these games not only engage players but also facilitate positive feelings. In other words, mobile games seem to support joyful learning, which was important to our design. Collaboration. In mobile games, each player can have their own device; unique information can be delivered to each player. Through scripted collaboration, this design provides shared power and authority between the players which promotes effective social interaction (Demetriadis, Tsiatsos, & Karakostas, 2012). However, the majority of mobile games disregard this social element of gameplay and leave it out of their designs (Permadi & Rafi, 2016). We decided to intentionally make this part of our design. Science skills. For over a decade, researchers have demonstrated that mobile games can support scientific skills such as inquiry (Dunleavy et al., 2009; Rosenbaum, Klopfer, & Perry, 2007; Squire & Klopfer, 2007) and argumentation (Mathews, Holden, Jan, & Martin, 2008; Squire & Jan, 2007). No wonder that since the turn of the century, more and more games have found their way into science education (Cheng, Chen, Chu, & Chen, 2015). In 2013, Cheng and Tsai reviewed several studies of mobile games and found that the collaborative design encourages players to actually practice science by observing phenomena, asking questions, investigating data, creating hypotheses, and constructing explanations. Given this strong support for collaborative mobile games and science learning, we decided to investigate how well our game could promote scientific practices.

Why Realistic? Well-designed educational games often immerse players in a realistic experience (Annetta, Murray, Laird, Bohr, & Park, 2006; Dede, 2009). In order for our game to create a real-world experience, players selected roles that enabled them to role-play within a place-based storyline interacting with characters and tools at specific locations. Augmented Reality. A fairly recent trend in mobile gaming is AR (Koutromanos & Avraamidou, 2014) which helps to create the immersive feel of the game. Mobile games that incorporate AR are “played in the real world with the support of digital devices (PDAs, cellphones) that create a fictional layer on top of the real-world context” (Squire & Jan, 2007, p. 6). In our game, QR codes were posted around the

81

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

school in locations chosen specifically to embed the storyline within the real-world context. For example, when students needed to interview the janitor as a suspect, they scanned a code at the custodian supplies closet (see Figure 1). AR not only makes the game feel more immersive but also improves learning. In a systematic review of the research to date, Clark, Tanner-Smith, and Killingsworth (2016) determined that augmented game designs offer significant learning benefits in comparison to standard game designs. Figure 1. Students scanning QR code (left) and what they see on-screen (right).

Role-Playing. As the most popular game type in science education (Cheng et al., 2015), role-playing games provide a means for thinking about scientific content within a relevant context (Shaffer, 2006). Squire and Jan (2007) found that the game roles enabled students to see themselves as investigators—rather than students—and this helped to support their scientific thinking. According to Barab et al. (2007b), role-playing is a powerful design decision because students can engage in meaningful interactions within the gamespace. Players sometimes embody their roles so deeply that they see “their abilities within the game as tied to their roles in an authentic way, like a real occupation” (Rosenbaum et al., 2007, p. 40). For example, during Sick at South Beach, students became water chemists, medical doctors, and wildlife ecologists; each student developed a different expertise and argued quite intensely from their role’s viewpoint (Squire, 2010). Overall, playing a role is a realistic way to experience science education and can even increase player self-efficacy in science (Ketelhut, 2007); therefore, students took on unique roles during our game. Storyline. A compelling narrative can transport a participant to another time and place, one that can seem very real (Gerrig, 1993). It can also help sustain players’ motivation and curiosity (Dickey, 2011). According to Dunleavy and Dede (2013), the narrative is a critical game design decision, yet a number of mobile games lack a great background story (Permadi & Rafi, 2016). For science education, narra-

82

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

tive is especially important because it provides a structure in which to think (Squire & Klopfer, 2007). By participating in a realistic narrative, students can develop a rich understanding of science (Barab, Sadler, Heiselt, Hickey, & Zuiker, 2007a). In fact, Lester et al. (2014) determined that their game narrative supported players’ science content learning. A well-crafted narrative can even support problemsolving (Dickey, 2006) and research has shown that students enjoy problem-solving games (Fraser, Shane-Simpson, & Asbell-Clarke, 2014). We decided to set up our narrative with a problem: Who stole the money from the cafeteria cash register? The only clue is an unknown white powder. Was the janitor the thief? He uses cornstarch as a cleaning agent. Maybe it was the secretary who recently baked sugar cookies? Perhaps a student did it? Destiny designed a rocket that uses baking soda. Everyone is a suspect with equally compelling backstories, so players need to use science to determine the real culprit.

Why Collaborative? Collaboration is critical in today’s digital society; to be able to work effectively in a group and solve problems together is an essential skill for thriving in our knowledge economy (Groff, 2018). Unfortunately, although there are games that focus on 21st century skills like critical thinking and problem-solving, few of these games emphasize collaboration (Qian & Clark, 2016). Collaboration should be considered as an important game design decision because research shows that playing learning games collaboratively is more effective than playing them individually (Wouters, van Nimwegen, van Oostendorp, & van der Spek, 2013). Playing collaboratively has also been shown to increase enjoyment, promote collaboration skills, and improve overall learning. Enjoyment. Simply speaking, when players collaborate during gameplay, they tend to enjoy the experience (Kaye & Bryce, 2014). Research has determined several reasons why this may be the case. First, when players collaborate during gameplay, they feel more positively about the content they are learning (Chang & Hwang, 2017; Ke & Grabowski, 2007; Looi, Chen, & Ng, 2010). Second, during collaborative gameplay, students are significantly more likely to make positive comments to their groupmates (Peppler, Danish, & Phelps, 2013). Third, playing games collaboratively has been shown to support sociocultural engagement (Plass, Homer, & Kinzer, 2015) and even put players in a positive mood (Kaye & Bryce, 2014). Given this research, we decided to include collaboration in our game design because playing collaboratively has been shown to enhance the playing experience—and we wanted our students to enjoy the experience. Facilitates collaboration. Collaborative play is not only enjoyable but also can help students learn how to collaborate better (Sánchez & Olivares, 2011). According to a research review conducted by Li and Tsai (2013), well-designed science games have the potential to promote collaborative problem-solving. To facilitate collaboration among players, game designers should design the game tasks and mechanisms appropriately (Li & Tsai, 2013). One effective mechanism is scaffolding. According to Demetriadis et al. (2012), freely collaborating students do not naturally interact in ways that are productive; students need scaffolding to have productive learning interactions. Chen and Law (2016) recommend hard scaffolds, such as open-ended questions. Another effective mechanism is peer encouragement. Chang and Hwang (2017) discovered that when the game encouraged students to provide assistance to other players, collaborative skills improved. Overall, since effective collaboration can be facilitated, we intentionally designed our game to support positive group interactions. Enhances learning. The research on collaborative games is piling up…when players collaborate, learning is enhanced (Chang & Hwang, 2017; Chatterjee, Mohanty, & Bhattacharya, 2011; Wouters et

83

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

al., 2013). What makes collaborative play so effective? First, cooperation and collaboration are positively correlated with game performance outcomes (Andrews et al., 2017); in other words, when players work well together, their performance improves. Second, researchers have known for some time that when players work in a group with interdependency, it can effectively scaffold collaborative problem solving (Dunleavy et al., 2009; Squire & Jan, 2007). According to Johnson, Johnson, and Holubec (1993), “interdependence is successfully structured when group members perceive that they are linked with each other in a way that one cannot succeed unless everyone succeeds” (p. 9). Nebel et al. (2017) determined that when the design had more interdependence, players’ performance in the game increased resulting in enhanced learning outcomes. Lastly, when collaborative knowledge construction mechanisms are built into the gaming process, research shows that students organize knowledge and apply it effectively to solve problems (Sung & Hwang, 2018). To conclude, if the game can structure a good collaborative relationship between group members through interdependency, it should improve game performance, problem-solving, and ultimately improve learning. Given this compelling research, our game was designed with interdependent roles.

Factors Affecting GBL Being engaged in the gaming experience—in other words, perceiving the game as playful—has a crucial impact on how well students develop complex thinking skills during gameplay (Eseryel, Law, Ifenthaler, Xun, & Miller, 2014). Given the previous section, we did our best to design an effective learning game that would hopefully feel playful and offer serious learning. Individual level factors may contribute to how well students learn. Specifically, based on previous research, gender, teacher, and prior knowledge may impact learning during gameplay.

Gender Kulturel-Konak, D’Allegro, and Dickinson (2011) argued that girls and boys have different learning styles and that teaching methodologies can make a difference in closing the gender gap in science education. GBL may be the answer given that girls have been known to outperform boys. However, results have also revealed higher performance from boys and even results that lack a gender effect. Basically, the jury is out, and more research is required. Here’s what we know so far. Some experts argue that GBL is better suited for girls. In one study, after students used a science learning game, Khan, Ahmad, and Malik (2017) discovered that girls were more engaged than boys and they also learned more. In comparison to the boys, the girls displayed more positive body language, more focus, and more confidence; they also scored higher on their post-tests. Lukosch, Kurapati, Groen, and Verbraeck (2017) also found that gender was an important factor in GBL; gender actually affected game performance. In their study, girls outperformed boys on a difficult game level indicating that the girls were better able to plan tasks. Some researchers have even studied the influence of gender on feelings of flow during gameplay. When appropriately challenged, players can sometimes achieve flow, a positive psychological state that is both enjoyable and intrinsically rewarding (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996). Hsieh, Lin, and Hou (2016) discovered that not only did girls experience greater flow but also higher flow was associated with higher learning. Some experts argue that boys have a distinct advantage in GBL environments over girls. For example, when Nietfeld, Shores, and Hoffmann (2014) examined students’ behaviors while using a cognitive tool

84

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

that was essential to gameplay, they found that boys used it more effectively than girls. In another study, students played a game about resource classification and Hsieh, Lin, and Hou (2015) discovered that the boys were more engaged than the girls. In a third study, Israel, Wang, and Marino (2016) studied a series of science games and found no gender effect in the aggregated dataset; however, when each game was analyzed individually, certain games revealed a gender effect with boys outperforming girls on content post-tests. Lastly, in some GBL studies, gender seems to have no effect at all. Bressler and Bodzin (2013) determined that gender was not predictive of engagement in a science mystery game. In a recent study, Steinmaurer, Pirker, and Gütl (2019) studied students playing a computational thinking game played on a mobile device and found that girls and boys demonstrated similar performances; in other words, the duration of the missions was similar for both boys and girls. When Lester et al. (2014) investigated their narrative-based science game, there were no differences in learning gains based on gender. In another study with the same game, girls had a quantifiable disadvantage based on their perceived skills and prior gaming experiences, and still achieved similar levels of content learning gains as boys (Nietfeld et al., 2014). Girls have also shown that they can perform as well as boys on a transfer task after playing a science mystery game (Nietfeld, 2020).

Teacher Integrating games into a classroom environment is not just child’s play, it can be a struggle even for the most experienced teacher. According to Chee, Mehrotra, and Ong (2015), teachers’ struggle with the tension between the innovation related to GBL which encourages change and the inherent nature of school systems to maintain status quo. While using games in the classroom, research shows that teachers need to capitalize on teachable moments—in order to foster productive gameplay—yet they may not have the skills to do so (Watson, Mong, & Harris, 2011). Ultimately, incorporating GBL into their classroom requires teachers to learn new practices (Molin, 2017) and to be creative (Nousiainen, Kangas, Rikala, & Vesisenaho, 2018) which is a lot to ask of either a novice or expert teacher. Although it can be a struggle, teachers need to take an active role in GBL in order to create a productive gaming experience (Ulicsak & Williamson, 2010). Bado (2019) determined that during gameplay, effective teachers provide content scaffolding and technical assistance while also managing classroom activities. In particular, the scaffolding was essential in creating an enjoyable and productive gaming experience for the students. Bressler and Bodzin (2016) discovered that during GBL teachers facilitate student learning by acting as a guide-on-the-side; students generally sought out the teachers for support when needed, rather than teachers supplying didactic instruction. In a study of collaborative GBL, Hämäläinen and Oksanen (2014) found that teachers can help student groups be more productive; specifically, effective teachers involve students in interpreting the context and asking appropriate questions along with generating ideas and providing explanations. Although this research indicates that the teacher plays a crucial role in GBL, the role of the teacher is often underplayed in the current GBL literature (Molin, 2017). Not only is the role of the teacher often overlooked, but the research is contradictory. Research on using games in the classroom seems to favor younger teachers. Novice teachers tend to believe that games can be used effectively in learning and instruction more than experienced teachers (Hsu, Tsai, Chang, & Liang, 2017). Younger teachers are also more confident than older teachers not only at using

85

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

games to represent content knowledge but also at integrating games in the classroom to promote learning (Hsu et al., 2017). Yet, expert teachers have been shown to excel over novice teachers in several areas that are important to student learning. Novice teachers tend to focus on maintaining disciplines, while expert teachers focus on their ability to influence learning (Wolff, van den Bogert, Jarodzka, & Boshuizen, 2015). More expert teachers tend to have a superior grasp on classroom management techniques, and they can provide better instructional explanations than novice teachers (Lachner, Jarodzka, & Nückles, 2016). According to Krepf, Plöger, Scholl, and Seifert (2018), when working with the students, expert teachers activate both their content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge in combination which enables them to achieve superior teaching performance over novice teachers. Overall, research on the teacher’s role in GBL is sparse; according to Molin (2017), we lack empirical studies in this area. Thus, it remains to be seen whether integrating GBL for the purposes of student learning is better achieved by an expert or a novice teacher.

Prior Knowledge In problem-based learning, prior knowledge is a critical factor contributing to knowledge and skills outcomes; Dochy, Segers, Van den Bossche, and Gijbels (2003) conducted an extensive meta-analysis and discovered that the effect of a problem-based learning intervention varies greatly depending on the prior expertise level of students. Prior knowledge plays an important role in GBL as well. When students played a 3D science role-playing game, players who had higher prior knowledge outperformed those who had lower prior knowledge (Chen, Wong, & Wang, 2014). Learners with more prior knowledge scored higher on both a science achievement test and a survey measuring motivation to learn science. Similar results have been obtained outside of science education. After playing an English language roleplaying game, students with prior knowledge in English scored higher on an English achievement test than students with lower prior knowledge (Yang & Quadir, 2018). Prior knowledge is not only important for performance on achievement tests, it plays a role in other ways as well. In one study, Chen and Huang (2013) studied the nature of the knowledge gains that are affected by prior knowledge in GBL. In their game that delivered declarative knowledge, students with higher prior knowledge had higher learning gains than those with lower prior knowledge. However, in their game that delivered procedural knowledge, the effect was the opposite. Chen and Huang (2013) concluded that prior knowledge in GBL is useful when the learning is focused on declarative knowledge; however, prior knowledge may not be useful when the focus is on procedural knowledge. In another study, Nietfeld (2020) had students participate for six sessions within an immersive GBL environment that focused on scientific inquiry. After gameplay, players completed a transfer task by creating a novel, out-of-the-game final project. According to Nietfeld (2020), science prior knowledge predicted whether students were able to transfer in-game learning to the final project. Since our game is an immersive role-playing game focused on science, the influence of prior knowledge cannot be overlooked; however, collaborative learning was also an integral design choice which could have consequences as well. There is evidence supporting the fact that prior knowledge does influence learning outcomes in collaborative settings. In one study, Cai and Gu (in press) determined that students who participated in collaborative problem-solving and had higher prior knowledge developed better factual knowledge than those with lower prior knowledge. In another study, Zambrano, Kirschner, Sweller, and Kirschner (2019) found that when students are asked to collaboratively work on complex problem-

86

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

solving tasks, prior knowledge dictates learning; specifically, students with higher prior knowledge will outperform those with lower prior knowledge. Interestingly, there is also evidence supporting the fact that prior knowledge does not influence learning outcomes in collaborative settings. In her landmark study, Barron (2003) discovered that prior knowledge did not account for differences in learning outcomes; in fact, it was how the groupmates responded to each other’s ideas that determined success.

Research Questions In our post-hoc analysis, we account for certain influences based on the above-mentioned literature. Given the mixed research results on gender and GBL, our study investigated the relationship between gender and learning. Our first question is: Does the impact of mobile AR on learning differ for boys and girls? Given that the teacher plays an important role in creating productive gameplay and teacher experience can influence learning outcomes, our study investigated the relationship between teacher and learning. Our second question is: Does the impact of mobile AR on learning differ between teachers? Given that prior knowledge can affect learning in both GBL and collaborative environments, our study investigated the relationship between prior knowledge and learning. Our third question is: Does the impact of mobile AR on learning differ based on prior knowledge?

RESEARCH PROJECT The purpose of this study was to investigate whether individual level factors contributed to collaborative learning outcomes from SSI: Mystery Powder and a control activity (See Figure 2). Students in the quasi-experiment played SSI: Mystery Powder, a mobile AR game mostly played on iPads by scanning QR codes located all around the school environment; at one point during the game, players conducted a short hands-on experiment and if their findings were correct, they continued gameplay. Students participating in the control activity spent all their time in the classroom conducting multiple experiments. This section presents the study’s sample and procedure, measures, data analytic plan, results, and discussion.

Sample and Procedure Participants were 203 eighth grade science students from a middle school in Pennsylvania, USA. The school was located in a diverse, urban area with many low-income households. Full classes were randomly assigned to conditions because implementing both the treatment and the control in the same class was undesirable. In total, 74 students participated in the experiment and 129 students participated in the control activity. Two teachers participated. Teacher A taught 2 treatment and 2 control classes. Teacher B taught 1 experiment and 3 control classes. Both the control and the experimental conditions required students to work in collaborative groups, so for each class, students were randomly assigned to working groups consisting of 3 to 4 students. All participants completed a survey of demographic information and a culminating artifact. The culminating artifact included 9 open-ended responses designed to measure scientific practices. Two raters individually rated all artifacts and then met to discuss all differences. Bressler and Bodzin (2016) described the rating process and noted that inter-rater reliability was Pearson’s r = .90 for all artifacts.

87

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Figure 2. Students playing SSI: Mystery Powder (left) and students in the control (right).

Prior knowledge was derived from the mathematics and ELA scores from the state standardized test given to all students the year prior to the implementation.

Measures Based on our instruments and demographic information, we derived the following measures to answer our research questions. We organize them by type (outcome or predictor). Descriptive statistics of the constructed measures are given in Table 1.

Outcome Scientific Practice: A continuous variable derived from the coded scientific practice scores, scaled for interpretation so that the mean was 0 and standard deviation was 1 (minimum = -3.07, maximum = 2.11).

Predictors Treatment: A dichotomous variable equal to 1 if the student was in a class participating in SSI: Mystery Powder, and 0 if the student was in a control class.

88

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Female: A dichotomous variable equal to 1 if the student identified as female, or 0 if not (presumed male). Teach: A dichotomous variable equal to 1 if the student was in a class for teacher A’s class or 0 if not (ergo, in teacher B’s class). Pre_know: A continuous variable measuring prior academic knowledge, derived from the average of a student’s math and ELA standardized test scores from the prior year, scaled so that the mean was 0 and standard deviation was 1 (minimum = -2.37, maximum = 3.01).

Table 1. Descriptive statistics (mean (sd)) of measures derived from instruments and demographic information Variable

Treatment (n=74)

Control (n=129)

Scientific Practice

0.29 (0.94)

-0.15 (1.01)

Female

0.43 (0.50)

0.53 (0.50)

Teach

0.41 (0.49)

0.58 (0.50)

Pre_know

0.22 (1.19)

-0.13 (0.85)

Data Analytic Plan Given the small, non-random nature of the current sample, traditional null hypothesis significance testing of estimates derived from least squares or maximum likelihood-based models was not appropriate (Gelman & Carlin, 2014; Gelman et al., 2013). As such, we opted to answer our research questions by fitting a taxonomy of multilevel Bayesian regression models, with our variables of interest being the interaction effects between the treatment variable and our three predictors. Our proposed data generating model was: ScientificPracticesijk ~ Normal(μ,σ)

µ = α + α group[ j ] + α class[k ] + β1Treatmentk + ω X i + γ (Treatmentk * X i )

𝛽 ~ Normal(0, 1) 𝛼 ~ Normal(0, 10) 𝜎 ~ Exponential(1) In this model, the observed data are modeled as being normally distributed and a function of the linear combination of the treatment variable (treatment), the main effects of the predictor variables (female, teacher, and prior knowledge, indexed as the vector ⍵), and the interaction effects between the treatment and the predictors (indexed as the vector γ). It is these interaction terms that we will interpret to answer our research questions. Informative priors—Normal(0,1)—were used on the estimates both to help regulate our estimates and prevent overfitting of the models to potential outliers, as well as to reflect our prior belief that large relationships (more than a standard deviation) were not likely (McElreath, 2016).

89

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

We systematically built our final model by first fitting a model with no predictors but that accounted for clustering by group and class. We then fitted models testing the main effects of treatment and prior knowledge, and then their interaction effects. Next, we included the main effects of gender and teacher, before finally interacting teacher and gender with the treatment variable, resulting in our final fitted model. We conducted our analyses using the rstanarm package (Stan Development Team, 2016) in the R statistical programming environment (R Core Team, 2019). The code used to conduct these analyses is available upon request.

Results We observed four divergent transitions after warm-up in our final model, though these did not impact mixing quality or convergence. Adequate evidence of convergence was observed via visual examination of trace-plots. Estimated parameters had effective sample sizes greater than 10% of the total sample size (i.e., there was minimal effect of autocorrelation); Monte Carlo standard errors that were less than 10% of the posterior standard deviations; and R-hat statistics less than 1.1. Visual inspection of predicted probability plots showed congruence with observed values. Findings from the final model were robust against a range of specified priors for the coefficient of interest. The final model explained 62% of the variation in scientific practices scores, with 51% of variation attributable to the student group and period information.

Figure 3. Posterior medians, 50% credible intervals (bold), and 90% credible intervals (light), of estimated relationships between predictors of interest and post-intervention scientific practices scores for our final fitted model.

90

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

We note in Figure 3, above, that there was a positive effect of the use of SSI on science practice scores, on average. Given the complexity of our final model, we first explored the average treatment effect (ATE) of engaging in SSI: Mystery Powder by examining the mean and distribution of the posterior predictive distribution of the treatment variable. We note in panel I of Figure 4, below, that students who used SSI: Mystery Powder had scientific practice scores that were 0.5 standard deviation units higher than their peers in the control condition, with about 70% of the posterior predicted draws greater than 0. In order to determine the degree to which our specific model specifications might have impacted our estimate of the impact of SSI: Mystery Powder, we used Bayesian model averaging to examine the effect of SSI: Mystery Powder across all of the models we tested. We note in panel II of Figure 4 that, across all potential models, the average treatment effect is 0.43 standard deviation units, with about 70% of the posterior predicted draws greater than 0. Furthermore, the statistical interactions in the last three rows answer our research questions by indicating the degree to which treatment effects varied by gender, teacher, and prior knowledge: Figure 4. Average treatment effect of the use of SSI: Mystery Powder as determined by the final model (I) and averaged across all tested models (II).

RQ1: Does the impact of mobile AR on learning differ for boys and girls? The median posterior estimate of the interaction effect between female and treatment effects (treatment:female in Figure 3, above), was -0.3, with a standard deviation of 0.2 (90% Credible Interval = -.60 to 0). That is to say, there is some evidence of a gender-based effect with the difference between girls in the treatment and control groups being less pronounced than the difference between their male peers.

91

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

RQ2: Does the impact of mobile AR on learning differ between teachers? The median posterior estimate of the interaction effect between teacher and treatment effects (treatment:teach, in Figure 3 above) was -0.6 with a standard deviation of 0.5 (90% Credible Interval = -1.2 to 0.1). In other words, while both students in both teachers’ classes showed gains, on average, there is evidence that the difference between treatment and control students was more pronounced in Teacher A’s class as compared to Teacher B. RQ3: Does the impact of mobile AR on learning differ based on prior knowledge? The median posterior estimate of the interaction effect between treatment and prior knowledge (treatment:pre_know in Figure 3 above) was -0.1 with a standard deviation of 0.1 (90% Credible Interval = -0.2 to 0.1). Given the data, there is slight evidence that the difference between treatment and control students are greater for students with lower prior knowledge (e.g., -2 sd below the sample mean) as compared to their peers with high prior knowledge (e.g., 2 sd above the sample mean). We unpack these complex statistical interactions in the discussion section that follows.

Discussion In this quasi-experimental research study, we examined several research questions pertaining to SSI: Mystery Powder in order to determine whether certain individual level factors influenced learning outcomes. First, playing the game had a positive effect on learning for both boys and girls; however, the effect was slightly stronger for boys. Second, students from both teachers experienced a positive effect on learning by playing the game; however, the effect was stronger for the novice teacher. Lastly, the effect on learning seemed to vary based on the amount of prior knowledge. On one hand, game players with lower general knowledge experienced a more positive effect on learning than control students with lower general knowledge. On the other hand, game players with higher general knowledge still learned but the positive effect on learning was statistically indistinguishable from control students with higher general knowledge.

Gender Using scores on an open-ended instrument that measured scientific practices as the outcome variable, we determined that both boys and girls learned more by using our collaborative science game than by participating in business-as-usual. Prior research in GBL environments supports this finding. First, Clark et al. (2018) determined that GBL can promote deeper learning than non-game experiences. Second, using meta-analytic techniques, Sitzmann (2011) investigated 55 reports on computer-based games and found that game players acquired more factual knowledge than those who had a more traditional experience. Third, Vogel et al. (2006) examined 32 GBL studies and determined that learning outcomes were more dominant for games over traditional teaching. Yet, boys playing SSI: Mystery Powder experienced a slightly bigger impact on learning science practices than girls. This finding does connect with previous research; certain games have been known to show a gender effect where boys outperform girls (Israel et al., 2016). However, our finding where boys learned slightly more than girls is strictly for our sample; we do not feel certain that this finding

92

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Figure 5. Gender differences between scientific practices scores for students in the treatment and control conditions.

would be replicable. Although boys seem to learn more than girls in SSI: Mystery Powder, we cannot make the grand claim that boys learn better during GBL than girls. Thus, our study contributes to the mostly inconclusive literature on gender and GBL.

Teacher Using learning scientific practices as the outcome variable, we determined that students from both teachers learned more by using our collaborative science game than by participating in business-as-usual; however, students who had Teacher A experienced more of any impact from the intervention than students who had Teacher B. Teacher A was a novice teacher; he was only in his second year teaching and was brand new to the district. Teacher B was a seasoned teacher who had been teaching with the district for well over a decade. Unfortunately, observations revealed that Teacher A had to tackle classroom management issues during the traditional teaching, while Teacher B was able to manage his classroom and facilitate learning. This makes sense given that research has shown that expert teachers provide more effective instruction and handle classroom issues better than novice teachers (Lachner et al., 2016; Wolff et al., 2015). Students from Teacher A had a better learning experience during the game because SSI: Mystery Powder folds the entire experience into a mystery-based storyline complete with quests to conquer (Bressler & Bodzin, 2016); therefore, the game’s structure guides students taking some of the pressure away from the teacher to direct the class. Several observations speak to why both teachers were able to generate an effective GBL experience. First, during gameplay, both teachers were observed provided content scaffolding; research indicates

93

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Figure 6. Differences in average student scientific practices scores between students in the treatment and control conditions for teachers A and B.

that effective GBL teachers provide this type of guidance (Bado, 2019; Hämäläinen & Oksanen, 2014). Second, game players were observed asking their teachers for help when needed which enabled teachers to capitalize on teachable moments, an important component of teaching GBL according to the research (Watson et al., 2011). Third, teachers were observed naturally infusing conversations with questions to prompt deeper thinking; research has found that for GBL interventions to be successful, there must be space for such reflection and synthesis (Cicchino, 2015). Ultimately, students from both teachers had a productive gaming experience because both teachers served an active role during gameplay which is crucial to effective GBL (Ulicsak & Williamson, 2010). There is limited empirical evidence about the teacher effect in a GBL environment (Molin, 2017); therefore, this study makes an important contribution to the GBL literature.

Prior Knowledge Students with higher prior knowledge had higher report scores as compared to students with lower prior knowledge. Prior research in GBL environments supports this finding. In previous GBL research, students with higher prior knowledge generally outperform students with lower prior knowledge (Chen et al., 2014; Yang & Quadir, 2018). Also, one could argue that the written report measuring scientific practices was really a transfer task and research shows that prior knowledge predicts whether students can transfer in-game learning to another task (Nietfeld, 2020). Using learning of scientific practices as the outcome variable, we determined that there is some evidence that treatment varies by prior knowledge, but it is not as strong as compared to our confidence

94

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

in the findings for gender and teacher. Although students with higher prior knowledge scored .35 SD higher in the treatment, that difference is so small that—practically speaking—it may not be a difference at all. However, students with lower prior knowledge scored .55 SD higher in the treatment than the comparison students. While we do find that the estimated treatment effect was larger for students with lower prior knowledge, there is a fair amount of uncertainty in our estimates given our sample size limitations. That said, the trend in the data clearly indicates that students with lower prior knowledge experienced a greater treatment effect. Though they had lower report scores on the whole, students in the sample with lower prior knowledge seemed to derive greater benefit from the treatment. Why did the lower prior knowledge students do better in the treatment? According to Barron (2003), collaborative teams that communicate effectively will achieve greater success than those that do not. We believe that game players learned more because

Figure 7. The relationship between student prior knowledge and scientific practices for students in the treatment and control conditions.

of their productive discourse. According to Bressler (2014), the game provided scaffolding in the form of interdependent roles which helped game teams communicate well—as individuals offered ideas, teammates provided positive feedback which enabled the conversation to move forward in a productive fashion. Also, game teams demonstrated greater levels of scientific practice in their report writing and conversational discourse (Bressler, 2014). In fact, a detailed analysis of gameplay discourse revealed the students developed scientific practices during gameplay and their positive, engaged style of communicating supported that development (Bressler, Bodzin, Eagan, & Tabatabai, 2019).

95

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Limitations There were several limitations to the design of this study. First, the study took place at only one urban middle school; therefore, our ability to generalize the findings is somewhat limited. Second, the study used a post-test-only control group design which can be a limitation. Given that there was no pre-test to establish group equivalence, classes were randomly assigned to treatment and control while prior knowledge was used as a variable in our model. Third, this was a post-hoc analysis; therefore, our investigation may not have been powered to detect differences. The individual level factors of gender, teacher, and prior knowledge should be considered in future GBL research. Finally, we did not use a measure of scientific practices to establish prior knowledge, instead we used a proxy for prior knowledge. Our proxy was a single score representing student achievement on the math and ELA standardized tests from the previous year.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS We need to create and implement curriculum activities that ensure students will acquire critical 21st century skills and benefit from the unique affordances of technology—no more business-as-usual. As Richardson (2012) explained, the new educational paradigm should be about “asking questions, working with others to find the answers, [and] doing real work” (loc. 267). That is exactly what students are doing when they play SSI: Mystery Powder. But our findings were only identified in a specific setting. Future research should replicate this study and determine how—and to what degree—these findings vary across settings. For example, future investigations should include more teachers representing a range of experience. The teachers should be selected to represent a variety of schools in terms of geography (i.e., urban, suburban, and rural) and levels of socio-economic status. With a larger sample, future studies could explore relationships that we were not powered enough to study. For example, do gender differences vary by prior knowledge? Do students with different levels of prior knowledge experience different effects based on teacher variables? To study these types of interaction effects, we would suggest a sample size of 500-600 students in order to ensure sufficient statistical power and precision.

CONCLUSION Non-traditional educational practices such as well-designed mobile AR games should not be considered a relief from learning, but rather they are serious learning. SSI: Mystery Powder was designed to foster enjoyment, collaboration, and science learning. Our post-hoc analyses indicated that playing the game was a substantially better learning experience for some students over business-as-usual. The game was more conducive to learning for both boys and girls, helped to mitigate some of the struggles that a novice teacher experiences, and may have helped students with lower prior knowledge experience greater success. Our findings make a practical contribution that may help combat some of the issues we are currently facing in science education. First, certain STEM disciplines—such as engineering and physics—remain overwhelmingly male due in part to the fact that 1) girls assess their abilities in STEM at a lower level than boys (Hill, Corbett, & St. Rose, 2010) and 2) girls find science difficult and uninteresting (Kim, 2016). If games such as SSI: Mystery Powder provide equal learning opportunities for girls and boys,

96

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

perhaps similar science learning games could engage more girls in science. Second, a recent survey revealed that a third of middle school science teachers are novice teachers (Smith, 2020). Novice teachers need effective resources that are easy to implement. Perhaps science learning games such as SSI: Mystery Powder could fill that requirement. Third, there is a lot of research indicating that students with lower prior knowledge underperform on learning outcomes when compared to students with higher prior knowledge (Cai & Gu, 2019; Chen et al., 2014; Yang & Quadir, 2018; Zambrano et al., 2019). However, lower prior knowledge does not always need to be a disadvantage to learning. When learning games are designed well to scaffold instruction and learning like SSI: Mystery Powder, all students can find success—particularly students with lower prior knowledge. As our findings indicate, well-designed games such as SSI: Mystery Powder are seriously beneficial to learning; however, strong game design also promotes the perception of playing (Lu & Lien, 2020). This is equally important because kids should feel good about learning and enjoy school, rather than feeling bored (Willingham, 2010) and disengaged (National Research Council, 2011). Well-designed games make serious learning feel like play… they increase mood and happiness levels (Zhonggen, 2019). Our mobile AR game seemed to promote serious learning through play. As one girl said after finishing School Scene Investigators, “I want to play it again...It was fun...If I could go back in time, I would... So I could do this again.”

REFERENCES Andrews, J. J., Kerr, D., Mislevy, R. J., Davier, A., Hao, J., & Liu, L. (2017). Modeling collaborative interaction patterns in a simulation-based task. Journal of Educational Measurement, 54(1), 54–69. doi:10.1111/jedm.12132 Annetta, L. A., Murray, M. R., Laird, S. G., Bohr, S. C., & Park, J. C. (2006). Serious Games: Incorporating video games in the classroom. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 29(3), 16–22. Bado, N. (2019). Game-based learning pedagogy: A review of the literature. Interactive Learning Environments, 0(0), 1–13. doi:10.1080/10494820.2019.1683587 Barab, S., Sadler, T., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007a). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 59–82. doi:10.100710956-006-9033-3 Barab, S., Zuiker, S., Warren, S., Hickey, D., Ingram-Goble, A., Kwon, E.-J., Kouper, I., & Herring, S. C. (2007b). Situationally embodied curriculum: Relating formalisms and contexts. Science Education, 91(5), 750–782. doi:10.1002ce.20217 Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359. doi:10.1207/ S15327809JLS1203_1 Battelle for Kids. (2019). Framework for 21st century learning [Web page]. Retrieved from http://static. battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21_Framework_Brief.pdf

97

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Bressler, D. (2014). Better than business-as-usual: Improving scientific practices during discourse and writing by playing a collaborative mystery game. Double Helix: A Journal of Critical Thinking and Writing, 2, 1-13. Bressler, D., & Bodzin, A. (2013). A mixed methods assessment of students’ flow experience during a mobile augmented reality science game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(6), 505–517. doi:10.1111/jcal.12008 Bressler, D., & Bodzin, A. (2016). Investigating flow experience and scientific practices during a mobile Serious Educational Game. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(5), 795–805. doi:10.100710956-016-9639-z Bressler, D., Bodzin, A., Eagan, B., & Tabatabai, S. (2019). Using epistemic network analysis to examine discourse and scientific practice during a collaborative game. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(5), 553–566. doi:10.100710956-019-09786-8 Brown, S. (2009). Play: How it shapes the brain, opens the imagination, and invigorates the soul. Avery. Cai, H., & Gu, X. (2019, October 25). Factors that influence the different levels of individuals’ understanding after collaborative problem solving: The effects of shared representational guidance and prior knowledge. Interactive Learning Environments, 1–12. doi:10.1080/10494820.2019.1679841 Casner-Lotto, J., Rosenblum, E., & Wright, M. (2009). The ill-prepared workforce: Exploring the challenges of employer-provided workforce readiness training. The Conference Board. Chang, S.-C., & Hwang, G.-J. (2017). Development of an effective educational computer game based on a mission synchronization-based peer-assistance approach. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(5), 667–681. doi:10.1080/10494820.2016.1172241 Chatterjee, S., Mohanty, A., & Bhattacharya, B. (2011). Peer collaboration, facilitator intervention, and learning styles in computer game-based learning: Initial findings from an empirical study. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, 683-690. Chee, Y. S., Mehrotra, S., & Ong, J. C. (2015). Authentic game-based learning and teachers’ dilemmas in reconstructing professional practice. Learning, Media and Technology, 40(4), 514–535. doi:10.108 0/17439884.2014.953958 Chen, C.-H., & Law, V. (2016). Scaffolding individual and collaborative game-based learning in learning performance and intrinsic motivation. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1201–1212. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2015.03.010 Chen, M.-P., Wong, Y.-T., & Wang, L.-C. (2014). Effects of type of exploratory strategy and prior knowledge on middle school students’ learning of chemical formulas from a 3D role-playing game. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(2), 163–185. doi:10.100711423-013-9324-3 Chen, S. Y., & Huang, P. R. (2013). The comparisons of the influences of prior knowledge on two gamebased learning systems. Computers & Education, 68, 177–186. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.05.005

98

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Cheng, K.-H. H., & Tsai, C.-C. C. (2013). Affordances of augmented reality in science learning: Suggestions for future research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(4), 449–462. doi:10.100710956012-9405-9 Cheng, M.-T., Chen, J.-H., Chu, S.-J., & Chen, S.-Y. (2015). The use of serious games in science education: A review of selected empirical research from 2002 to 2013. Journal of Computers in Education, 2(3), 353–375. doi:10.100740692-015-0039-9 Cicchino, M. I. (2015). Using game-based learning to foster critical thinking in student discourse. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 9(2). Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E., Hostetler, A., Fradkin, A., & Polikov, V. (2018). Substantial integration of typical educational games into extended curricula. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(2), 265–318. doi:10.1080/10508406.2017.1333431 Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79–122. doi:10.3102/0034654315582065 PMID:26937054 Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper Collins. Dede, C. (2009). Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning. Science, 323(5910), 66–69. doi:10.1126cience.1167311 PMID:19119219 Demetriadis, S., Tsiatsos, T., & Karakostas, A. (2012). Scripted collaboration to guide the pedagogy and architecture of digital learning games. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, 148-154. Dickey, M. (2006). Game design narrative for learning: Appropriating adventure game design narrative devices and techniques for the design of interactive learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(3), 245–263. doi:10.100711423-006-8806-y Dickey, M. D. (2011). Murder on Grimm Isle: The impact of game narrative design in an educational game-based learning environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(3), 456–469. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.01032.x Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 533–568. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00025-7 Dunleavy, M., & Dede, C. (2013). Augmented reality teaching and learning. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (4th ed., Vol. 2). Springer. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(1), 7–22. doi:10.100710956-008-9119-1

99

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Eseryel, D., Law, V., Ifenthaler, D., Xun, G., & Miller, R. (2014). An investigation of the interrelationships between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 42–53. Facer, K., Joiner, R., Stanton, D., Reid, J., Hull, R., & Kirk, D. (2004). Savannah: Mobile gaming and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(6), 399–409. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00105.x Fraser, J., Shane-Simpson, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2014). Youth science identity, science learning, and gaming experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 523–532. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.048 Gee, J. P. (2007). Good video games + good learning: Collected essays on video games, learning, and literacy. Peter Lang Publishing. doi:10.3726/978-1-4539-1162-4 Gelman, A., & Carlin, J. (2014). Beyond power calculations: Assessing type S (sign) and type M (magnitude) errors. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(6), 641–651. doi:10.1177/1745691614551642 PMID:26186114 Gelman, A., Carlin, J. B., Rubin, D. B., Vehtari, A., Dunson, D. B., & Stern, H. S. (2013). Bayesian data analysis. Chapman and Hall/CRC. doi:10.1201/b16018 Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511790942 Gelman, A., Hill, J., & Yajima, M. (2012). Why we (usually) don’t have to worry about multiple comparisons. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 5(2), 189–211. doi:10.1080/19345747.20 11.618213 Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds. Yale University Press. Groff, J. S. (2018). The potentials of game‐based environments for integrated, immersive learning data. European Journal of Education, 53(2), 188–201. doi:10.1111/ejed.12270 Hämäläinen, R., & Oksanen, K. (2014). Collaborative 3D learning games for future learning: Teachers’ instructional practices to enhance shared knowledge construction among students. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23(1), 81–101. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2013.838451 Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering & mathematics. American Association of University Women. Hsieh, Y.-H., Lin, Y.-C., & Hou, H.-T. (2015). Exploring elementary-school students’ engagement patterns in a game-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 336–348. Hsieh, Y.-H., Lin, Y.-C., & Hou, H.-T. (2016). Exploring the role of flow experience, learning performance and potential behavior clusters in elementary students’ game-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(1), 178–193. doi:10.1080/10494820.2013.834827 Hsu, C. Y., Tsai, M. J., Chang, Y. H., & Liang, J. C. (2017). Surveying in-service teachers’ beliefs about game-based learning and perceptions of technological pedagogical and content knowledge of games. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(1), 134–143.

100

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Israel, M., Wang, S., & Marino, M. T. (2016). A multilevel analysis of diverse learners playing life science video games: Interactions between game content, learning disability status, reading proficiency, and gender. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(2), 324–345. doi:10.1002/tea.21273 Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1993). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom (4th ed.). Interaction Book Company. Kaye, L. K., & Bryce, J. (2014). Go with the flow: The experience and affective outcomes of solo versus social gameplay. Journal of Gaming & Virtual Worlds, 6(1), 49–60. doi:10.1386/jgvw.6.1.49_1 Ke, F., & Grabowski, B. (2007). Gameplaying for maths learning: Cooperative or not? British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 249–259. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00593.x Ketelhut, D. (2007). The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An exploratory investigation in River City, a multi-user virtual environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 99–111. doi:10.100710956-006-9038-y Khan, A., Ahmad, F. H., & Malik, M. M. (2017). Use of digital game based learning and gamification in secondary school science: The effect on student engagement, learning and gender difference. Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 2767–2804. doi:10.100710639-017-9622-1 Kim, H. (2016). Inquiry-based science and technology enrichment program for middle school-aged female students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 174–186. doi:10.100710956-015-9584-2 Kirriemuir, J., & McFarlane, A. (2004). Report 8: Literature review in games and learning. NESTA Futurelab. Koutromanos, G., & Avraamidou, L. (2014). The use of mobile games in formal and informal learning environments: A review of the literature. Educational Media International, 51(1), 49–65. doi:10.1080 /09523987.2014.889409 Krepf, M., Plöger, W., Scholl, D., & Seifert, A. (2018). Pedagogical content knowledge of experts and novices—What knowledge do they activate when analyzing science lessons? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 44–67. doi:10.1002/tea.21410 Kulturel-Konak, S., D’Allegro, M. L., & Dickinson, S. (2011). Review of gender differences in learning styles: Suggestions for STEM education. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4(3), 9–18. doi:10.19030/cier.v4i3.4116 Lachner, A., Jarodzka, H., & Nückles, M. (2016). What makes an expert teacher? Investigating teachers’ professional vision and discourse abilities. Instructional Science, 44(3), 197–203. doi:10.100711251016-9376-y Lester, J. C., Spires, H. A., Nietfeld, J. L., Minogue, J., Mott, B. W., & Lobene, E. V. (2014). Designing game-based learning environments for elementary science education: A narrative-centered learning perspective. Information Sciences, 264, 4–18. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2013.09.005 Li, M.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2013). Game-based learning in science education: A review of relevant research. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22(6), 877–898. doi:10.100710956-013-9436-x

101

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Looi, C. K., Chen, W., & Ng, F. K. (2010). Collaborative activities enabled by GroupScribbles (GS): An exploratory study of learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 54(1), 14–26. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2009.07.003 Lu, Y. L., & Lien, C. J. (2020). Are they learning or playing? Students’ perception traits and their learning self-efficacy in a game-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(8), 1879–1909. doi:10.1177/0735633118820684 Lukosch, H., Kurapati, S., Groen, D., & Verbraeck, A. (2017). Gender and cultural differences in gamebased learning experiences. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 15(4), 310–319. Mathews, J., Holden, C., Jan, M.-F., & Martin, J. (2008). Sick at South Shore Beach: A place-based augmented reality game as a framework for building evidence-based arguments. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Learning Sciences, 3, 89-90. McElreath, R. (2016). Statistical rethinking: A Bayesian course with examples in R and Stan. CRC Press. Merchant, Z., Goetz, E. T., Cifuentes, L., Keeney-Kennicutt, W., & Davis, T. J. (2014). Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A metaanalysis. Computers & Education, 70, 29–40. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.033 Molin, G. (2017). The role of the teacher in game-based learning: A review and outlook. In M. Ma & A. Oikonomou (Eds.), Serious Games and Edutainment Applications (Vol. 2, pp. 649–674). Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-51645-5_28 National Research Council. (2011). High school dropout, graduation, and completion rates: Better data, better measures, better decisions. The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, cross-cutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. Nebel, S., Schneider, S., Beege, M., Kolda, F., Mackiewicz, V., & Rey, G. (2017). You cannot do this alone! Increasing task interdependence in cooperative educational videogames to encourage collaboration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(4), 993–1014. doi:10.100711423-017-9511-8 Nietfeld, J. L. (2020). Predicting transfer from a game-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 146, 103780. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103780 Nietfeld, J. L., Shores, L. R., & Hoffmann, K. F. (2014). Self-regulation and gender within a game-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 961–973. doi:10.1037/a0037116 Nousiainen, T., Kangas, M., Rikala, J., & Vesisenaho, M. (2018). Teacher competencies in game-based pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 74, 85–97. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.04.012 Peppler, K., Danish, J. A., & Phelps, D. (2013). Collaborative gaming: Teaching children about complex systems and collective behavior. Simulation & Gaming, 44(5), 683–705. doi:10.1177/1046878113501462

102

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Permadi, D., & Rafi, A. (2016). Empirical analysis of mobile augmented reality games for engaging users’ experience. In K. Lavangnananda, S. Phon-Amnuaisuk, W. Engchuan, & J. Chan (Eds.), Intelligent and Evolutionary Systems. Proceedings in Adaptation, Learning and Optimization (Vol. 5, pp. 343–355). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-27000-5_28 Perry, J., Klopfer, E., Norton, M., Sutch, D., Sandford, R., & Facer, K. (2008). AR gone wild: Two approaches to using augmented reality learning games in zoos. Paper presented at the 8th international for the learning sciences, Utrecht, Netherlands. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258–283. doi:10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533 Qian, M., & Clark, K. R. (2016). Game-based learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50–58. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023 R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/ Reigeluth, C. M. (1994). Introduction: The imperative for systemic change. In C. M. Reigeluth & R. J. Garfinkle (Eds.), Systemic change in education (pp. 3–14). Educational Technology Publications, Inc. Richardson, W. (2012). Why school? How education must change when learning and information are everywhere [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com Rogers, F. (2002). You are special: Neighborly wit and wisdom from Mister Rogers. Running Press. Rosenbaum, E., Klopfer, E., & Perry, J. (2007). On location learning: Authentic applied science with networked augmented realities. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 31–45. doi:10.100710956-006-9036-0 Sánchez, J., & Olivares, R. (2011). Problem solving and collaboration using mobile serious games. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1943–1952. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.04.012 Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer games help children learn. Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9780230601994 Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 489–528. doi:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x Smith, P. S. (2020). 2018 NSSME +: Trends in U. S. science education from 2012 to 2018. Horizon Research, Inc. Squire, K. (2010). From information to experience: Place-based augmented reality games as a model for learning in a globally networked society. Teachers College Record, 112(10), 2565–2602. Squire, K., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad city mystery: Developing scientific argumentation skills with a placebased augmented reality game on handheld computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 5–29. doi:10.100710956-006-9037-z Squire, K., & Klopfer, E. (2007). Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 371–413. doi:10.1080/10508400701413435

103

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Stan Development Team. (2016). rstanarm: Bayesian applied regression modeling via Stan. R package version 2.13.1. https://mc-stan.org/ Steinmaurer, A., Pirker, J., & Gütl, C. (2019). Scool - Game-based learning in computer science class: A case study in secondary education. International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy, 9(2), 35–50. doi:10.3991/ijep.v9i2.9942 Sung, H.-Y., & Hwang, G.-J. (2018). Facilitating effective digital game-based learning behaviors and learning performances of students based on a collaborative knowledge construction strategy. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(1), 118–134. doi:10.1080/10494820.2017.1283334 Ulicsak, M., & Williamson, B. (2010). Computer games and learning: A Futurelab handbook. Retrieved from https://www.nfer.ac.uk/media/1765/futl01.pdf Vogel, J. J., Vogel, D. S., Cannon-Bowers, J. A. N., Bowers, C. A., Muse, K., & Wright, M. (2006). Computer gaming and interactive simulations for learning: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(3), 229–243. doi:10.2190/FLHV-K4WA-WPVQ-H0YM Watson, W. R., Mong, C. J., & Harris, C. A. (2011). A case study of the in-class use of a video game for teaching high school history. Computers & Education, 56(2), 466–474. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.007 Willingham, D. T. (2010). Why don’t students like school: A cognitive scientist answers questions about how the mind works and what it means for the classroom. Jossey-Bass. doi:10.1002/9781118269527 Wolff, C. E., van den Bogert, N., Jarodzka, H., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2015). Keeping an eye on learning: Differences between expert and novice teachers’ representations of classroom management events. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(1), 68–85. doi:10.1177/0022487114549810 Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249–265. doi:10.1037/a0031311 Yang, J. C., & Quadir, B. (2018). Effects of prior knowledge on learning performance and anxiety in an English learning online role-playing game. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 174–185. Zambrano, R. J., Kirschner, F., Sweller, J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2019). Effects of prior knowledge on collaborative and individual learning. Learning and Instruction, 63, 101214. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.05.011 Zhonggen, Y. (2019). A meta-analysis of use of serious games in education over a decade. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, 2019(3), 1–8. doi:10.1155/2019/4797032

ADDITIONAL READING Annetta, L. A. (2008). Serious educational games: From theory to practice. Sense Publishers. doi:10.1163/9789087903817

104

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Barab, S., & Dede, C. (2007). Games and immersive participatory simulations for science education: An emerging type of curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 1–3. doi:10.100710956007-9043-9 Bruner, J. (1983). Play, thought, and language. Peabody Journal of Education, 60(3), 60–69. doi:10.1080/01619568309538407 Christensen, C. M., Horn, M. B., & Johnson, C. W. (2008). Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. McGraw-Hill. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Play and intrinsic rewards. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15(3), 41–63. doi:10.1177/002216787501500306 Davidson, C. N., & Goldberg, D. T. (2010). The future of thinking: Learning institutions in a digital age. The MIT Press. doi:10.7551/mitpress/8601.001.0001 Dikkers, S., Martin, J., & Coulter, B. (2012). Mobile media learning: Amazing uses of mobile devices for teaching and learning. ETC Press. Gatto, J. T. (2009). Weapons for mass instruction: A schoolteacher’s journey through the dark world of compulsory schooling. New Society Publishers. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1145/950566.950595 Goyal, N. (2012). One size does not fit all: A student’s assessment of school [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com Huizinga, J. (1971). Homo ludens: A study of the play-element in culture (J. R. F. C. Hull, Trans.). The Beacon Press. (Original work published 1938) Klopfer, E. (2008). Augmented learning: Research and design of mobile educational games. The MIT Press. doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262113151.001.0001 Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., & Salen, K. (2009). Moving learning games forward. Education Arcade., Retrieved from http://education.mit.edu/papers/MovingLearningGamesForward_EdArcade.pdf Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 4(4), 333–369. doi:10.120715516709cog0504_2 McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. The Penguin Press. Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams, and imitations in childhood (C. Gattegno & F. M. Hodgson, Trans.). W.W. Norton and Company. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com Resnick, M. (2017). Lifelong kindergarten: Cultivating creativity through projects, passion, peers, and play. [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com

105

 “Play Is Serious Learning”

Salen, K., Torres, R., Wolozin, L., Rufo-Tepper, R., & Shapiro, A. (2011). Quest to Learn: Developing the school for digital kids. The MIT Press. Schrage, M. (2000). Serious play: How the world’s best companies simulate to innovate. Harvard Business School Press. Squire, K. (2011). Video games and learning: Teaching and participatory culture in the digital age. Teachers College Press. Steinkuehler, C., Squire, K., & Barab, S. (2012). Games, learning, and society: Learning and meaning in the digital age. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139031127 Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. Toppo, G. (2015). The game believes in you: How digital play can make our kids smarter. [Kindle version]. Retrieved from Amazon.com Vygotsky, L. S. (1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Social Psychology, 12(6), 62–76.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 21st Century Skills: This set of skills includes critical thinking, problem solving, communication, and collaboration. Such skills and expertise are essential for today’s work-life. Augmented Reality: Augmented reality is a technology that overlays digital information on top of a real-world view or object to create a composite view. Game-Based Learning (GBL): Simply put, games used for educational purposes could be categorized as game-based learning; this is one definition used within this study. However, the term game-based learning is also used to describe the effective learning experienced during gameplay. Quick-Response (QR) Code: Visual markers that are similar to two-dimensional barcodes. When special software is used to scan the marker, digital information connected to the code can be accessed such as a website address. Scientific Practices: According to the 2012 report published by the National Research Council, science education should be designed around eight scientific practices—such as asking questions and constructing explanations—as outlined in the report. The Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) has created educational standards designed to support these scientific practices which include more emphasis on higher-order thinking skills, rather than fact memorization.

106

107

Chapter 6

Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities: Duty of Care, Student Success, and Approaches to Learning Lorraine Carter McMaster University, Canada Alanna Carter Ryerson University, Canada

ABSTRACT McMaster University Continuing Education (Hamilton, Ontario) and the Real Institute in the Chang School, Ryerson University (Toronto, Ontario) are two university continuing education units that respond to the needs of adult learners from newcomer and international backgrounds. McMaster Continuing Education is known for its expertise in online education and support of adult learners as they seek professionally focused education. The Real Institute provides dedicated in-class programming and support strategies for younger adult learners. In this chapter, the experiences of older and younger adults from diverse cultural backgrounds studying at the two units are presented. The authors suggest that the needs of this learner group may be better met within the continuing education unit than within the mainstream academy. Innovative learning strategies and flexibility are key elements in this position. Finally, it is suggested that the two profiled units take their duty of care and commitment to student success seriously.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch006

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

INTRODUCTION More and more, international students are choosing to attend Canadian universities to study as undergraduates and graduate students. In complementary fashion, individuals from around the world are electing to come to Canada as immigrants and creating new lives. While the former student body enriches Canadian campuses and provides a valuable revenue source for post-secondary educational institutions, Canada’s identity as a country defined by diversity and democratic principles holds great appeal for individuals and families ‘from away.’ Indeed, these persons often come to Canada with learning needs of their own although their needs often fall into the career and professional learning sector versus the undergraduate and graduate domains. In both cases, however, there is a need for competence in one of Canada’s two official languages, generally, English, and what the literature calls cultural fluency. Oftentimes, these needs are met by the university’s continuing education unit. In this paper, case studies are used to profile efforts by university continuing education units in two urban centres in southern Ontario, Canada to serve learners from diverse cultural and language backgrounds. The continuing education units are McMaster Continuing Education (McMaster University) located in Hamilton and The Chang School (Ryerson University) which houses Ryerson’s English as an Additional Language (Real) Institute in Toronto. Particular attention will be paid to the importance of supporting language and cultural development. In the situation of more life experienced learners, learning that supports career development and employability are highlighted. In both contexts, the concepts of duty of care and crossing borders are considered. The authors relate their experiences from distinct perspectives: namely, as the Director of McMaster University Continuing Education and as an instructor with the Real Institute at Ryerson University. These identities inform the ideas presented and range from a more macro perspective to a micro look and, taken together, provide insight into how two university continuing education units in Ontario, Canada are supporting learners from diverse cultural and language backgrounds.

LITERATURE REVIEW International Students, Newcomers, and Canada As the world becomes increasingly connected, opportunities to travel, work, and study abroad are abundant. Importantly, Canada is an attractive destination for people who seek opportunities to improve their quality of life, to gain foreign training and credentials, and to gain valuable work and professional experience. International student numbers in Canada increase on a yearly basis; the number of international students who chose Canada as a place to study increased 68% from 2014 to 2018 (Government of Canada, 2020). Significantly, in 2018, the number of international students in Canada across all levels reached 721, 205 (Government of Canada, 2020). Although people from around the world choose Canada, it is worth noting that more than 50% of international students in Canada come from two main countries: India and China. The vast majority of these students live and attend educational institutions in Ontario, Quebec, and British Columbia (Government of Canada, 2020). The reasons that international students and newcomers choose Canada vary, but two important themes have emerged: (1) the quality of education in Canada, and (2) the fact that Canada is widely considered to be a safe country (Humphries & Knight-Grofe, 2014). Additionally, pathways to permanent residency play an important role in why many choose Canada for their studies (Government of Canada, 2020). 108

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Interestingly, approximately one-third of students who study at the university or college level in Canada have had previous educational experiences in the country either at private language schools or public or private high schools (Humphries & Knight-Grofe, 2014). This is significant as it may affect or indicate how culturally fluent these students are in social and classroom contexts. At the same time, it is clear that, since many international students in Canada are new to the country, these students may require additional support navigating cultural issues as well as ‘the hidden curriculum’—that is the unstated rules and assumptions that exist with an educational context but may not be explicitly stated in a course or institution (Egbo, 2009). Such curricular unknowns are a reality for international students and may be quite different from what exists in their home countries. Discussion of the cost of tuition is important as both Canadian post-secondary institutions and the Canadian government promote themselves as affordable compared to educational institutions in other countries, particularly in countries that use English as the language of the majority. Promotional materials often cite how tuition fees for Canadian institutions are cheaper than those for institutions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia (EduCanada, 2019). This affordability is certainly attractive to newcomers and students when making decisions about where to go. That said, the cost of living in Canada remains high, and 25% of students report difficulties in keeping up with the cost of living expenses (Humphries & Knight-Grofe, 2014). Difficulties in being able to pay bills can have a significant impact on a student’s success in a course or program as the student may need to take on part-time work. This situation can translate into very real academic challenges should the student not be able to attend a class due to work commitments or stress related making ends meet. International students also bring significant revenue into Canada which positively impacts the Canadian economy and jobs. In 2018, international students brought in $21.6 billion into the country in the form of tuition, accommodation, and other expenses (Government of Canada, 2020). International students supported almost 170, 000 jobs in 2016 (Government of Canada). Given that international students contribute to the economy more than other major Canadian exports such as auto parts, lumber, and aircraft (Government of Canada, 2020), attention must be paid to this growing group of students. Likewise, persons who have chosen Canada as their new home for diverse reasons are entitled to the same opportunities and services including educational experiences as individuals born in Canada. In particular, more life experienced adult learners bring skills and expertise that Canada needs now and into the future based on the country’s declining birth rate and a need for an expanded workforce as Canadian-born baby boomers continue to retire (Government of Canada, 2020).

General Curricular and Other Considerations: Language, Culture, and Employability Language. Success in Canadian academic programs inherently involves linguistic fluency in either English or French. Achieving comfort, let alone mastery, in an additional language is not easy and requires significant time, patience, and practice. Failure to achieve an acceptable level of language proficiency will significantly hinder one’s chances to be academically, and socially, successful. Further, language instructors need to navigate a number of other aspects to assist their students including learning styles, personality, motivation, attitudes, identity and ethnic group affiliation, learner beliefs, and age of acquisition (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006). Careful consideration of these aspects by instructors will result in a more proficient, capable, and ready learner.

109

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

In programs developed specifically to enhance English language and cultural development, as well as other courses and programs in which there are high numbers of students from newcomer backgrounds, opportunities that assist learners in how to organize and critically analyze information are vital. In particular, students need to be able to find information online, interpret information correctly, and relay key messages (Yamauchi, 2009). Brainstorming strategies before students begin to research for assignments are valuable ways of encouraging critical thinking in a new environment (Yamauchi, 2009; Yunus, Salehi, & Chenzi, 2012). Other valuable activities include keeping journals or blogs regarding daily activities (Yamauchi, 2009). For example, in a course dedicated to English language development, students may be asked to describe interactions they have had with English-speaking people, noting what is easy or difficult for them. This kind of assignment can be adapted in other courses with students of all ages and life stages. Conversational English is especially important for learners from international and linguistically diverse backgrounds and can be enabled by having students participate in scenarios, role plays, and simulations that require them to practice their oral conversation skills (Thornbury, 2005). Participation in role plays where learners take on the persona of another and simulations where learners ‘act’ as themselves are useful activities for developing comfort and fluency in common real-life situations such as shopping, job interviews, and interactions with professors and employers. Instruction regarding conversational scripts—that is, the pattern that conversations generally follow—is a useful practice and will help students interact with others more effectively and naturally. As an example, students should be taught that service encounters, such as buying a product, generally follow a predictable script: a greeting (“Hello!”), then an offer (“Can I get you anything?”), then a request (“Yes, I’d like six sausages, please”), and so on. Explicit teaching using these scripts ensures that the student participates in conversation in culturally sensitive and appropriate ways. In the previous example, service encounters in North American cultures generally do not include bargaining opportunities; this may be different in other cultures that do allow for bargaining in their scripts (Thornbury, 2005). This kind of learning is also critical for international learners—younger and older—who are seeking some form of employment in Canada. Additionally, students need to learn how to use functional language including language to “show respect, apologize, or make requests” (Lightbrown & Spada, 2006, p 188). Explicit teaching of the pragmatics of language is useful for learners in understanding how to communicate successfully with others in specific cultural contexts. Appropriate use and understanding of discourse markers such as “Well,” “Oh,” and “Right” is likewise essential for conversation that is logical and appropriate (Thornbury, 2005). Discussion of the importance of conversational English would not be complete without consideration of the effect of accents. Studies have shown that through a simple “Hello,” listeners can identify a speaker’s linguistic and ethnic background and make judgments about that person (Ze, Arndt, Singh, Biernet, & Liu, 2013). If these judgments are negative, speakers can experience instances of discrimination and face challenges socially, academically, and professionally. Most instructors of language would agree that intelligibility is more important than actually sounding like a local; however, research also shows that negative biases towards nonnative accents can still exist even when the speaker is entirely understood (Hosoda, & Stone-Romero, 2010). Consequently, many language instructors agree that the explicit teaching of pronunciation is essential to ensure both intelligibility and social acceptance. Written skills for both younger and more life experienced international students are likewise critical to academic and life success. Unless a student is in a program that is heavily skewed to technical learning such as data analytics, mathematics, physics, or engineering, written communication is a core element 110

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

of success in university studies. Therefore, in all courses and programs in which international learners find themselves, instructors need to be aware of the writing challenges their students will experience. In addition to learning about written expression in general, students may or may not be familiar with the practices of quoting, citing, and referencing as required in Western academe (Carter, 2008). Because of this, they may find themselves in situations of plagiarism which can lead to serious penalties in university. It is also important to introduce students to the particular types of writing they will be required to do in university studies to assist students on their academic journeys. The styles of writing that students are exposed to should go beyond the traditional essay. For example, prospective business students should learn about report writing; hospitality students should learn about general professional communication including proper email etiquette; design students should learn effective descriptive writing. Additionally, like speaking, it is important to teach students about the structures and patterns found and used in English writing. For example, English writing is generally ‘reader friendly’ and considers how the reader interprets information, while Japanese writing is ‘writer friendly’ and the onus is on readers to interpret the writer’s ideas (Minett, 2009, p. 68). These differences need to be explicitly examined so that students can successfully communicate in written English. Writing competence is a further variable when it comes to seeking employment. A poorly written application, letter, or resume quickly diminishes an individual’s chances of employment and enhanced quality of life. When a person has arrived in Canada and, in addition to needing to study, he or she needs to work, any assistance the educational setting can provide in order to assist the student with letter writing and resume preparation is important. Culture. Cultural relevance and what the literature refers to as cultural fluency are essential for learners who come from international backgrounds. For instance, in the two cases described later in this chapter, students come from diverse cultures, and the classes they attend may be their first exposure to Canadian culture. From a pedagogical and language development perspective, Tour (2010) states that culture is a fundamental pillar of literacy and that one cannot be fluent in a language without understanding the culture that accompanies it. Based on this idea, instructors who work with students from diverse cultural backgrounds need to be able understand their students’ backgrounds and be able to explain new concepts in culturally relevant ways (Eyring, 2014). Instructors may need to point out cultural differences, particularly when approaching a topic that may be unfamiliar to the students. For example, students from some cultures may not be accustomed to speaking in class which can make class discussions challenging. Many barriers exist regarding newcomer retention in courses and programs. In particular, poor student engagement and a negative student-teacher relationship can make a student feel uncomfortable in the program to the point that she or he drops out (Rodriguez-Garcia, 2013). Indeed, the process of language learning and learning subjects in a language other than a person’s native language can be discouraging and time-consuming and, thus, lead struggles with self-efficacy and perseverance (Eyring, 2014; Sanchez, 2013). This issue may be amplified in classes with diverse student abilities. In such classes, weaker students may not speak up when they are having difficulties while lack of participation ultimately impedes their progress. Furthermore, learners may struggle to continue with a program if they lack familial and other support (Eyring, 2014; Rodriguez-Garcia, 2013). Due to these obstacles, instructors need to develop a range of interesting and motivating strategies that are age- and culture-appropriate to keep students engaged. Often, people experience some form of culture shock when moving to a new culture. According to Adler’s (1975) well accepted model of culture shock, culture shock is a five stage process that involves 111

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

the following: (1) contact, (2) disintegration, (3) reintegration, (4) autonomy, and (5) independence. Instructors need to be aware of whether their newcomer students may be experiencing one of the stages of culture shock and know how to support them through this process. At the same time, although not all people undergo the five stages, it is important for instructors to be sensitive to the very real changes and feelings that international and newcomer students may be feeling. As well, inability to pass through a stage successfully may prevent a person from fully adapting and being successful in a new setting whether it be an academic or other environment. Beyond issues of culture shock, many stressors outside of the classroom exist for the international and newcomer student including language stressors, sociocultural stressors, discrimination, and stressors related to money and accommodation (Berry, 2005, as in Smith & Khawaja, 2011). Failure to deal with these stressors can lead to more significant barriers and failure to achieve academic success and even life success. In programs where students must achieve a specific level before progression, they are generally tested upon entry and placed into a course or class corresponding to their level of language mastery (Rodriguez-Garcia, 2013; Sanchez, 2013; Yamauchi, 2009). This method ensures that students are surrounded by learners who are at a similar level. It may also decrease feelings of discouragement (Thuy, 1992). Student-centred approaches that incorporate the goals of individuals and self-directed learning can also improve retention. This idea holds for both younger and more life experienced international learners. Judicious use of technology is a method which may enable student motivation, interest, self-esteem, and the development of language skills (Alegre, Mansoor, Moss, & Phillips, 2001; Nemeth, 2010; Thuy, 1992; Tour, 2010; Yamauchi, 2009). Technology often promotes self-directed learning and, thus, provides a means for students to work at their own pace (Alegre, 2001; Nemeth, 2010; Sandhu, 2000; Yamauchi, 2009). As well, technology is such a part of contemporary daily life in Canada that its employment in learning may help students develop the skills required to thrive in their new country (Alegre, 2001; Yunus et al., 2012). Technological literacy, particularly relative to English-based software, is essential for many jobs in Canada (Thuy, 1992). While the overwhelming diversity of programs serving international students makes it difficult to draw specific conclusions about the features of an ideal program or course (Sandhu, 2000; Thuy, 1992; Wrigley, 1993), self-directed, collaborative, and culturally relevant models are highly regarded (Curtis, 2014; Dusbiber, 2006; Rodriguez-Garcia, 2013; Sandhu, 2000). Newcomers will face many challenges in their learning, but a program that fits their schedules and facilitates achievement of goals will be enticing (Rodriguez-Garcia, 2013). Technology is being increasingly incorporated into ESL programs, having been found to enhance programs and improve student motivation (Tour, 2010; Yamauchi, 2009; Alegre, 2001; Thuy, 1992). Employability. Furthering the above discussion is the fact that more life experienced newcomers tend to look for education and training that will lead to better jobs and enhance their careers and lives in Canada. As such, this learner group often gravitates to programs that are professionally-focused. In these programs, attention may be less targeted on language development and cultural development and more focused on a professional practice area such as business or health. At the same time, these programs still need to reflect the language and cultural nuances of being a working professional in Canada. For instance, in business, persons who are new to Canada need to understand interviewing and hiring practices as they tend to occur here. In a health education program, how cultural elements affect interactions between the health provider and the patient need to be explored. Hence, in professional programs serving more life experienced adult learners, it is important to weave these 112

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

elements across the curriculum and to provide experiential learning opportunities whenever possible. At Canadian universities, these kinds of programs are most often offered by the continuing education unit.

Important Caveat: Differences between Younger and More Life Experienced International Students It would be short-sighted to suggest that the principles and practices described above comprise a ‘one size fits all’ solution to the teaching and learning challenges of international students. Moreover, it would be naive to suggest that the learning needs and experiences of younger and more life experienced students from international backgrounds are equivalent. In the first instance, younger international students often come to Canada after acceptance into what is called a bridging program which enables them, upon successful completion, to move into degree studies. Bridging programs are, in some instances, housed within the university’s continuing education unit. A bridging program frequently includes full-day study for four to eight months with other international students. Given this framework, there are unique opportunities for learning such as excursions and re-visiting challenging curricular areas over time. While the life needs of this group include but are not limited to adjustment to a new country, managing money and the activities of daily life, and loneliness, oftentimes, there are supports available to the student through the program itself. In this chapter, a bridging program offered by the Real Institute in Ryerson University’s continuing education centre called the Chang School is discussed. More experienced adult learners represent a different sector of the international learner group. These learners require unique flexibility in order to work, support their families, meet community responsibilities, and study as a means of achieving a better life. In the case of adult learners from international backgrounds, these realities are further enveloped in the cultural and social challenges of a new society with visible and invisible expectations. In this chapter, these persons are the learners who tend to find their way to McMaster Continuing Education and similar units. It is important to reflect on course design and delivery with these two groups—namely, younger and more life experienced international learners. In general, many adult learners, including those from international backgrounds, are choosing online and blended learning course options. The draw of this delivery model which is borne out at McMaster Continuing Education is its flexibility such that adults can work, study, and manage family life at the same time. While online-supported learning settings may not be initially familiar to the learner, its value in a complex life situation can be compelling. Moreover, present-day online education has become a more person-centred experience than in its earlier iterations (Carter, & Graham, 2012). By comparison, many younger earners have grown up with technology and and use it for socializing, personal banking, gaming, and accessing apps for managing their lives (Buzducea, 2010). For them, using technology is simply a part of ordinary life. At the same time, although many younger learners are comfortable with using technology and particularly their phones, they do not always gravitate or ‘take’ to online learning for reasons including learning style differences and preferences (Dorrian & Wache, 2009). Additionally, work by Margaryan, Littlejohn, and Vojt (2011) does not “support popular claims that young people adopt radically different learning styles [in technology-supported learning settings]” (p. 429). In summary, the research tells us that, while there is evidence of generational differences between older and younger university students in relation to educational technology, course designers and instructors must be careful not to make assumptions. 113

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Why University Continuing Education and International Students? Continuing education units hold a unique place in the architecture of the Canadian academy. While they share synergistic relationships with university faculties and institutes, they are often one step away from the principal operations of the university. Some units receive base funding from the university. Others do not and, instead, function as ancillaries. Still others function according to a mixed model of funding and operational infrastructure. All said, there is greater independence in university continuing education units in Canada than tends to exist within faculties. For instance, continuing education units are frequently able to launch new programs reasonably quickly and tend to be more flexible than faculties. Today is a uniquely exciting time for university continuing education partly because it responds to the increasing demand for workers to possess new skills in changing labour markets; strives to meet the needs of growing international and immigrant populations; responds to market-based demands for credentialed and professional learning; innovates in the teaching and learning sector; and serves as a leader in community engagement (Strategic Plan 2016-2020, Canadian Association of University Continuing Education, 2020). Extrapolating to the needs of younger and more life experienced learners from diverse international backgrounds, continuing education has much to offer this population: groundedness in real world practices; a greater flexibility than may exist within other sectors of the university; and deep connections within communities and groups that comprise the fabric of Canadian society.

THEORETICAL POSITIONING Duty of Care and Student Success In the legal world, duty of care is referred to as follows: A legal responsibility of a person or organization to avoid any behaviors or omissions that could reasonably be foreseen to cause harm to others. For example, a duty of care is owed by an accountant in correctly preparing a customer’s tax returns, to minimize the chance of an IRS audit. Similarly, manufacturers owe a duty of care to consumers in making sure that their products are safe for public use. (“Duty of care,” 2017) While it is not difficult to extrapolate the above to health care and care of elementary and secondary school learners, how and where it applies to university students is somewhat more complex. At the same time, with the prevalence of mental health crises on Canadian post-secondary campuses (Rourke, & Carter, 2019) and institutions struggling to determine their ethical responsibilities in relation to student mental health as well as the intellectual and administrative discussions underway regarding learning analytics as an invasion of student privacy (Prinsloo, 2018), perhaps now is the perfect time for duty of care to be front and centre in post-secondary discourse about both younger and more life experienced international students. Prinsloo’s (2018) ideas about student success and consideration of institutional responsibility also inform the paper. As suggested earlier, international students are an important revenue stream for universities in Canada. To provide courses and programs that may or may not set these students up for academic and life success 114

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

is, arguably, a form of institutional negligence. Different but similar are the adult learners who come to educational institutions looking for the opportunity of a better life through a new credential or to recredential within a Canadian context. Often, these persons have made major life and family sacrifices to come to a new country. Given this, the institutions they select for education and training have a duty of care that, while grounded principally in the educational experience, also needs to be person-centred, inclusive, and supportive.

Case Study 1: McMaster Continuing Education, McMaster University in Hamilton About Hamilton and McMaster University Hamilton is a culturally diverse city of approximately 500,000 residents located an hour’s drive from Toronto with population growth of 37% expected between 2016 and 2041 (Hamilton Immigration Partnership Council, 2019). Its present population includes about 130,000 immigrants and 125,000 residents whose mother tongue is a non-official language (Statistics Canada, 2017). Close to 40% of its immigrant community landed in Canada before 1991 while about one-third have lived in Hamilton since 2000. Recent immigrants—those arriving between 2001-2016—tend to be much younger than Hamilton’s non-immigrant population. The most common home countries among Hamilton’s more recent immigrants are Syria, Iraq, the Philippines, and India. The most spoken first language among Hamilton’s more recent immigrants is Arabic. Throughout Hamilton, there are various organizations dedicated to supporting newcomers as they transition to life in Canada and the city itself as well as develop as speakers of English. Like other immigrants, Hamilton’s newcomers face a myriad of challenges in their transition to life in this new community, not the least of which is accessing the resources that play an integral part in introducing them to life in Canada and prevent social isolation (Caidi & Allard, 2005). Programs that include opportunities to develop language and cultural competence and enhance life and career prospects (Caidi & Allard, 2005; Sherry, Thomas, & Chui, 2010) are especially important since immigrants have lower levels of participation in the labour market across all age groups when compared to non-immigrants. In Hamilton, a significant wage disparity exists between non-immigrants and immigrants with education above the bachelor’s level. Also important is that 35.2% of recent immigrants in Hamilton hold a university certificate, diploma, or degree at the bachelor’s level or higher. As well as being a destination city for newcomers to Canada, Hamilton is home to McMaster University, one of four Canadian universities in the world’s top 75 according to the well regarded 2020 Times Higher Education rankings (“The world university rankings 2020,” 2020). Among many newcomers and others considering relocation to Hamilton, particularly persons from professional backgrounds, McMaster University is an important draw. Foreign trained professionals often know of McMaster’s global reputation which crosses many disciplines but is especially well known in health, engineering, and business. McMaster’s Centre for Continuing Education, a provider of a wide cross-section professionally-focused programs through face to face and online methods, is, therefore, an important educational setting for the new immigrant seeking a Canadian academic credential from a university.

115

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

What McMaster Continuing Education Offers to Adult Learners from International Backgrounds McMaster Continuing Education is located in downtown Hamilton and sits at the cross-section of business and municipal government. It is also in a part of the city where entrepreneurs are opening new shops and restaurants although various social problems exist in this same area. Many newcomers live just north of the downtown and within an easy bus ride to McMaster Continuing Education. While the physical location of McMaster Continuing Education is important, so too is its place in the online education world. Since 2015, Continuing Education has assumed a leadership role in online education both within the University and the national online education scene as it involves university continuing education. With approximately 80% of all registrations in online courses at McMaster Continuing Education, the intersection of online education and the immigrant learner is an important one and will be discussed here. Although there are indisputable benefits to face to face learning for the newcomer adult learner including language and cultural development in real time and the building of networks in one’s own city, for the adult learner, life is often distinguished by the need to work at more than one low paying job and to juggle the stressors of family life in a new country. For these reasons, attending face to face classes can be yet another stressor. By comparison, provided that the design of online courses is thoughtful and inclusive, instructors are aware that they will have newcomers in their courses, and adequate learning and other resources are in place, online education can be a valuable way for the newcomer to acquire a Canadian credential. Given all of the above and because several organizations in the city offer language training for newcomers, McMaster Continuing Education does not offer a dedicated face to face English as a second language program. Instead, its focus is on the development and delivery of programs which will benefit all adult learners including newcomers to Canada; reflect diversity and cultural norms; and include the support systems necessary to ensure academic success as well as advantage in the Canadian workplace. As a further note, the access and flexibility that online education provides means that adult learners can actually begin their studies before they even arrive in Canada.

Program Types Because McMaster Continuing Education’s primary goal is to offer university-approved certificate and diploma programs that will advance employability in the Canadian knowledge marketplace rather than in the trades, programs typically fall into four general domains. The domains and sample programs are noted in Table 1. The programs noted in Table 1 and others are based on ongoing review of Canadian labour market trends so that persons who take them will be positioned for work both in the present and the future. For those who arrive in Canada with prior post-secondary education (as noted earlier in this chapter, Hamilton has a substantive number of educated newcomers), these programs are uniquely valuable. The newcomer-learner can, upon successful completion, add a further academic credential from a highly regarded university to his or her portfolio. For other newcomers who may not have attended post-secondary education in his or her country or origin, the majority of programs offered by McMaster Continuing Education are open access programs, meaning that the student does not require prior college or university

116

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Table 1. Domains and Programs, McMaster Continuing Education Academic Domain

Program Examples

Business

Business Administration Accounting Human Resources Management

Health

Professional Addictions Studies Applied Clinical Research Science of Cannabis

Communication and Design

Marketing Digital Marketing

Technology and Analytics

Big Data Analytics Health Information Management

Note: Greater detail about the programs listed in Table 1 is found at the McMaster Continuing Education web site at www.mcmastercce. ca.

education to start a program. Importantly, all of McMaster’s academic certificate and diploma programs are offered online, while a limited number are offered in face to face and online formats. Complementing its more structured and longer academic certificate (usually five term-length courses) and diploma programs (usually eight to ten term-length courses), McMaster Continuing Education offers a menu of professional development opportunities in several formats. Examples include one-two workshops on topics ranging from self-knowledge to management and leadership and short courses offered as webinars which provide participants a taste of a particular area and which may serve to inform a participant’s choice of a program. McMaster Continuing Education is also exploring the value of not-for-credit programs that are not as intensive or as long as certificate and diploma programs but not as short as the aforementioned professional development offerings. For instance, a not-for-credit four course program in entrepreneurship is being launched in Spring 2020. As an open access program, this program will be particularly valuable to newcomers who have come from their homelands with business experience. Additionally, many persons from international backgrounds aspire to establish businesses as a means of supporting themselves and their families. They may not have the time or financial means to enrol in a longer business administration certificate or diploma program. A unique program that enables newcomers to progress from the more practical learning offered through McMaster Continuing Education to degree studies is called the MyOWNMac program. This pathway is one that provides adults career development opportunities complemented by a degree completion option if the newcomer desires this. Because the continuing education courses as well as the degree courses are available online, the newcomer-learner can complete his or her degree in a part-time way. While the vast majority of programs offered by McMaster Continuing Education target learning for the work world, this should not suggest that these programs are distinguished by anything less than pedagogical excellence, which all students deserve and is particularly important when international students are involved. As well, Continuing Education offers a number of programs and learning supports that serve the needs of the international learner group in specific ways. Thirdly, the Continuing Education unit is structured such that a team of dedicated staff members interact with students directly and instructors are provided professional development opportunities. Each of these items will be addressed below.

117

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

PEDAGOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS: COURSE DEVELOPMENT, INSTRUCTION, AND OTHER ACADEMIC MATTERS As noted earlier in the chapter, the majority of courses and programs by McMaster Continuing Education offered are delivered online. While McMaster Continuing Education still offers courses and programs in the face to face context, course enrollments clearly delineate that adult learners prefer the flexibility of online learning over classes that require them to be present at particular times. At the time of the writing of this chapter, 80% of all course enrolments are in online courses while enrolments in face to face courses have shown a steady decline over the last three academic years. For all adult learners including the international learners McMaster Continuing Education serves, it is critical that the actual design and development of its online courses reflect the best practices of contemporary online instructional design (Salyers, Carter, Myers, Barrett, & Carter, 2014). McMaster takes this responsibility very seriously with a dedicated educational development team, judicious use of educational templates, adherence to quality assurance practices, and compliance with accessibility standards. In order for online learning to be meaningful, it is important that each of these elements be part of an online course experience (Carter, Salyers, Myers, Hipfner, Hoffart, MacLean, White, Matus, Forssman, & Barrett, 2014). While the variables of course design and development are important in online education, the character and expertise of the instructor are the most important aspects of a successful online experience for the international adult learner. Indeed, at McMaster, instructors and the international students they teach often come from different worlds including different social, ethnic, cultural, and geographical worlds. Given this, McMaster Continuing Education is highly selective in the instructors it hires, the goal being that the content expertise of instructors is made richer by their caring and culturally appropriate interactions with learners. In response to the reality that students are active participants in the online classroom and that cultural differences between instructors and their students can pose important challenges to the efficacy of teaching and learning (Gay, 2013), the hiring and evaluation of instructors is taken very seriously at McMaster. Attention is also given to the professional development needs of instructors in relation to teaching in culturally diverse contexts. For example, in all classroom types, a lack of understanding of cultural issues and practices on the part of the teacher can lead to miscommunication, mistrust, poor guidance, frustration, and attrition. In the online classroom with its many asynchronous communications and lack of visual cues in these connections, misunderstandings can happen. While its professional development program is not as robust as it desired, supports and resources for instructors as online learning facilitators and stewards of culturally diverse classrooms are increasing. Of help for both learners and their instructors are a couple of recently developed programs. The first focuses on academic writing and is offered as four short online courses; the second program is a face to face three course program that explores professional communication when a person’s first language is not English. The former will assist the adult learner in understanding and applying the principles and practices of academic writing which will, in turn, enhance success in their courses and programs. Becoming a strong academic writer involves not only the foundations of grammar, paragraphing, and thesis and idea development but also understanding of academic integrity and its related processes. The latter courses explore specific challenges in professional communication faced by the international learner and others whose first language is not English.

118

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

McMaster Continuing Education is also in the process implementing academic tutoring services for all of its learners. It is anticipated that this resource will be well used by international students.

Supports: Staff, Events, and Other There is no question about it: interactions with informed and caring staff, in addition to competent and kindly instructors, play an important role in the life of an international student. To this end, staff called Information Specialists interact with students as they have questions and need assistance with their course choices. According to a 2018 review of McMaster Continuing Education conducted by the Learning Resources Network (LERN) organization, the world’s leading organization in continuing education, McMaster’s Information Specialists are exceptionally skilled at their job and play an important role in supporting and guiding students. Other staff are likewise available to students depending on their need. Students are also engaged in the life of McMaster Continuing Education through the many community events hosted there and their access to a warm and welcoming lounge are where they can gather to study, work on projects, and otherwise retreat. Many of the events hosted at Continuing Education are open to the public and, therefore, ways for international students to learn about the city of Hamilton. Through publicly available online talks or webinars organized by McMaster Continuing Education at a low price point, international and other students can explore other areas of interest. Finally, every student who completes a certificate or diploma program with McMaster Continuing Education has the chance to participate in a graduation event held every fall. Notably, many international students participate and bring members of their families as the students’ achievements are a distinct measure of success in a new country and point of personal pride. Not all university continuing education units organize a graduation due to the logistics and costs associated with doing so. The fact that McMaster Continuing Education hosts an annual graduation is evidence of how it values its students and their families many of whom are newcomers to Canada. Finally, McMaster does not charge higher fees for those learners who have not yet secured their citizenship in Canada to take courses or to compensate for the costs of services that international learners may need to a greater extent than Canadian born learners.

Case Study 2: The Real Institute, Chang School, Ryerson University in Toronto About Toronto and Ryerson University With a population of 2.7 million people (Statistics Canada, 2017), Toronto is Canada’s largest city. The Greater Toronto Area (GTA) is composed of 5.9 million people (Statistics Canada, 2016), of which more than 2.7 million residents of are immigrants who come from around the world including the Americas, Europe, and Asia with large numbers from China and India (Statistics Canada, 2017). Resulting from the many immigrants who call Toronto home, the languages that are spoken in the city are varied and diverse. In fact, the first language of 2.5 million residents in the GTA is not English or French (Statistics Canada, 2017). Toronto is often referred to as “The City of Neighbourhoods,” and this is clear through the cultural names of many neighbourhoods that exist in the city including China Town, Little Italy, and Greek Town to name just a few. Toronto is a city that prides itself on its multicultural nature and celebrates this through the many cultural festivals and celebrations that occur in the city. Certainly, Toronto is culturally

119

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

and linguistically diverse and, as a result, is an attractive choice for persons seeking new educational and professional opportunities. In its role as one of the most culturally diverse cities in the world, Toronto has a myriad of services and programs available to help immigrants adjust and improve their English language and cultural fluency skills. These include language programs offered through the numerous colleges and universities in the city; Language Instruction for Newcomers (LINC) programs funded by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC); English as a second language (ESL) and newcomer programs offered through the Toronto Public Library; and English conversation circles run by various community groups. These programs are extremely valuable and accessed by many newcomers to the city. At the same time, significant challenges still exist for newcomers including social isolation, financial difficulties given Toronto’s high cost of living, and difficulties adjusting to the harsh Canadian weather. For the younger international student in Canada, challenges exist regarding communicating in English, adapting to a new culture, and living away from family support at a young age. Ryerson University is an attractive option for younger international students in Toronto who are looking to gain educational credentials and want, at the same time, to experience a bustling multicultural city. Given its vibrant downtown location and its focus on research and innovation as well as an emphasis on experiential learning—called Zone Learning—to encourage and support entrepreneurship, Ryerson is the “most applied to university in Ontario relative to available space” (Ryerson University). Undergraduate programs are innovative and creative in nature. Examples of Ryerson programs are Fashion Design, Image Arts, and New Media. Ryerson is also home to the Ted Rogers School of Management and is a popular choice for many international students who attend Ryerson. Ryerson University is also home to the Chang School of Continuing Education which offers a wide range of programs for learners from varied backgrounds to develop and upgrade their skills. The Chang School reduces barriers to education and offers several bridging programs for students who are looking to join university programs. The bridging program that will be the focus of the following discussion is offered through Ryerson’s English as an Additional Language (Real) Institute which offers programming to a diverse student body. While the Real Institute offers a variety of program types, particular attention will be given to the curricular and programmatic features of the ESL Foundation Program.

THE REAL INSTITUTE’S PROGRAMS AND STUDENTS Programs. As noted above, the Real Institute is home to several ESL/EAP (English as a Second Language/English for Academic Purposes) programs which attract international students from around the world. The Real Institute offers both short-term and long-term programs. Short-term programs range from 4-12 weeks in length and serve a variety of purposes. For example, the English Intensive program offers a customizable language experience of 20 hours of learning experiences per week with opportunities for experiential learning excursions outside the classroom (Real Institute). The English ++ program combines language learning with the option of taking up to two degree-credit courses and opportunities for hands-on learning (Real Institute). In addition to these shorter style language programs, the Real Institute’s ESL Foundation Program is the Institute’s most popular program. This program is designed for students who have been academically accepted to an undergraduate degree program at Ryerson but do not meet the English language

120

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

proficiency requirements. Successful completion of the ESL Foundation Program will result in full admission to the student’s chosen undergraduate degree program. Students can join the ESL Foundation program at three entry points according to an English language proficiency test score such as IELTS. Students may be required to complete a one, two, or three semesters program. Further to approximately 20-25 hours spent in class learning language each week, students in their final semester of the program enrol in an undergraduate degree course offered through the Chang School. This course serves as a credit toward their degree program. Depending on a student’s success in the program, they may be allowed to earn up to two additional degree credits (Real Institute). Students. The student body of the Real Institute is diverse with students coming from more than 15 countries worldwide although the largest share of students come from China. Students from Vietnam, Korea, Iran, Bulgaria, Brazil, and Mexico, among others, are also represented. As a result, the Real Institute is a diverse, multicultural learning space where students and instructors alike have opportunities to engage with people from different cultural, ethnic, and linguistic backgrounds on a daily basis. As previously noted, the student population of the ESL Foundation Program is composed of young adults; most students are between the ages of 18-20, and they are just beginning their university careers. Since approximately 50% of students in the ESL Foundation Program enter from Canadian high schools serving international learners, many of these students already have some understanding and experience of Canadian learning environments and Canadian culture. On the other hand, approximately half of students enter the ESL Foundation Program directly from their home countries. Regardless of students’ educational and cultural experiences, instructors and staff at the Real Institute have a duty to ensure that students are safe, engaged, and well-prepared for the academic realities they will face once they enter their undergraduate degree programs. Students from the ESL Foundation Program enter a variety of programs across Ryerson University’s six undergraduate faculties. Importantly, a large number of students enter the Ted Rogers School of Management and go on to complete studies in Hospitality and Tourism Management (BComm) and Accounting and Finance (BComm). Other programs among ESL Foundation Program students are Fashion (BDes) and New Media (BFA). This range of interest in programs creates an environment at the Real Institute that is engaged, exciting, and optimistic. Diversity is also present among instructors and staff who work at the Real Institute. Instructors and staff come from a range of cultural backgrounds and speak a multitude of languages. Instructors have varied educational backgrounds, but all have completed formal studies in education and second language acquisition. This diversity among instructors and staff creates a stimulating learning environment for students.

Academic and Curricular Considerations Student Placement. Upon acceptance to the Real Institute, specifically, the ESL Foundation Program, students are placed into levels according to their English proficiency test scores. Although challenges exist regarding the placement of students based on their test scores, it is also a clear and transparent process. Placing students in levels is beneficial to both students and instructors. Regarding students, it is important for them to receive instruction and support at a level that is accessible and manageable. Requiring students to take part in lessons that are too advanced brings little benefit and can result in disinterest and hopelessness on the part of the learner. It also creates challenges for the instructor who will struggle with students who do not progress and improve as expected. Thus, ensuring that students 121

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

are placed at appropriate levels is essential to ensuring success for all stakeholders. This practice supports the development of accessible lessons where both students and instructors make and see progress. It is likewise essential for instructors to ensure that students have achieved the objectives of one level before promoting a student to the next. Curriculum. Class sizes in the ESL Foundation Program are intentionally kept small. This allows for students to comfortably practice and develop their language skills; it likewise allows for instructors to provide students with the necessary time, support, and care. During weekly office hours, students can approach instructors with questions related to assignments and class; interestingly, students often use this time as a chance to discuss personal and cultural challenges that they may be facing with instructors. The entire curriculum of the ESL Foundation Program is designed by instructors who are familiar with the unique challenges that ESL/EAP students face, the skills necessary for students to be successful in a university setting, best practices for language teaching, and possible implications. The curriculum is developed by a team of instructors who take into consideration all of the above factors. The curriculum is arranged around modules with carefully chosen themes that are intended to be both engaging, meaningful, and culturally sensitive. For example, the module of Sustainability has real world implications given the current climate crisis, and students are encouraged to think about the impacts and effects that humans have on the environment. In addition to being directly linked to students’ lives, this topic will be a recurring theme throughout their university studies and professional work; exposing ESL students to this theme will assist them in the discussions and projects that they will certainly experience beyond in their undergraduate studies beyond the Real Institute. The reading and writing aspects of the curriculum incorporate texts and tasks that are accessible and practical. Explicit teaching of reading strategies is intended to help students grapple with texts that might be challenging. Writing tasks and assignments are designed to reflect the types of tasks that students will be required to complete in their undergraduate courses and include lessons on personal styles of writing as well as more academic styles. Conducting research is a skill that is also explicitly taught and highly valued in the program as all undergraduate students, not just international students, often struggle with this. With respect to the listening and speaking curriculum, again, lessons and modules are designed to be interactive, useful, and purposeful. Listening lessons heavily emphasize note taking skills, which are essential for the university. Speaking skills are also explicitly taught, and students are required to complete speaking assignments that are reflective of the types of speaking they will be required to do in their undergraduate programs. This gives students opportunities to practice their general English skills while, at the same, preparing and practicing for situations that they will experience in academic settings. An important aspect of the ESL Foundation Program curriculum is scaffolding and repetition. Given that the program is designed for students to progress through levels, it is essential to scaffold to ensure that all lessons are accessible. Scaffolding likewise allows for students to see connections between what is taught and practiced. This makes learning more relevant and contributes to student “buy in.” Purposeful repetition likewise ensures that students practice and improve their fluency. Technology. The incorporation of technology into lessons is an important element of the curriculum. Given that the ESL Foundation Program is comprised of younger learners, safe and purposeful incorporation of technology is motivating. Instructors encourage the controlled use of mobile devices in lessons to enhance engagement but also increase relevance. Thus, the curriculum includes planned use of technology and apps including Kahoot, Quizlet, and various Google apps. It is worth noting that students often need to be instructed on appropriate and correct use of these technologies. This is to en122

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

sure student safety but also because students may not be familiar with them depending on their cultural and educational backgrounds. On a different but related note, international students are often unfamiliar with document and formatting standards in the North American context and need help with basic, technical tasks such as changing the settings in Microsoft Word so that they are aligned with North American norms. This is an essential part of the instructors’ role in ensuring that students are set up for success in the university setting. Culture. Lessons also include discussion and consideration of culture where appropriate. Given that all students at the Real Institute are living in and adapting to a new culture, these are necessary conversations to have in the safety of the classroom. Students feel comfortable in the classroom asking questions about culture that they may find challenging and confusing. Beyond allowing space for students to ask questions, elements of culture are purposefully incorporated into the curriculum to encourage students to reflect on how their culture and Canadian culture are similar and different, to learn about appropriate cultural behaviour in various contexts both academically and otherwise, and to consider how their own identity is affected or changed by the culture(s) in which they live or identify with.

Beyond the Classroom Experiential Learning. In addition to extensive in-class instruction, students in the ESL Foundation Program have opportunities to participate in experiential learning activities. While some experiential learning takes place off-campus and at various locations in Toronto, many experiential learning activities involve connecting Real Institute students with various partners and departments on the Ryerson University campus. Because the Real Institute is physically separated from the main campus, it is essential to make sure that students feel that they are part of the greater Ryerson University community and to create connections between departments and students. Thus, many experiential learning events take place at and supported by various departments at the university. Workshops and Mental Health. Support and administrative staff at the Real Institute organize and host various workshop sessions for students to learn about the services and supports that are available to them on campus and to which they are entitled through their tuition fees including English language support, library services, and, importantly, mental health services. All students experience stressors related to mental health, and international students who are away from their families and traditional support systems are no different. Discussion of mental health is considered taboo in some cultures; therefore, it is important to have open, candid conversations with students about these challenges. Peer Mentors. In addition to the professional support staff who work at the Real Institute and serve students, peer mentors serve an important role in supporting Real Institute students. Peer mentors are trained in various issues that international students may face and support students in situations where they feel more comfortable talking to a “mentor” rather than an instructor or authority figure. In addition to providing emotional and social support to students, peer mentors organize social events, talent shows, and intramural sports activities. These events create opportunities for engagement beyond the classroom. Students also form friendships with peer mentors, which contributes to the development of relationships in a different culture. A Warm, Welcoming Environment. As a whole, the Real Institute fosters a warm, welcoming environment where students are made to feel comfortable and safe. Students are encouraged to share their opinions and reminded that all contributions are valuable. It is important to explicitly share expectations for behaviour both within the classroom and in the context of Canadian society. This approach assists 123

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

students’ integration into Canadian society; enables them to develop friendships and relationships more easily; and, ultimately, aids their academic success.

DISCUSSION Thinking about Duty of Care, Student Success, and International Students in the University Continuing Education Unit While the cases presented in this paper are different in terms of the age and stage of the learners served, each examines the learning and support experiences of international students as met by a Canadian university continuing education unit. The strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities of each unit in facilitating learning and extending care so that students are successful in their academics and in their lives are discussed below. Recommendations for enhancement are also suggested. There is little question that both units take their duty of care and commitment to student success seriously. Reflecting on the students who study at McMaster, there is no better way to advance one’s personal and family life station than through meaningful work, and, in Canada, a credential from a well-recognized post-secondary institution goes a long way. Extrapolating, a carefully designed and delivered professional program is likely to enhance the older adult learner’s ability to move across and between the borders of a new life in a new country. Moreover, acquiring a professional credential that is also academic in flexible and accessible ways that permit the learner to meet family, work, and other demands is important. McMaster’s approach to programming and the delivery of its programs reflects these variables. As discussed, the programs offered by McMaster Continuing Education are grounded in marketplace trends and prepared by staff who are experts in adult and online education. As such, they represent a good value for the more life experienced international learner: they represent career and life promise or situations of caring in action. Likewise, at McMaster, the international learner pays no more than for someone who has lived all of his or her life in Canada. McMaster Continuing Education is not using the international learner to balance its fiscal books. Prinsloo (2018) points out how educational institutions and their leaders can be caught between fiscal responsibilities and a commitment to student success achieved in caring and competent ways. Unfortunately, in some institutions, the extra costs of supporting the international student can be passed on to the student through high fees. At the same time, there are certain assumptions at play including that the international learners who study with McMaster Continuing Education have sufficient English language skills to manage adequately in their courses. Anecdotally, based on conversations with instructors, this is not the case for all learners. Given that many online courses in particular require a good deal of writing and sometimes online group work, there is an area in which McMaster Continuing Education needs to do further work. There are also cultural nuances that may be difficult to navigate since there is limited or no face to face interaction. Alternatively, persons from certain cultures and backgrounds may prefer the online setting over the face to face setting where real-time discussion is often an expectation. For instance, depending on one’s cultural background, he or she may hold the instructor in a situation of deference and choose not to be an active participant. This can be problematic in a discourse-focused face to face classroom.

124

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

If McMaster does not choose to develop additional language programs given the many resources in the city to support the language and cultural development of its students, there are two primary ways by which it can be a better practitioner of duty of care and enabler of student success: providing increased academic and career supports for international learners and ensuring greater faculty development. Regarding the former, McMaster Continuing Education will only be as strong as its students who need to be successful in their courses and in securing employment. While McMaster is presently making strides in implementing greater academic supports for its international learners through a limited selection of language focused courses, different workshops, and a new tutoring service, it needs to continue to push itself in this area. Developing competence and confidence in a new language (Carter, 2008) and achieving cultural safety in a new country takes time and how one gets there will vary from person to person. In other words, trying new approaches and revising them as required is critical. So too is pulling on the experiences of other post-secondary institutions, educational providers, and community agencies that work with older international students. Career support is likewise an area in which McMaster Continuing Education could do more. While it offers courses in recruitment and business communications, practical opportunities to role play interviews, meet with employers, build networks, and practice the soft skills needed in the Canadian workplace would advantage all students but, in particular, international students. Offering these kinds of opportunities in the face to face context is ideal. However, there are also means of extending these options through technology. Because so many of Continuing Education’s courses are online and its learners report valuing the flexibility and accessibility of online education, developing career resources and workshops supported by technology is a natural step. Faculty development is equally important since instructors play a vital role in bridging cultural differences through culturally responsive teaching (Gay, 2010). Cultural responsiveness in teaching means meeting, working with, and engaging diverse students in higher education, including students of color; military students; lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and questioning (LGBTQ) students; religious minority students; and international students (Harper, Quaye, & Pendakar, 2020). Given that McMaster Continuing Education serves non-traditional students including a growing number of students from international backgrounds, it is important that its instructors reflect the diversity of its student body and that they be educated themselves in how to best serve their students. Indeed, cultural responsiveness as well as teaching and learning approaches that bridge cultural difference is an imperative for meeting the needs of these students (Carter, & Brockerhoff, 2011). Highly relevant mentoring or HRM of faculty is critically important at this time when courses and programs continue to grow in their international composition (Carter, Salyers, Page, Williams, Hofsink, & Albl, 2011). By comparison, the Real Institute is an example of an organization highly committed to the learning and life needs of its international students albeit this international group is at a different life stage than those who choose McMaster Continuing Education. This is evident through its placement of students into appropriate levels to ensure necessary progress, connecting with students through various mediums, and fostering a safe environment where students from all cultural and linguistic backgrounds feel comfortable. In particular, informed and carefully made curriculum decisions contribute to the strength of the programs offered by the Real Institute. Curriculum development teams and instructors carefully identify the skills required to be successful at the undergraduate level and incorporate these skills into lessons to develop students’ comfort and fluency. While Real Institute students may appear to be at a disadvantage given the linguistic challenges they face, ESL Foundation Program students are highly prepared for undertaking university level studies because they have had time, opportunity, and exposure to learn 125

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

and practice essential academic skills. Many domestic students who enter university directly from high school lack some of the skills that ESL Foundation Program students have opportunities to develop. The Real Institute practices care by engaging students in interesting, relevant, and meaningful ways. As described above, planned and purposeful integration of technology enhances student motivation; additionally, intentional choices regarding topics for reading and listening texts make lessons interesting and useful. Explanations of how, what, and why topics are taught and learned in class are made clear to students as well as how topics are relevant to their future undergraduate studies. Reminding students that everyone—students, instructors, and staff—are all working towards their success creates an environment of care and optimism. A further element of the success of the Real Institute is a strong emphasis on cultural sensitivity on behalf of all parties including staff, instructors, and students alike. Ensuring that all people and cultures are respected and included is essential to the creation of the warm, welcoming environment outlined above. When all learners and instructors are respected and included, relationships flourish. Positive relationships between students and between instructors and students make the learning environment productive as well as enjoyable. Safe spaces encourage sound learning. Although the Real Institute strives to create a caring, supportive environment, challenges still exist. As the Real Institute is close to but not actually on the main Ryerson University campus, it is important to make sure that students feel that they are part of the Ryerson community. The experiential learning activities that already exist in programs certainly support this goal, but expansion of these opportunities will help students further adjust and transition into the first-year undergraduate experience. Requiring students to observe undergraduate classes to get a feel for how the classes work would be a valuable activity for students to participate in. Additionally, further efforts can be made to incorporate these considerations into the curriculum by including notes and activities in curricular documents about the greater Ryerson community and the students’ connection to it. Further access to supports for challenges related to mental health for students, instructors, and staff would also increase the level of care that the Real Institute is able to provide to students. Issues of mental health can be challenging to navigate in any classroom; in the language classroom, these issues are further complicated by issues of language and culture. Sometimes a student may want to discuss an issue related to mental health with an instructor with whom the student feels comfortable but may be limited by language abilities. Conversely, other students may feel it is inappropriate or uncomfortable to discuss mental health at all. Although there are many health services available to students on campus, addressing these issues and developing concrete strategies for managing these types of situations would be beneficial for all people connected to the Real Institute.

FINAL THOUGHTS Respecting that some international students will be like those who attend the Real Institute and others will be like those who choose McMaster Continuing Education and still others will find a Canadian university some other way either an undergraduate or graduate student, there is no doubt that there are many roads to explore as Canada internationalizes its campuses and that some of them will be bumpy. Still, a fundamental commitment to educational experiences wrapped in principles and pedagogies that reflect duty to care and student success appears to be the most appropriate starting point.

126

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

As this paper has pointed out, university continuing education units have an important role to play as Canadian universities work to discover right roads for their international students. While university continuing education units share important relationships with academic faculties, it is possible that their quasi-independence from them, overall nimbleness, flexibility to try new learning strategies and educational technologies, and historical experience with non-traditional learners will serve international learners and the larger academy well. Indeed, the role of the university continuing education should not be overlooked as Canadian universities continue to explore and discover how they can practically and ethically serve international learners at all ages and life stages.

REFERENCES Adler, P. S. (1975). The transitional experience: An alternative view of culture shock. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 15(4), 13–23. doi:10.1177/002216787501500403 Alegre, M.K., Mansoor, I., Moss, D., & Phillips, V. (2001). Integrating technology in the ESL classroom. Facilitator’s guide [and] participant’s materials [and] participant’s reference materials. Retrieved from ERIC, Resources in Education. (62355039) Avci, H., & Adiguzel, T. (2017). A case study on mobile-blended collaborative learning in and English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Context. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(7). Advance online publication. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v18i7.3261 Buzducea, D. (2010). Social work in the new millennium: A global perspective. Social Work Research, 1, 31–42. Byrne, D. (2017). Research ethics: How can I ensure I will be safe when carrying out my research? SAGE Publications. Inc., 1-2. Advance online publication. doi:10.4135/9781526408556 Caidi, N., & Allard, D. (2005). Social inclusion of newcomers to Canada: An information problem? Policy Matters, 23(3), 1–10. doi:10.1016/j.lisr.2005.04.003 Canadian Association of University Continuing Education. (2020). A new reality for university continuing education in Canada: Leading the way to a re-defined academy, 2016-2020. Retrieved from: https:// cauce-aepuc.ca/documents/2016-2020-CAUCE Strategic-Plan.pdf Carter, L. (2008). Perceptions of writing confidence, critical thinking, and writing competence among registered nurse-learners studying online. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 34(2), 63–87. Carter, L., & Brockerhoff-Macdonald, B. (2011). Continuing education needs of faculty as the teachers at a mid-sized Ontario university: A descriptive account. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 4. doi:10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2011.1.4 Carter, L., & Graham, R. (2012). The evolution of online education at a small northern university: Theory and practice. Journal of Distance Education, 26(2).

127

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Carter, L., Salyers, V., Page, A., Williams, L., Hofsink, C., & Albl, L. (2011). Highly relevant mentoring (HRM) as a faculty development model for web-based instruction. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 38(1). Advance online publication. doi:10.21432/T27C7M Carter, L., Salyers, V., Page, A., Williams, L., Hofsink, C., & Albl, L. (2011). Highly relevant mentoring (HRM) as a faculty development model for web-based instruction. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 38(1). Advance online publication. doi:10.21432/T27C7M Carter, L.M., Salyers, V. Myers, S., Hipfner, C., Hoffart, C., MacLean, C., White, K., Matus, T., Forssman, V. & Barrett, P. (2014). Qualitative insights from a Canadian multi institutional research study: In search of meaningful e-learning. Canadian Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning/La revue canadienne sur l’avancement des connaissances en enseignement et en apprentissage, 5(1). Curtis, C. A. (2014). ForWord: A study of an interactive learning environment in foreign language. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (1571976) Dorrian, J., & Wache, D. (2009). Introduction of an online approach to flexible learning for on campus and distance students: Lessons learned and ways forward. Nurse Education Today, 29(2), 157–167. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2008.08.010 PMID:18954922 Dusbiber, D. (2006). Time is not on our side: Literacy and literature for high school language learners prioritizing what we teach. Retrieved from: https://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/2330 Duty of Care. (2017). In Legal Dictionary. Retrieved from: https://legaldictionary.net/duty of-care/ Egbo, B. (2009). Teaching for diversity in Canadian schools. Pearson Prentice Hall. Eyring, J. L. (2014). Adult ESL education in the US. The CATESOL Journal, 26(1), 120–149. https://searchproquestom.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/docview/1871582347/F7590B63 70D4E3PQ/4?accountid=12347 Gay, G. (2013). Teaching to and through cultural diversity. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(1), 48–70. Government of Canada. (2020). Building on Success: International Education Strategy (2019 2014). Retrieved from: https://www.international.gc.ca/education/strategy-2019-2024strategie.aspx?lang=eng Hamilton Integration Partnership Council. (2019). A demographic profile of immigrants in Hamilton. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. Harper, S. R., Quaye, S. J., & Pendakar, S. L. (Eds.). (2020). Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and practical applications (3rd ed.). Routledge. Hosoda, M., & Stone-Romero, E. (2010). The effects of foreign accents on employment-related decisions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 25(2), 113–132. doi:10.1108/02683941011019339 Humphries, J., & Knight-Grofe, J. (2014). Canada first: The 2009 survey of international students. Canadian Bureau for International Education. Kukulska-Hulme, A. (2007). Mobile usability in educational contexts: What have we learnt? The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 8(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v8i2.356

128

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Lightbrown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned (3rd ed.). Oxford Press. Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004 Minet, A. J. (2009). “Earth aches by midnight”: Helping ESL writers clarify their intended meaning. In S. Bruce & B. Rafoth (Eds.), ESL writers: A guide for writing centre tutors (2nd ed., pp. 66–77). Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc. Minkler, M. (2004). Ethical challenges for the “outside” researcher in community-based participatory research. Health Education & Behavior, 31(6), 684–697. doi:10.1177/1090198104269566 PMID:15539542 Nemeth, L. (2010). Assessing the effectiveness of the Puentes de Vida program as a means of teaching English to immigrant Hispanic adults. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (85677947) Prinsloo, P. (2018, February). Balancing cost, quality and access with care in online education: The role of student data. Presentation at McMaster University Centre for Continuing Education. Real Institute. (n.d.). Ryerson University. Retrieved from: https://www.ryerson.ca/realinstitute/ Rodríguez-García, L. M. (2014). Influential factors that affect retention and language acquisition in beginning ESL students. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (1871570233) Rourke, L., & Carter, L. (2019, June). Understanding, supporting and empowering adult learners in universities. The Teaching Technology Conference, New Orleans, LA. Ryerson University. (2020). Retrieved from: https://www.ryerson.ca/ Salyers, V., Carter, L., Myers, S., Barrett, P., & Carter, A. (2014). The search for meaningful elearning at Canadian universities: A multi-institution research study. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 15(6), 1–25. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v15i6.1713 Sanchez, K. (2013). Adult learning in a computer-based ESL acquisition program. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (3602208) Sandhu, K. (2000). Reaching all students in an ESL class. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (62337153) Selman, M. (1979). English as a second language for adults: A curriculum guide. Ministry of Education. Retrieved from: https://searchproquest.com.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/docview/63540402/1B5437630 9C46 EPQ/17?accountid=1 Sherry, M., Thomas, P., & Chui, W. H. (2010). International students: A vulnerable student population. Higher Education, 60(1), 33–46. doi:10.100710734-009-9284-z Smith, R. A., & Khawaja, N. G. (2011). A review of the acculturation experiences of international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(6), 699–713. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.08.004 Snape, D., & Spencer, L. (2003). The foundations of qualitative research. In Qualitative research practice. Retrieved from: pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CMACA&Code1=535&Geo2=PR&Code 2=35&Data=Count&SearchText=toronto&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1 =All&TABID=1

129

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Study costs for international students in Canada. (2019). EduCanada. Retrieved from: https://www. educanada.ca/programs-programmes/education_cost-cout_education.aspx?lang=eng Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking (J. Harmer, Ed.). Longman. Thuy, V. (1992). High-tech for effective ESL/family literacy instruction. Final Report. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (62860097) Tour, E. (2010). Technology use in ESL: An investigation of students’ experiences and the implications for language education. TESOL in Context, 20(1), 5–21. World University Rankings. (2020). In THE World University Rankings. Retrieved from: https://www. timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020) Wrigley, H. (1993). Adult ESL literacy: Findings from a national study. ERIC Digest. Retrieved from: ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (62796138) Yamauchi, M. (2009). Integrating internet technology into the EFL classroom: A case study. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 5(2), 3–19. Yunus, M., Salehi, H., & Chenzi, C. (2012). Integrating social networking tools into ESL writing classroom: Strengths and weaknesses. English Language Teaching, 5(8), 42–48. Ze, W., Arndt, A. D., Singh, S. N., Biernet, M., & Liu, F. (2013). “You lost me at hello”: How and when accent-based biases are expressed and suppressed. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 30(2), 185–196. Zhao, N., & McDougall, D. (2008). Cultural influences on Chinese students’ asynchronous online learning in a Canadian university. International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education, 22(2), 59–80.

ADDITIONAL READING Corbin Dwyer, S. (2019). University educators’ experiences of teaching abroad: The promotion of cross-cultural competence. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(3). Advance online publication. doi:10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2019.3.9476 DiPlacito-DeRango, M. L. (2016). Acknowledge the barriers to better the practices: Support for student mental health in higher education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2016.2.2 Egbo, B. (2009). Teaching for diversity in Canadian schools. Pearson Prentice Hall. INTER Project. (2007). Culture is our focus, diversity is our normality: INTER guide to implement intercultural education. Vol 4. 2nd ed. European Commission’s Cormenius Programme. Vienna, Austria: Navreme publications.

130

 Serving Adult Learners From International Backgrounds at Two Canadian Universities

Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 423–451. doi:10.120715327809jls1303_6 Shan, H. (2015). Distributed pedagogy of difference: Reimagining immigrant training and education. Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 27(3), 1–16. https://cjsae.library.dal.ca/index.php/ cjsae/article/view/3362

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Cultural Diversity: Cultural diversity refers to the plurality of diverse or different cultures in a context of working together and respecting difference. Cultural Fluency: Cultural fluency involves understanding and use of elements from different cultures for the purpose of communication. It enables the communicator to convey meaning across cultures, and the receiver to understand messages as they are intended. Duty of Care: Duty of care is a legal term referring to an obligation to protect others from harm. Instructional and administrative staff in an educational setting hold duty of care for learners including international learners. Employability: Employability refers to the attributes and skills of a person that make him or her able to gain and maintain employment. Hidden Curriculum: Hidden curriculum is an element of an educational experience which may not have been intended such as the inclusion of norms, values, and beliefs. In courses and programs for international learners, awareness that there is a hidden curriculum is important for learners and instructors. Online Learning: Online learning is a learning model enabled by the use of internet technologies and, in general, facilitated by a subject matter expert. Among adult learners, online learning is often a preferred mode of learning because of its flexibility and accessibility.

131

132

Chapter 7

Making and Modalities:

Upending Traditional Teacher Education Course Delivery to Improve 21st Century Teaching and Learning Farah L. Vallera Lehigh University, USA Chris Harvey Lehigh University, USA

ABSTRACT The World Economic Forum’s 2018 report indicated that students will need to be prepared for a rapidly changing, technology-filled world in which their future jobs likely do not yet exist. Recent education reform initiatives have focused on preparing the workforce for 21st century jobs by improving STEM literacy and acknowledging the importance of teacher preparation. Unfortunately, many teachers, designers, and technologists have not been trained in the same ways as they are expected to prepare students, and training opportunities are often delivered in traditional, business-as-usual formats. To better prepare individuals to prepare students, reimagining traditional educational delivery and modalities, while integrating STEM, making, and play to encourage the development and practice of 21st century skills may prepare those adult learners build toward the future. This chapter will discuss administrative and curricular changes we made geared toward meeting our adult audiences’ needs in a teacher education program following their learning preferences.

INTRODUCTION Recently, I asked one of my instructional design students to intern for me on an upcoming project, to which she replied, “I would love to try to put what I have learned into practice even though I am a walking insecurity.” Her words resonated with me, as my colleagues and I have had to rapidly transition our courses and students to online learning environments in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch007

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Making and Modalities

educators have been struggling with the rapid and immediate transition to the unfamiliar with insecurity, trepidation, uncertainty, and reluctance, but urgency necessitated change. My insightful student recognized the feelings that accompany changing the way we “have always done things” and her words illuminate one of the many reasons education may be slower to adapt to our ever-evolving world. The solution, however, to such insecurity is through proper preparation. The World Economic Forum’s (2018) recent report indicated that current students will need to be prepared for a rapidly changing, technology-filled world in which their future jobs likely do not yet exist. Students must be adaptable to the disruptions experienced in the workforce and the world, flexible in their capacity for skills development, reskilling, and upskilling, and become committed, agile lifelong learners able to innovate and forge their own future workforce pathways (World Economic Forum, 2018). Their instructors need to be just as prepared and flexible. Numerous researchers have noted that encouraging the development of 21st century skills in students will better prepare them for their future employment (see Bellanca & Brandt, 2010; Chan, 2016; Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Unfortunately, there is speculation as to whether or not the traditional structure of the U.S. educational system and businessas-usual curriculum delivery can meet those needs and requirements (Chan, 2016; McLeod & Shareski, 2018; Prensky, 2016). In response, recent education reform initiatives have focused on preparing the workforce for 21st century jobs by improving literacy in STEM fields and acknowledging the importance of appropriate teacher preparation. According to Trilling and Fadel (2009, p. XXVI), 21st century skills include: learning and innovation skills (creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication, often referred to as the 4Cs); digital literacy skills (media, information, and ICTs, or information and communication technologies literacies); and career and life skills (flexibility, adaptability, initiative, self-direction, multicultural interaction, productivity, accountability, leadership, and responsibility). Such skills can prepare individuals for the unpredictable, uncertain, and dynamic future they are likely to encounter by allowing them to be agile, creative thinkers that shift directions easily, while working effectively with diverse audiences. However, there is a great deal of concern that students are not and will not be adequately equipped for the future since their educations lack training of these skills necessary to solve problems and think analytically in order to be successful in high-quality, technology-driven jobs (Chan, 2016; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, n.d.). And, “Without high-quality, knowledge-intensive jobs and the innovative enterprises that lead to discovery and new technology, our economy will suffer and our people will face a lower standard of living” (National Research Council [NRC], 2007, p. 1). Preparing the workforce for 21st century jobs by improving literacy in STEM fields has become the crux of recent education reform initiatives. The call for increased STEM literacy and improved learning outcomes in STEM subjects has been ongoing since the Space Race (NRC, 2007). Obama’s Race to the Top initiative addressed U.S. deficiencies in 21st century skill areas and STEM education by encouraging “U.S. states to adopt internationally benchmarked standards and assessments as a framework within which it can prepare students for success in college and the workplace” (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2013). In general, STEM standards encourage students to gain: 1) awareness of global interconnectedness, 2) conscientiousness of the future, 3) understandings of applications of the subject(s) in practice, and 4) the ability to create models, diagrams, and drawings within those subjects. Many initiatives have been undertaken to improve students’ 21st century skills and STEM literacies; however, teachers, designers, and developers may have not been trained to implement them effectively. While students are not necessarily expected to become STEM majors, being literate in STEM subjects will help them gain those essential 21st century skills. Still, many fear that poor U.S. STEM teacher quality and preparation are 133

 Making and Modalities

keeping STEM literacy initiatives from being successful in schools (Gonzalez & Kuenzi, 2012; NRC, 2011). Keeping this in mind, preparing teachers for such changes has become incredibly important. Teachers are the key to sustained curriculum reform (Blumenfeld, Fishman, Krajcik, Marx, & Soloway, 2000) and barriers to their success must be removed in order for initiatives to be successful. According to Blumenfeld and colleagues (2000), “Educators’ beliefs, understandings of the reform, and expertise in carrying it out will influence their reaction to change” (p. 151). Providing teachers with proper professional development, ample background content knowledge, built-in student scaffolding, and notes regarding regularly identified misconceptions in the subject areas can increase teacher confidence and lessen the amount of time needed to prepare and administer curricula. Well-designed materials that include avenues for failure, feedback, iterations, and that reduce cognitive load on students (Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark, 2006) can increase instructional efficiency and sustain student learning. Thus, instruction will not leave students unguided. Additionally, preparation and training similar to what their students should receive are also essential. Unfortunately, many teachers, instructional designers and technologists, and curriculum developers have not been trained in the same ways as they are now expected to prepare students, and the training opportunities presented to them are often delivered in traditional formats as well (Voogt, Erstad, Dede, & Mishra, 2013). And as mentioned previously, that lack of training may lead to insecurities connected to making appropriate curricular and administrative changes toward the future. Teachers and designers need appropriate training to prepare students for those 21st century jobs that may not yet exist, and those training opportunities must align to the expectations being placed on students. To accomplish this, reimagining traditional educational delivery and modalities, while utilizing integrated STEM, making, and play to encourage the development and practice of 21st century skills may prepare those adult learners to teach or build toward the future.

BACKGROUND Traditional Teaching and Learning Needs to Change Traditional teaching and business-as-usual curriculum and instruction have not changed drastically over the last 100 or more years. Education and teaching in the U.S. have traditionally consisted of brick-andmortar buildings, school years aligned with the harvest schedule, and curriculum that included integrated general studies all students undertook. Over time classes of similarly-aged students were grouped together, subjects were split apart and taught separately, and standardized testing dictated whether or not a student, school, district, or state were successful in their academic achievement. However, little else has changed monumentally. Unfortunately, the U.S. teaching and education system has been slow to adapt to invention, technological advancements, and rapid social and global change (Chan, 2016; McLeod & Shareski, 2018). Calls for the reform of traditional didactic curriculum and instruction to include inquiry and investigation have been present in the U.S. since the first half of the 21st century (Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Ravitch, 1983). World War II affected America on many levels and identified several important issues needing reform in order for the U.S. to remain competitive in world affairs, that included: the need to train more people for high-quality jobs and improve their basic literacy skills (along with those in STEM fields), get more students involved in science in both general and higher education, train more teachers 134

 Making and Modalities

to prepare a more technologically competent workforce, and “make school more relevant” (DeBoer, 1991, p. 129) in the lives of students by reforming curricula to include inquiry. Curriculum reformers “hoped to replace current methods—characterized by teacher-led ‘telling’ and student recitation - with curriculum packages that used ‘discovery,’ ‘inquiry,’ and inductive reasoning as methods of learning” (Ravitch, 1983, p. 232). This would imply that teacher training would also need to change in order to align to these shifting expectations. Criticisms of teacher education programs have been surfacing over that past several decades (see Darling-Hammond, 2000; Elliot, 2012; Voogt et al., 2013). Many of these appraisals have commented on the need to “strengthen [teacher education’s] knowledge base, its connections to both practice and theory, and its capacity to support the development of powerful teaching” (Darling-Hammond, 2000, p. 166). However, much like PreK-12 education’s resistance to change over time, higher education has made little progress in terms of adapting to rapid social and technological change (Chan, 2016; Kondakci & Van den Broeck, 2009). Teaching and learning most often still take place in formal learning environments, courses run during scheduled hours, semesters, and school years, and lecture-based instruction (even in online environments) is more prevalent than inquiry and exploration, while the most effective and engaging institutions are those that change and adapt purposefully to meet students’ needs and the changing social landscape (Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, & Whitt, 2005). In-service teacher training is often delivered in many of the same ways as pre-service teacher training programs, with the exception that it often takes place within teachers’ schools, yet during scheduled times and meetings (Elliot, 2012). While not all change is positive, inflexible options need to adapt to the changing needs of teachers and students in preparation programs. Content, curricula, and delivery are not the only things in need of change. The school year itself was designed to allow students to have time off during the summers to harvest on their family farms; students were split into classes based on ages, rather than ability levels or interests; and learning took place primarily in formal locations such as schools and classrooms. According to Patall, Cooper, and Batts Allen (2010), many past studies demonstrated a positive relationship between longer school years and academic achievement. Similarly, some researchers suggest that student groupings by age may hold back or delay students’ progress or achievement over those in multi-age groupings (Katz, Evangelou, & Hartman, 1990; Rutter & Maughan, 2002), and learning in informal and non-formal environments, along with formal learning environments has been found to improve engagement and achievement (Eshach, 2007). With improvements and advancements in technologies, all of these traditional practices are becoming less relevant globally. The rate of educational change has not stayed consistent with the rate of change in other areas of society (Chan, 2016; McLeod & Shareski, 2018). Administrative and curricular changes need to take place in individual classes, schools, districts, and colleges and universities in order to meet changing societal needs and reflect 21st century practices.

Ways Education is Changing (Slowly) Regardless of its speed or effectiveness, education is changing in a number of ways. Here, we will focus primarily on the changes happening in higher education, as our focus is on administrative and curricular adjustments made in our teacher education, preparation, and reskilling programs. First, an increase in online, blended, flipped, and hybrid offerings either supplementing or replacing traditional face-to-face courses has taken place in higher education institutions around the world (Adekola, Dale, & Gardiner, 2017; Bates, 2015; Garrison & Kanuka, 2004; Halverson, Graham, Spring, & Drysdale, 2012; Nguyen, 135

 Making and Modalities

2015; Seaman, Allen, & Seaman, 2018). These offerings are appearing at private, public, and for-profit educational institutions (Kidd, 2010; Nguyen, 2015), which is important when competing for audiences looking to learn, upskill, or reskill (Blackburn, 2019; Mintz, 2019). Similar administrative changes are occurring in terms of the length of courses and the timing of their offerings. Courses are available throughout days, evenings, and weekend hours for full semesters, truncated semesters, short-course formats, workshops, and seminars (Blackburn, 2019; Mintz, 2019; Pacansky-Brook, 2017). Learning is happening in formal learning environments, such as classrooms, as well as in non-formal environments, like those that take place on the job, and in informal environments, such as in living rooms or on commutes through YouTube tutorials or interactions with others (Mintz, 2019; Pacansky-Brook, 2017; Ramaley, 2014). These flexible opportunities are also contributing to changes in credentialing. Credentials may be offered for experience and demonstrated competencies in practices or on exams, and additional types of credentials are being offered in addition to college degrees (Chan, 2016; Mintz, 2019). Curricular changes are also occurring in higher education learning environments. Some faculty are moving away from traditional, lecture-based didactic instruction and are including more experiential and inquiry-based learning to provide students with authentic opportunities and practice (Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Kuh et al., 2005; Ramaley, 2014). Additionally, many of these changes rely in some way on technology. Technology-enhanced lessons, activities, and courses are emerging around the world, allowing students to experience things they could not previously, connect with audiences unlike themselves, and access information instantaneously (Chan, 2016; Kuh et al., 2005; McLeod & Shareski, 2018; Ramaley, 2014). Unfortunately, in many cases these changes have been slow, inconsistent, designed haphazardly, and often ineffective, where their potential impacts have not been fully realized or successfully implemented and adopted on a larger scale.

Ways Students are Changing (Not Quite as Slowly) With the increase in immediate access to information available online and in our pockets, students of all ages have begun demanding (not always overtly) high-quality, engaging, and interactive learning environments (Adekola et al., 2017; Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; McLeod & Graber, 2019; McLeod & Shareski, 2018). They need and often expect authentic experiences, collaborative opportunities, and immediate feedback from their instructors (Adekola et al., 2017; Ally, 2008; Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Ramaley, 2014). With the number of learning opportunities growing in non-profit, for-profit, in-person, online, and every combination imaginable, higher education institutions need to pay closer attention to their audiences’ needs before those audiences go elsewhere (Blackburn, 2019; Chan, 2016; Mintz, 2019; Ramaley, 2014). Encouraging the development of 21st century skills in adults can impact the changing needs of their younger students as well.

Pedagogical Needs Younger students often need more than grades to be interested and invested in their learning. Relying solely on extrinsic motivators, such as grades can lead to reduced interest in topic areas (Brooks, Brooks, & Goldstein, 2012). Students’ mindsets and resiliency can also be affected by their engagement with the subject (Dougherty, 2013). If students are not engaged, they may rely on lazy or distracting habits to cope with their feelings of disinterest. Aside from inquiry, Brooks and colleagues (2012) also identify 136

 Making and Modalities

fun and play as strong motivators for learning. Using play and making as learning tools allows children to engage in a variety of problem-solving strategies, where they integrate cognitive strategies with physical actions. While integrating formal play into lessons has been successful in impacting learning, unstructured play and tinkering are also important for students’ learning and development (Petrich, Wilkinson, & Bevan, 2013; Stapp & Karr, 2018). Unstructured play and tinkering allow students to dictate their level of involvement, letting them join or leave a game based on their own comfort and interest, as well as engage deeply in their learning (Petrich et al., 2013; Stapp & Karr, 2018). Encouraging play, making, and fun can generate interest and engagement, impact learning, and allow students to develop essential 21st century skills.

Andragogical Needs Adult learners’ needs were not always differentiated from the needs of younger students (Knowles, 1980). Knowles (1980; 1984), followed by Merriam and colleagues (2007), made several assumptions that distinguished adult learners from children. Adults are: 1) self-directed, 2) more intrinsically motivated (while also being extrinsically motivated), 3) ready to learn, 4) prepared to discuss their real-world experience, 5) interested in immediate application of their learning, and 6) looking for explanations of why they are learning what they are learning (Knowles, 1980; 1984; Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, 2007). Adult learners are looking for more flexible and fluid ways to learn and prepare for their own futures and their educational environments need to reflect and include the changing needs of 21st century learners. Since adults learn differently than younger students, understanding andragogical needs is necessary for improving education (Blackley & Sheffield, 2015; Knowles, 1980). However, we not only need to create learning environments that meet the complex needs of our adult learners, but we also need to instruct them to embrace 21st century skills to help them better prepare future learners. To do this, we need to make both administrative and curricular changes in higher education teacher preparation, training, and reskilling programs. We should meet adult learners’ needs for flexible learning environments in relation to modality, scheduling, timing, and credentialing, as well as encourage adult teachers and designers to learn as their students do through the incorporation of 21st century skills development. Using play and making as strategies for adult learners can impact how they instruct or train their own students.

CONSIDERATIONS FOR TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATIONAL CHANGE Regardless of nationwide teacher shortages, teacher education programs around the country are consistently losing enrollments (Sutcher, Darling-Hammond, & Carver-Thomas, 2016). However, microcredentialing, online learning, and adult learning populations have all been increasing (Blumenstyk, 2019; Seaman et al., 2018). Additionally, there are several jobs where training and certification can take place fully online and even on the job. Not all students are committed to completing a degree or doing coursework fully online or fully face-to-face. Some individuals are only looking to update their skills (World Economic Forum, 2018) or increase their credits in order to receive pay increases from their employers. Creating learning environments and opportunities that are delivered in multiple modalities (e.g., face-to-face, online, and in blended/flipped/hybrid options), during multiple time periods (e.g., semester-long courses, short courses, workshops, or seminars), and in flexible settings (e.g., formal, informal, and non-formal) can meet the needs of adult learners and encourage the development of 21st century skills involving 137

 Making and Modalities

flexibility, adaptability, collaboration, leadership, and many others. Here, we will discuss some of these administrative changes, as well as the essential curricular changes we made geared toward meeting our adult audiences’ needs following investigation into their preferences.

Preliminary Findings from Internal Investigations We have spent the last few years looking into the current programming of our Instructional Technology (which also has a strong focus on Instructional Design) certificate and master’s degree programs, asking students what they wanted and needed to learn and how they wanted to learn it. We implemented and reviewed several internal surveys, focus groups, and course evaluations to determine what our adult learners required and desired in their courses. We sought to learn how we were doing and what we could do better, inquiring about learning environments, expectations, experiences, and tools - and then we began strategically making those changes. We also reached out to local districts to determine if there was additional programming we could offer that would be of interest to them. District employees desired flexibility and customization in courses and degree programs and applicability and transferability of skills to real-world practice. Students responded similarly. One survey conducted in November 2019 asked students about their experiences and expectations in the programs, the characteristics of their ideal learning environments, and the preferred tools and technologies they utilized throughout their course of study. Forty students responded to the questionnaire distributed through Qualtrics, which represented a large portion of the students enrolled in the two programs. Overall, our students stated they wanted authenticity, community and collaboration with their peers and instructors, immediate feedback from their instructors, and engaging, interactive experiences in all of their classes. Most respondents hoped to grow their professional networks within and beyond their courses and connect with other students to learn cooperatively.

Authenticity Respondents to the survey noted that they wanted opportunities to put into practice the things they were learning about in the content, materials, and discussions of their courses. Many asked for opportunities to brainstorm, prototype, test, demonstrate, and share their ideas and projects with others. Most students commented how replicating in-person activities, such as “true social interaction” was difficult in online environments, yet they desired the chance to connect, practice, test, discuss, and build with their classmates things they could use in the real world in any environment. One respondent remarked, “I love creating projects with technology and would like to share my final products more often with classmates.” Another mentioned, “I like using various tools that can assist me in the classroom or apply to my content.” Creating useful and meaningful projects that could be used immediately were the most important and appreciated activities. Many students identified making and makerspaces as tools that help them pilot test projects in authentic ways.

Community and Collaboration Students were asked several questions related to their levels of interest in connecting with other students and their instructors, as well as growing their professional networks. They were also asked how they have experienced those connections throughout their course of study. Of the respondents, 47.5% indicated 138

 Making and Modalities

they were very interested in connecting with other students, but believed only 10% of other students were very interested in connecting with them. Sixty percent of respondents were very interested in growing their professional networks, and 89.4% were interested in connecting with their instructors. In openended sections, students discussed how “troubleshooting with one another on various learning tools,” “collaborative group activities,” and “having the ability/time to work with new tech with your peers is a great value-add.” Students desired connectivity in face-to-face, online, and hybrid courses, requesting one-on-one discussions, icebreakers, and group discussions regularly. When asked what tools and technologies best facilitated and developed those connections when face-to-face options were not available, nearly all (90%) indicated video conferencing softwares, such as Zoom, Skype, or FaceTime were the most helpful. Sixty-five percent identified cloud-based collaboration tools, such as Google Docs and Padlet, while another 65% shared their cell phone numbers to call or text one another. Many (62.5%) were comfortable sharing emails and documents through more asynchronous means of connection, while few (25%) felt discussion boards and forums helped facilitate genuine connection. One respondent commented, “I think people learn best when they have a relationship with the content and the instructor.” While another noted, “The more interaction and discussion, the more a student is going to retain and remember about the content of the course.” What resonated most was the notion of value-added past learning, represented by this student’s comment, “What would add ‘extra’ value to me is the feeling of ‘being connected’ throughout the semester and being able to discuss, clear doubts, share, and build knowledge with my classmates.”

Engaging, Interactive Experiences Students were asked several questions related to how they felt about different methods of consuming content in their courses, as well as the values they assigned to such methods. What emerged from their responses was the need for engagement and interactivity (see Table 1). Of the students that had experienced the tools, professor created interactive modules (63.9%), externally created interactive modules (47.2%), and externally created videos (27%) were most “loved.” Unfortunately, professor created videos (24.3%), externally created slideshows (17.1%), and independent reading assignments (15.8%) were least loved. In open-ended sections, students most often mentioned the time involved in the least liked methods of consuming content. For instance, one student noted, “It takes more energy on video to come across the same as you do in the classroom. If that’s not taken into account...the videos feel slow and like they’re dragging on and on.” Another student mentioned that, “Instructor videos and slide decks should be short!! It’s ok to have 10 of them at 3-4 minutes each. But a single 30-45 video? Ugh.” When discussing the readings, while students recognized the value of the practice, most were unhappy with the time it took to complete. One student stated, “I absolutely hate a ton of reading. Nine 20-page journal articles in one week is not fun. I loathe it. A nice mix of a journal, video, chat about it (and the chat post isn’t 7 paragraphs long about the readings I just did).” Another student encouraged combining methods as well, I do not like the excessive amount of readings a week in online classes. Maybe pair a video and a reading together, or pick out 2-3 main readings. When there are more than 2-3 readings a week, I usually do not have time to read them or end up just skimming them. Videos are more helpful, but also not too long of videos or too many of them.

139

 Making and Modalities

Keeping things engaging, interactive, meaningful, and requiring a reasonable amount of time to complete were incredibly important to students. Table 1. Feelings About Consuming Content Never Experienced It

Loved It

It Was Okay

Hated It

Professor created slideshows

6.5%

19.4%

75.0%

5.6%

Professor created podcasts

39.1%

9.5%

85.7%

4.8%

Professor created videos

4.3%

24.3%

59.5%

16.2%

Professor created interactive modules

6.5%

63.9%

36.1%

--

Externally created slideshows

8.7%

11.4%

71.4%

17.1%

Externally created podcasts

17.4%

29.0%

67.7%

3.2%

Externally created videos

4.3%

27.0%

62.2%

10.8%

Externally created interactive modules

6.5%

47.2%

52.8%

--

Independent reading assignments

2.2%

15.8%

68.4%

15.8%

Students were also asked how they felt about participating in different types of activities in their courses, as well as the values they assigned to them. From their responses, again, the more interactive and engaging, the better (see Table 2). The number of activities students loved was far greater than the number of methods of content consumption they loved. Of the students that experienced each activity, more than half (63.6%) loved synchronous breakout room conferences, synchronous whole class video conferences (56.8%), student video creation (56.8%), and synchronous video conferences with the professor outside of class (55.2%). Peer reviewing assignments (27.8%) and text-based discussion boards were least liked (27%). When asked to elaborate, one student stated, “I find that discussion boards are difficult to engage with because we aren’t doing them synchronously, and asking for clarification or building on ideas can be challenging.” When asked what worked best, another student noted, “I find that the activities that involve collaboration, cooperation, and coordination are very valuable and enhance my understanding of content.” The needs and desires identified in this survey are similar to the 21st century skills related to learning and innovation and career and life skills we hope students would learn in our programs. Since many teachers, instructional designers, and instructional technologists have not been trained in the same ways as they are now expected to prepare students, it was imperative that we incorporate 21st century skills development into learning opportunities to prepare them in similar ways as they would have to prepare students. To do this, we made curricular changes to incorporate more authenticity, community, and interactivity into our courses and program. We developed content and activities driven by inquiry, integrated STEM subjects, and built making and play into courses in order to meet our students’ needs and encourage the development of related 21st century skills. We selected these concepts since they encourage the things our students requested from their coursework when utilized appropriately in constructive learning environments.

140

 Making and Modalities

Table 2. Feelings About Course Activities Never Experienced

Loved It

It Was Okay

Hated It

Text-based discussion boards

4.3%

18.9%

54.1%

27.0%

Video-based discussion boards

10.9%

32.4%

58.8%

8.8%

Collaborative group projects

2.2%

42.1%

50.0%

7.9%

Peer reviewing assignments

6.5%

36.1%

36.1%

27.8%

Student video creation

4.3%

56.8%

35.1%

8.1%

Student podcast creation

21.7%

48.3%

37.9%

13.8%

Synchronous video conference – whole class

4.3%

56.8%

43.2%

--

Synchronous video conference – breakouts

13.0%

63.6%

36.4%

--

Synchronous video conference – outside class

13.0%

45.5%

54.5%

--

Synchronous video conference – with professor outside class

21.7%

55.2%

44.8%

--

Asynchronous communication

2.2%

39.5%

60.5%

--

We also began offering more flexible courses and credentialing opportunities to meet our students’ needs. We realize that many teacher education programs are doing similar things regarding these curricular and administrative changes; however, we have continued to involve our students in the process in order to continue to meet their changing needs. We will discuss the administrative and curricular changes as they relate to these programs and how we have been reimagining traditional educational delivery and modalities.

Administrative Changes: Changing Modalities, Timing, Credentialing, and Environments Not all adult learners are looking to complete degrees or certificates. Many would like additional training or credits to update skills or receive pay increases and want flexibility in crediting options. Adults in particular are looking for a variety of options in training, courses, and other forms of professional development, as well as the opportunity to take classes for any length of time, from wherever they want, and whenever they want (Blackburn, 2019; Mintz, 2019; Pacansky-Brook, 2017). Traditional face-to-face college enrollments have been decreasing in the U.S., while online course offerings have been increasing in higher education and for-profit institutions around the world (Bonk, Lee, Kou, Xu, & Sheu, 2015; Seaman et al., 2018).

Modalities: Face-to-face, Online, Blended, Flipped, and Hybrid Opportunities The definitions of online learning vary, so our focus includes “any virtual format of delivering instruction with the use of a computer and internet connection to access materials synchronously and/or asynchronously” (Vallera & Lewis, 2019, p. 368). Online learning is offered in public, private, and for-profit institutions due to its accessibility, convenience, and cost effectiveness (Kidd, 2010; Nguyen, 2015).

141

 Making and Modalities

There has also been an increase in blended, flipped, and hybrid offerings (Adekola et al., 2017; Garrison & Kanuka, 2004; Halverson et al., 2012). According to Nguyen (2015), these types of environments may impact student learning and achievement positively as well as in traditional face-to-face formats. In online environments, students have opportunities to interact with and reflect on the materials more deeply and they have time to participate with others more meaningfully after such reflections (Nguyen, 2015). This flexibility in offering coursework remotely has allowed more working adults to begin or return to higher education. Consider again the recent COVID-19 global pandemic. It was not until the world needed to quarantine its population that the importance of online learning and training was recognized by many in the U.S. as a truly viable and necessary learning option. Many colleges and universities moved classes online quickly, while PreK-12 institutions took longer to transition. Some teachers and faculty continued their business-as-usual approach to lecturing through video conferencing softwares, often causing “Zoom fatigue” (Sklar, 2020), while others changed their syllabi and plans altogether to focus on human connection in the new times of social distancing (Supiano, 2020). What was clear, however, was that most teachers, faculty, trainers, designers, and technologists were not prepared for the sudden shift to online learning (Williams June, 2020). Many instructors had never taught online and trainers and designers were not prepared to move large numbers of courses to the online format in short order. And most problematic was the inequity in access to online learning and technological resources that became glaring throughout the transition (Schaffhouser, 2020; Schoology, 2020). During the school year, teachers and aspiring instructional designers and technologists face logistical challenges with face-to-face only course offerings. Crowded schedules, work-life balance, and other time constraints make flexibility a necessity. Our program offers a variety of face-to-face, online, blended, flipped, and hybrid courses for our students. Traditional, full-semester courses are offered in face-toface formats during evening hours, beginning at either 4:00 PM or 7:00 PM. Courses are also offered in online formats or as hybrid courses with asynchronous online work and a few scheduled synchronous meetings (either in the classroom or via video conferencing softwares) throughout the semester. Many of our courses are also flipped, where students prepare for face-to-face classes by consuming materials and content online asynchronously before the class meeting where they put into practice the theoretical ideas they explored online. These flexible modalities allow students to take courses from anywhere and at any time with asynchronous options.

Timing: Length, Offerings, and Scheduling Opportunities While the traditional classroom setting can cause issues for teachers scheduling classes to take, we have found that course length and timing can as well. We now offer several different course structures to help teachers alleviate some of these scheduling concerns. Aside from traditional fall and spring full-semester options, we offer seven-week courses both in online and hybrid formats in those semesters, as well as bookended hybrid short-courses. These bookended courses have online components at the beginning and end of the course, with synchronous, face-to-face meetings in between. The summer and winter semesters give teachers more flexibility when scheduling courses. To take advantage of this time, we offer a few different formats. Our summer semester is split into two terms. While some courses run the full length of the summer, most courses fit in either of the two six-week terms. These six-week courses are offered as either face-to-face, online, or in hybrid formats. We also offer more intensive eight-day, face-to-face sessions in the summer, and ten-day face-to-face, online, or 142

 Making and Modalities

hybrid sessions over the winter semester. These courses offer students concentrated training during times when schools are traditionally on break. While students are able to fulfill required continuing education credits through the degree and certification programs, we are also building short, stackable workshops and seminars focused on upskilling and reskilling the tools, technologies, or strategies of interest.

Credentialing: Microcredentials, Certificates, and Degrees Many individuals working in the education field are looking to increase their number of college credits in order to receive pay increases past their degrees, while maintaining their continuing education requirements. Other individuals are looking to update their skills related to new tools, strategies, and technologies and do not necessarily want or need additional degrees. The market trend toward personalized, on-the-go, customizable credentialing is a demand higher education institutions are trying to meet. For-profit and other non-profit institutions are prepared to offer flexible educational opportunities and much evidence exists demonstrating their growing numbers of online and adult enrollments (Kidd, 2010; Nguyen, 2015). We have begun working toward developing flexible crediting options and credentialing choices. In addition to our traditional degrees, certificates, and certifications, we are developing microcredentials, workshops, seminars, or individual courses for varying credits or continuing education units (CEUs). Courses are offered in day-long, week-long, semester-long, or other lengths of time and in multiple environments - online, hybrid, and face-to-face programming throughout the calendar year. Such programming could serve as a pipeline into the master’s, certificate programs, and doctoral degree programs. Providing such flexibility in our credentialing allows our students to customize their educational packages, while creating agile, lifelong learners in the process. These 21st century skills can help in the workplace and when navigating an unpredictable and dynamic future.

Environment: Formal, Informal, and Non-Formal Opportunities Learning can take place in any number of environments, not just classrooms (Eshach, 2007; Ramaley, 2014). The more environments in which students can experience learning, the more opportunities students have to transfer information and knowledge into practice and long-term memory (Bransford et al., 2000). In addition to our formal classroom-based learning environment, we incorporated a more non-formal space for students to play, develop, and test their ideas. We developed a course on building makerspaces, another on how to teach in or manage such spaces, and then created a makerspace in our lab/classroom. During every face-to-face or hybrid class, regardless of the topic, students have access to maker tools used for planning, innovating, prototyping, and testing new designs and ideas. A makerspace is both a space and a mindset, and it is certainly no stranger to education. By encouraging play, design, tinkering, and inquiry, these spaces and mindsets can build transferrable, higher-order thinking skills, knowledge, and attitudes and beliefs about multiple topics, which we will discuss in more detail related to curricular changes. Providing a makerspace or play environment can keep learners engaged and connected to the materials and practices they are learning about in their courses. During making, students have the opportunities to tinker, troubleshoot, and muddle through messes. The aesthetics of a makerspace can also impact the audiences interested in making. In a study performed at Purdue University, researchers found that “messier, more chaotic looking spaces were rated lower with respect to mystery by the participants, especially those with non-engineering majors” (Hynes & Hynes, 2017, p. 881). Appropriate design of such spaces is helpful when encouraging their use. 143

 Making and Modalities

Our summer course in developing makerspaces for learning environments spans two weeks with eight, four-and-a-half-hour in-person sessions. During the duration of the course, students are tasked with developing their own makerspace. The short course format with longer session times allowed the students to take part in warm-up exercises related to the main lesson of the day, while still having time for open building and developing in the workshop near the end. While the course promoted play, tinkering, and creative inquiry, framing these concepts around a central lesson helped each class feel coherent. Additionally, having access to a makerspace in the lab/classroom during every class, encouraged connection, engagement, inquiry, and authenticity in both practices and interactions with others.

Curricular Changes: Authenticity, STEM, Making, and Technology As we reflected on our survey, focus group, and course evaluation findings, we realized there was still work to do in meeting our students’ changing needs and desires for learning. Our students no longer found value in discussion boards, stating that real discussion was not taking place regardless of the deadlines assigned. Passive lectures delivered in the forms of synchronous video conferencing, faculty-made videos recorded with accompanying slideshows, and videos taken from other scholars outside the university (such as TEDTalks) were not desirable if they were too long, boring, or “rambled on” without purpose. We needed to make curricular changes related to the design of both activities and course content. Teaching in and designing engaging and interactive learning environments is challenging, and online development is not the same as developing for face-to-face situations (Bates, 2015). The most effective and successful environments are engaging, collaborative, supportive, and flexible - whether online, hybrid, or face-toface (Nguyen, 2015). Those that do their best to replicate authentic, real-world activities and encourage connections and experiences beyond the classroom are often the most successful. All of this takes time, planning, and resources, where students are as prepared as faculty to engage, interact, and learn. Designing innovative content and activities demonstrating concepts known to cause students difficulty may help facilitate learning; and utilizing those materials to supplement traditional didactic methods of instruction, such as lectures and textbooks, may encourage students to engage with their learning, transfer knowledge to other situations and classes, and become more literate in multiple subject areas. Unfortunately, instructors often have concerns about their roles in developing such content and activities. They may fear that they are unprepared due to limited time or training or that they are giving up too much of their “control” to students’ own decision making or that “unguided instruction” in certain activities or remote environments will not result in real learning (Chang & Wang, 2009; Danielson, 2007; Kirschner et al., 2006). Proper training and preparation can help instructors better prepare for such opportunities to engage their students in their learning, while practicing those essential 21st century skills. Curricular changes related to encouraging authenticity, community, and interactivity by incorporating more inquiry, integration of concepts, subjects, and ideas (primarily with STEM), and making and play can support 21st century skill acquisition. The use of innovative technologies can help twofold as well: to engage and interest students and also provide valuable skills related to the usage of those tools.

Inquiry: Authentic and Experiential Opportunities Suggestions for more authentic, experiential, and inquiry-based opportunities in both PreK-12 U.S. classrooms and higher education teacher training programs have been made to support educational reform initiatives’ intentions of creating a generation of knowledgeable, skilled, and thoughtful life144

 Making and Modalities

long learners able to participate in important discussions about their futures (NGSS Lead States, 2013; NRC, 2012; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, n.d.; Ravitch, 2010). The Framework for K-12 Science Education (NRC, 2012), for instance, promoted the incorporation of authentic, meaningful, systematic, standards- and inquiry-based practices into future curricula in order to cultivate STEM literacy and 21st century skills. By situating learning in authentic contexts and real-world circumstances (Caine & Caine, 1991; Jonassen, 1999), students can gain deeper understandings of a discipline by actively constructing meanings associated with the tasks they are assigned (Singer, Marx, Krajcik, & Clay Chambers, 2000). Such strategies make learning more student-centered, inquiry-based, and engaging, where students take ownership of their own learning and transfer their knowledge to real-life experiences (Blumenfeld, Soloway, Marx, Krajcik, Guzdial, & Palincsar, 1991). In the makerspace course, for instance, students had four main projects to complete. One project involved free-form making and prototyping, an important aspect of the maker movement. The activity encouraged creativity and innovation to prototype something that addressed some problem each student identified as necessary to solve. While students had access to advanced tools and technologies such as 3D printers, soldering irons, and vinyl cutters, the most popular mediums were cardboard, string, and popsicle sticks. The low-cost nature of these materials allowed the students leeway with trial and error without worry about wasting expensive materials. Another aspect of the maker movement involves design challenges, or activities that prompt students to creatively work through ideating, prototyping, and testing potential solutions to problems. While the challenges are flexible and relatively open-ended for the participants, teachers and designers must plan them thoughtfully in advance to ensure there are plenty of materials, that the solutions are not impossible, and that the activities are engaging. This activity required that students create a design challenge for their specific audience. Their final challenge involved the development of a proposal geared toward creating their own makerspace and had to address 1) the purpose, goals, and objectives of the space, 2) the use and layout of the physical space, what materials/tools will be available, and how participants will interact in and utilize the space, and 3) the costs, fidelity, and sustainability of the space. Many students in the class were teachers so most proposed settings were located in schools, while others proposed public library spaces or even mobile solutions. Having the spatial planning aspect in the activity encourages students to focus on the administrative side of makerspaces as well. Students learned throughout the course using methods that would eventually be found in their proposed spaces. Throughout their time in the course, they also created an article, blog, or website to help teachers, designers, or educators who were considering building their own makerspace to offer tips, ideas, projects, research, or any other aspect of the importance of makerspaces. Having the students make, plan, and develop first-hand in a makerspace gave them authentic experiences. Activities such as these have been replicated in other face-to-face online, and hybrid courses to give students the opportunity to put into immediate practice their learning through authentic challenges.

Integrating STEM Road maps and frameworks have been emerging to encourage the thoughtful integration of STEM subjects. Scholars suggest that STEM literate students are better equipped for 21st century jobs, they make wiser decisions as consumers, and they are able to participate in important discussions about their health, the environment, and technological advancements that may affect their futures. Students are urged to mirror practitioners’ actions and “learn by doing” authentically in order to find purpose and meaning in 145

 Making and Modalities

their work (Dewey, 1938; Jonassen, 1996). This kind of experimentation increases student motivation in their own learning (Lee, 2004); and by providing integrated materials students could become engaged in all subjects concurrently and transfer knowledge and skills across the subject areas (Bransford et al., 2000). The recent reform initiatives encouraging STEM literacy can be accomplished with integrated curricula and materials. Designing authentic curricula is important in STEM because it can address misconceptions and deliver unfamiliar content to students and teachers (NRC, 2012). Utilizing real-world examples of science (or technology, engineering, or math) in practice would give students authentic, tangible experiences that focus their attention on connections they take for granted. Students may be able to better understand challenging concepts when exploring them in authentic hands-on, inquiry-based scenarios, rather than in disconnected and fragmented ways, such as reading in the textbook, seeing a diagram, or listening to a lecture. Honey and colleagues (2014) noted that inquiry-based learning are important tools for integrating STEM curricula because they encourage “students to be active learners by engaging them in loosely structured problems that resemble situations they might encounter in their lives and for which multiple situations are possible” (Honey, Pearson, & Schweingruber, 2014, p. 44). Providing students with scaffolded guidance in their authentic, inquiry-based activities can be both interactive and engaging for strong and weak students alike (Lee, 2004; Lord & Orkwiszewski, 2006). In an Instructional Technology program, integrating STEM subjects serves multiple purposes. Aside from those mentioned previously, current in-service teachers can learn to find ways to develop integrated materials for their own students. Aspiring instructional designers and technologists can design in and explore different content areas without being subject matter experts in any. All students would benefit from seeing how integrating subjects requires thoughtful, meaningful planning, alignment, and evaluation. These skills will help students regardless of their discipline.

Making: Mindsets and Play Making and makerspaces are gaining momentum both within and outside of educational settings and encourage students to explore their creativity through tinkering, design challenges, make-and-take activities, and free-form making. By participating in makerspaces, students can enhance their 21st century skills involving creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration, while also incorporating entrepreneurial tactics to create a new nation of thinkers and problem solvers who will become more innovative, creative tinkerers, and lifelong learners. Engaging students in the act of play can help open them up to new experiences, while removing some of the barriers that exist in formal education. Kolb and Kolb (2010) noted, “The power of play is about the symbolic representation of self as the embodiment and actualization of what one has imagined oneself to be and become” (p. 43). In a traditional lecture format, learners do not have the luxury of self-actualization. The process of the instructor disseminating information for the students to copy down, study, and then regurgitate on a test limits the student’s engagement with the subject. Instead of the business-as-usual, lecture-based format, the makerspace instructor acts more as a facilitator than a content matter expert. Material is presented but students are able to inquire, explore, and engage in play. Removing potential roadblocks related to logistical or technological issues will allow participants to reach a state of flow and creative development rather than simply attending lectures and note taking (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013).

146

 Making and Modalities

The mindset that develops through play-based learning involves the promotion of failure as a learning mechanism rather than an end result of a lesson (Tawfik, Rong, & Choi, 2015). Promoting a businessas-usual didactic curriculum creates the mindset for students that they are wrong if they do not have the perfect or correct answer. Using the maker mentality, students learn that they are allowed to fail and are encouraged to understand what went right and wrong in their project. According to Tawfik and colleagues, (2015), “failure is beneficial because it enables the learner to retrieve the experience for future problem solving” (p. 989). Similarly, Gruen (2018) noted, “The iterative process of trial, feedback, and revision helped students recognize that there is power in learning from failure, and it helped them be more open to approaching challenges that may arise in the workplace” (p. 140). Our program and courses encourage making, tinkering, and play, as well as the development of mindsets amenable to failure. In technology development courses, students mock-up projects with paper, playdough, Lego bricks, or K*Nex prior to building them on their computers. In other courses, they participate in several game-based activities designed to keep them engaged and motivated, while still learning and applying what they had been learning. In one course, students design an augmented reality game and a game in the programming language, Scratch. They spend several days playtesting and playing one another’s games in order to get feedback and iterate more effectively. In order to explore the purpose of play more deeply, students in the makerspace course partner up, select a toy, and find other individuals on campus to play with them. While playing, they discuss the importance of play and how its presence in education diminishes as students age. Play is an important element of learning, regardless of the students’ ages. Those who played in their courses consistently acknowledged their appreciation of the time they were able to spend engaging in an activity they deemed essential to learning.

Technology: Enhanced Lessons and Learning Opportunities Technology is not going away and the pace of technological change, innovation, and integration is more rapid than it ever has been before (McLeod & Graber, 2019). We do not know what tools and technologies the future will bring us and we cannot predict how we are going to use them. However, learning technologies are logical means of delivering authentic, inquiry-based learning since they allow students to visualize complex concepts with which they may be unfamiliar, experience hands-on, relevant approaches to learning, and associate their in-school learning with real-world applications (Bransford et al., 2000). Using educational technology has also been implicated as a means of improving learning by gaining students’ attention, increasing their motivation, and providing authentic experiences with tools actual practitioners use in the field (Lord & Orkwiszewski, 2006). Unfortunately, a recent survey conducted by Schoology, a large PreK-12 learning management system provider, indicated that there is still inequity in access to technology at home, lack of proper training and professional development opportunities, challenges involving device management, and a lack of collaboration between instructors and administrators (Schoology, 2020). Several districts are working to address this issue by providing computers, technology support, and wireless “hotspots” to students and their families. However, even with accessible technology and district provided resources, there is still the issue of preparation. Even though younger students engage more in social media and networking, internet searches, and gaming, they are still not considered technologically savvy (Kennedy, Judd, Churchward, Gray, & Krause, 2008; Margaryan, Littlejohn, & Vojt, 2011). Most institutions of higher education offer some form of adult learning or continuing education related to technology training. Most, however, do not prepare students on the latest technologies, technologi147

 Making and Modalities

cal integration, or instructional and learning design practices in flexible formats for variable credits and credentialing. Technology and integration are growing fields; however, without proper training and design instruction, many programs leave students underprepared for a rapidly changing future. Programming must be flexible, adaptable, and timely. It must be delivered succinctly and evaluated and updated regularly. We must also keep in mind that emerging technologies are not “magic bullets” for effective learning and teaching. Instructional designers, technologists, and educators must be prepared to meet both society’s and students’ changing needs and demographics or those audiences will abandon their services. It is essential to look at the impact of technology integration thoughtfully, lead with the learning and not the tool or technology, and consider technology as a support mechanism to learning and not simply the answer. It is important for educators to prepare individuals, both young and old, for rapid social changes rather than solely focusing on utilizing the newest tool or technology making its way into education today.

CONCLUSION Recent education reform initiatives have focused on preparing the future workforce for 21st century jobs. Improving students’ 21st century skills, training individuals to be STEM literate, and encouraging inquiry in learning can develop more future-focused, creative collaborators. Unfortunately, many teachers, instructional designers, and instructional technologists have not been trained in the same ways as they are expected to prepare students and have not incorporated 21st century skills into their classrooms. Effective teacher training programs and improving STEM literacy are some of the suggested means of reform. Curricular and administrative changes were made to our programs following the identification of our students’ needs and desires in surveys, focus groups, and course evaluations. Students sought authentic, interactive, engaging environments that promoted community and connection. Adjustments to our programs to meet our students’ needs, prepare them for a rapidly changing future, and model their learning opportunities in ways they are expected to prepare their students will hopefully impact future learners as well. Involving them in the process of curricular and administrative redesign now and in the future will likely improve the experiences of all involved.

REFERENCES Adekola, J., Dale, V., & Gardiner, K. (2017). Development of an institutional framework to guide transitions into enhanced blended learning in higher education. Research in Learning Technology, 25(0). Advance online publication. doi:10.25304/rlt.v25.1973 Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 15–44). AU Press. Bates, A. (2015). Teaching in a digital age. Tony Bates Associates, Ltd. Bellanca, J., & Brandt, R. (Eds.). (2010). 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn. Solution Tree Press.

148

 Making and Modalities

Blackburn, S. (2019, September). 3 ideas for more flexible course scheduling. University Business. Retrieved from https://universitybusiness.com/course-scheduling-best-practices-boost-flexible-learninglate-start-courses/ Blackley, S., & Sheffield, R. (2015). Digital andragogy: A richer blend of initial teacher education in the 21st century. Issues in Educational Research, 25(4), 397–414. Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systematic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3503_2 Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 369–398. doi:10.120715326985ep2603&4_8 Blumenstyk, G. (2019, August). What a tech company’s big shift portends for the future of the master’s degree. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Whata-Tech-Company-s-Big/246889 Bonk, C., Lee, M., Kou, X., Xu, S., & Sheu, F. (2015). Understanding the self-directed online learning preferences, goals, achievements, and challenges of MIT OpenCourseWare subscribers. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 349–365. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind experience, and school. National Academy Press. Brooks, R., Brooks, S., & Goldstein, S. (2012). The power of mindsets: Nurturing engagement, motivation, and resilience in students. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 541–562). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_26 Caine, R., & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Association for Supervision and Curriculum. Chan, R. (2016). Understanding the purpose of higher education: An analysis of the economic and social benefits for completing a college degree. Journal of Education Policy. Planning and Administration, 6(5), 1–40. Chang, C., & Wang, H. (2009). Issues of inquiry learning in digital learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 169–173. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00850.x Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. Harper Collins. Danielson, C. (2007). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). How teacher education matters. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 166–173. doi:10.1177/0022487100051003002

149

 Making and Modalities

DeBoer, G. (1991). A history of ideas in science education: Implications for practice. Teachers College Press. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. Kappa Delta Pi. Dougherty, D. (2013). The maker mindset. In M. Honey & D. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators (pp. 7–11). Routledge. Elliot, J. (2012). Reconstructing teacher education: Teacher development. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203126066 Eshach, H. (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-school learning: Formal, non-formal, and informal education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(2), 171–190. doi:10.100710956-006-9027-1 Garrison, D., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.02.001 Gonzalez, H., & Kuenzi, J. (2012). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. Congressional Research Services. Gruen, R. (2018). Authoring self: GED students transforming their identities in a composition makerspace. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 67(1), 131–146. doi:10.1177/2381336918787197 Halverson, L., Graham, C., Spring, K., & Drysdale, J. (2012). An analysis of high impact scholarship and publication trends in blended learning. Distance Education, 33(3), 381–413. doi:10.1080/015879 19.2012.723166 Honey, M., Pearson, G., & Schweingruber, H. (2014). STEM integration in K-12 education: Status, prospects, and an agenda for research. National Academies Press. Hynes, M., & Hynes, W. (2018). If you build it, will they come? Student preferences for makerspace environments in higher education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(3), 867–883. doi:10.100710798-017-9412-5 Jonassen, D. (1996). Computers in the classroom: Mindtools for critical thinking. Merrill/Prentice-Hall. Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructionaldesign theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 215–240). Lawrence Earlbaum Associates. Katz, L., Evangelou, D., & Hartman, J. (1990). The case for mixed-age grouping in early education. National Association for the Education of Young Children. Kennedy, G., Judd, T., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K.-L. (2008). First year students’ experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(1), 108–122. doi:10.14742/ajet.1233 Kidd, T. (2010). Online education and adult learning. IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-60566-830-7

150

 Making and Modalities

Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. doi:10.120715326985ep4102_1 Knowles, M. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy (2nd ed.). Cambridge Books. Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species (3rd ed.). Gulf. Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. doi:10.5465/ amle.2005.17268566 Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2010). Learning to play, playing to learn: A case study of a ludic learning space. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 23(1), 26–50. doi:10.1108/09534811011017199 Kondakci, Y., & Van den Broeck, H. (2009). Institutional imperatives versus emergent dynamics: A case study on continuous change in higher education. Higher Education, 58(4), 439–464. doi:10.100710734009-9204-2 Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J., & Whitt, E. (2005). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. Jossey-Bass. Lee, V. (2004). Promoting learning through inquiry. Essays on Teaching Excellence: Toward the Best in the Academy, 15(3), 1–5. Lord, T., & Orkwiszewski, T. (2006). Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. The American Biology Teacher, 68(6), 342–345. doi:10.2307/4452009 Margaryan, A., Littlejohn, A., & Vojt, G. (2011). Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Computers & Education, 56(2), 429–440. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.09.004 McLeod, S., & Graber, J. (2019). Harnessing technology for deeper learning. Solution Tree Press. McLeod, S., & Shareski, D. (2018). Different schools for a different world. Solution Tree Press. Merriam, S., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). Jossey-Bass. Mintz, S. (2019, October). Why higher education will change. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/higher-ed-gamma/why-higher-education-will-change National Research Council. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education. National Academies Press. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards. National Academy Press.

151

 Making and Modalities

Nguyen, T. (2015). The effectiveness of online learning: Beyond no significant difference and future horizons. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 11(2), 309–319. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2013). Lessons from PISA 2012 for the United States: Strong performers and successful reformers in education. Author. Pacansky-Brook, M. (2017, April). 5 invisible barriers preventing change in higher ed. EdSurge. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2017-04-28-5-invisible-barriers-preventing-change-in-higher-ed Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (n.d.). The intellectual and policy foundations of the 21st Century Skills Framework. Retrieved from: http://youngspirit.org/docs/21stcentury.pdf Patall, E., Cooper, H., & Batts Allen, A. (2010). Extending the school day or school year: A systematic review of research (1985–2009). Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 401–436. doi:10.3102/0034654310377086 Petrich, M., Wilkinson, K., & Bevan, B. (2013). It looks like fun, but are they learning? In M. Honey & D. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators (pp. 50–70). Routledge. Prensky, M. (2016). Education to better their world: Unleashing the power of 21st-century kids. Teachers College Press. Ramaley, J. (2014). The changing role of higher education: Learning to deal with wicked problems. Journal of Higher Education Outreach & Engagement, 18(3), 7–21. Ravitch, D. (1983). The troubled crusade: American education 1945-1980. BasicBooks. Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education. Basic Books. Rutter, M., & Maughan, B. (2002). School effectiveness findings 1979-2002. Journal of School Psychology, 40(6), 451–475. doi:10.1016/S0022-4405(02)00124-3 Schaffhauser, D. (2020, March). Survey on digital learning hints at gaps in school prep for ‘virus days’. THE Journal. Retrieved from https://thejournal.com/articles/2020/03/05/survey-on-digital-learninghints-at-gaps-in-school-prep-for-virus-days.aspx?m=1 Schoology. (2020). The state of digital learning [White paper]. Retrieved from https://info.schoology. com/rs/601-CPX-764/images/State_of_Digital_Learning_in_K-12.pdf Seaman, J., Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group. Singer, J., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., & Clay Chambers, J. (2000). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 165–178. doi:10.1207/ S15326985EP3503_3 Sklar, J. (2020, April). ‘Zoom fatigue’ is taxing the brain. Here’s why that happens. National Geographic. Retrieved from https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2020/04/coronavirus-zoom-fatigue-istaxing-the-brain-here-is-why-that-happens/#close

152

 Making and Modalities

Stapp, A., & Karr, J. (2018). Effect of recess on fifth grade students’ time on-task in an elementary classroom. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 10(4), 449–456. doi:10.26822/ iejee.2018438135 Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the U.S. Learning Policy Institute. Supiano, B. (2020, March). ‘Nobody signed up for this’: One professor’s guidelines for an interrupted semester. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/NobodySigned-Up-for/248298 Tawfik, A., Rong, H., & Choi, I. (2015). Failing to learn: Towards a unified design approach for failurebased learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(6), 975–994. doi:10.100711423015-9399-0 Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass, A Wiley Imprint. Vallera, F., & Lewis, M. (2019). Andragogical design considerations for online multicultural education. In J. Keengwe & K. Kungu (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Cross-Cultural Online Learning in Higher Education (pp. 364–383). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8286-1.ch018 Voogt, J., Erstad, O., Dede, C., & Mishra, P. (2013). Challenges to learning and schooling in the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(5), 403–413. doi:10.1111/jcal.12029 Williams June, A. (2020, March). Are colleges prepared to move all of their classes online? The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/Are-Colleges-Prepared-toMove/248217 World Economic Forum. (2018). The future of jobs report. Geneva, Switzerland: Centre for the New Economy and Society.

153

 Making and Modalities

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 21st Century Skills: Skills and competencies identified to prepare learners for a future involving rapid change that include: creativity, collaboration, critical thinking, communication, digital (information, media, and information and communication technology) literacy, flexibility, adaptability, initiative, self-direction, multicultural, productivity, accountability, leadership, and responsibility (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). Andragogy: A theory involving the methods, practices, and study of instructing adult learners, where it is assumed that adults learn differently than children. Bookended Hybrid Short-Courses: These are courses that have online components at the beginning and end of the course with in-person meetings in the middle. Diversity: The range of cultural differences in race/ethnicity, gender, sexuality, identity, religion, ability/disability, socio-economic status, and other indicators of socially constructed characteristics. Experiential Learning: A hands-on learning strategy where students learn authentically by doing. Makerspace: A place and a mindset where individuals connect and collaborate to innovate new ideas by sharing tools, technologies, and expertise. Online Learning/Education: Any virtual format of delivering instruction with the use of a computer and internet connection to access materials synchronously and/or asynchronously.

154

155

Chapter 8

Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education Qunxing Ding Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA Haiyan Zhu Kent State University at East Liverpool, USA

ABSTRACT STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) holds a special position in higher education, and data indicated that online teaching may increase the rate of dropout in STEM courses. Meanwhile, much higher percentage of STEM courses require hands-on experience that cannot be satisfied by online teaching and the virtual reality (VR) techniques. Flipping classroom provides a unique approach to utilize the components of online teaching and the advantage of traditional face-to-face classroom teaching. This chapter summarizes the development of flipping classroom and practical examples to explain the general principles to improve the design and conduction of flipping classroom, especially in STEM education.

INTRODUCTION “FLIP” was first coined by Barbi Honeycutt as “Focus on your Learners by Involving them in the Process” to improve the teaching outcomes with universal design for learning (Tobin & Honeycutt, 2017). However, the pedagogical practice can be traced back much earlier, such as a “prelecture assignment is intended to motivate students to preview the relevant text material before attending lecture” (Kristine, 1985), but the complete renovation was described by Alison King in her publication “From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side” in the effort to convert the learner from passive mode to active mode (King, 1993). Meanwhile, another group of educators reported their practice to “invert” the learning from “inside the classroom” to “outside classroom”, emphasizing the application of multimedia (Lage, et al., 2000). In another direction, the educators also indicated that flipping classroom is not only about the shift of timing and location of teaching, but also the individualization of teaching (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). Basically, the group-delivery of knowledge (lecturing) was replaced by individual-delivery (self-study of DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch008

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

lecture materials), followed by interactive group learning. Robert Talbert tried to define the purpose of “flipping” as promoting self-learning for confident “problem-solvers” of a new generation (Talbert 2014), which emphasized the important role of the learners. The traditional education is designed to convey the information all together in a unified mode that ignored the individual background and capacity, and the different learning preference with limited interaction between the instructor and the learners due to the limitation of class time. Traditionally, learning mostly takes place along with and after the teaching. While in the flipping mode, learning takes place before teaching, and continue along with teaching in the classroom. In fact, the flipping model moves learning ahead of teaching, transforms passive learning to active learning. In addition, flipping mode of teaching separates the delivery and digestion of course information, turn learning into a learner-dependent process. Education in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) has been globally intensified to deal with multiple challenges such as the climate change, shortage of energy and water, and food security in the future. Unfortunately, the enrollment of students in STEM fields is declining significantly. Self-motivation was reported as the primary cause for STEM decline in the US (Bahar & Adiguzel, 2016), so improving the teaching strategy would be critical to attract more students in STEM fields. Flipping classroom as the emerging strategy has been applied in multiple disciplines including STEM. Problem-solving skills is one of the core educational goals especially in STEM education. Reports indicated that flipping classroom could effectively guide the students to construct new knowledge by improved participation, communication, and cooperation (Ash, 2012; Wang et at., 2018). Along with the improvement of computer science, online teaching (distance learning) became popular especially in higher education. Many educators vacillate to utilize online teaching in STEM due to the requirement of hands-on practice in STEM subjects and flipping model may provide an excellent tool in taking the advantage of both online and face-to-face (F2F) approaches. Nevertheless, flipping classroom may provide unique opportunities to reform the STEM education in certain degrees and in varied directions, to meet the call for reformation of STEM education (NAE 2005; Jamieson & Lohmann, 2009). Figure 1. The concept of flipping classroom. The arrow indicates the timing of teaching, above the arrow shows the traditional classroom and below the arrow shows the flipping classroom.

156

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Impressive improvements of flipping models have been reported but the challenges are still present for the learners, the instructors and the institution. The learners need to study the course materials before the class without the direct instruction; the instructor needs to prepare and load the course materials before the class that highly relies on the technology and setting structure; and the institution needs to provide technical and facility support for both the learners and the instructor. The organization, planning, connection to the students, assessment of learning, and practical techniques may vary in different disciplines especially STEM fields, which are markedly difficult subjects for many students. For example, the format and structure of learning materials to deliver to the students before the class time were critical to the learning experience and outcomes of the students in flipping model (Lo & Hew, 2017). In summary, flipping classroom (also called inverted classroom, blended learning etc.) provides opportunity for the students to review the course materials at home, and practice in school. The benefits concentrate on the self-pacing, self-learning, and self-directed skills that some students may not have. However, similar to that in a traditional classroom, the success of the students in a flipping classroom highly depends on the motivation, quality of the lecture, curriculum, assessment and instruction. As indicated in Figure 1, the production of the preload lecture, and the design of class activities are the core value of this approach. This chapter will use examples to explain the benefits and risks of flipping classroom.

FLIPPING STRATEGIES: PROS AND CONS Teaching is one of the most important traditions in civilization. A flipped classroom allows teachers release their reliance on lecture into new strategies to improve student learning. There are many methods had been developed and applied in the classroom, this section will discuss the general principles, and detailed settings of a few practical examples and analyze their advantage and disadvantages in student support, communication, and assessment.

a. General Principles to Design a Flipping Classroom 1. Start small. Preparing pre-class lecture or assignment is time-consuming and the setting up the effective assignment and related rubrics for the pre-class materials is also time-consuming. The instructor needs to provide adoption period for the students to understand the inversion and get use to the flipping: that is a significant change for the procedure, requirement, instruction, and examination of teaching and learning. Both the instructor and the students need time to adjust the expectation and implementation. In addition, every subject is unique, every student is different. One strategy worked well in one course/school, may not work so well in another course/school. 2. Clear purpose. When planning the flipping, the most important question is “why do you want to do it?”. One of the practical choices is to pick up a single topic, easy or confusing. Selecting an easy topic can provide quick adaption for the students to get familiar to the new materials, procedure and requirements. Choosing a confusing topic would directly help in clarify, discuss and explain the obstacle in learning. Try to avoid multiple targets at the beginning, which increase the risk of failure. 3. Engage the students. Create detailed instruction for pre-class materials, which are not always necessary to be video presentation, include but not limited to text, video, audio, game, computer 157

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

stimulations etc. It is not necessary to produce all the above formats, but more than one formats would help to meet the varied needs of different students. In case the pre-class assessment is required, clear rubrics should be provided, and communication should be encouraged for the students who may have questions. 4. Allow flexibility. Since the pre-class materials is provided in and occupy out-of-class time, allow certain length of time period, split learning objects into small goals, set up multiple or flexible assessments would all help the students to prepare for the in-class activities. 5. Simplify the activities. Select a simple class activity at the beginning. Complicated in-class activities may confuse the students, diminish the learning subjects. The activity should serve and imply the points of course materials, not itself. b. General Principles to Support Students 1. Convenient communication. Create effective methods to communicate with the students and allow the connection among the students so they can talk to each other and to the instructor. Pre-class course materials are for individual learning, but not for learning alone. Online discussion board and other social apps are all effective tools. 2. Short assessment. Design a pre-class assignment or quiz to assess the learning outcomes, so the students can measure their progress and improvement. Limit the assessment to remembering/ understanding and leave the analysis/application to the in-class activity. 3. Clear expectation. Avoid vague requirement like “read the section”, “listen to the lecture” etc., use measurable actions like “describe the top two principles in…”, “explain the concept of…” etc. 4. Participation points. The pre-class activity should be rewardable, measurable and recorded. Providing points that contribute to their grades is one of the effective ways, others like “enter-ticket” to in-class activity, “choose a side” in in-class debate, “peer-review” in group learning would all help. 5. Alternative demonstration. As it has been mentioned above, the assessment should provide alternative methods for the students to report their progress, which can meet the diverse learning preference and personality of the students. The example formats include but not limit to one-minute summary paper, one-sentence report, hand drawing, audio fragment, video clip etc. 6. Comfortable challenge. It is important to limit the level of challenge when the students try to learn by themselves, in order to reduce the stress and promote learning enthusiasm. 7. Second chance. Due to the nature of pre-class activity, some students may miss the opportunity to prepare due to other responsibilities like family/job issue, or simply procrastination. Provide second chance for the students would enhance the participation, performance, and progress. c. General Tools to Apply in Class Activities 1. Discussion. Create a short list of review questions that cover the key points in the pre-class materials, then discuss them in the classroom to promote understanding, comparison, analysis, and application according to Bloom’s taxonomy. One of the concerns is that the instructor usually explains most of the review questions, and the feedback of the students may vary significantly. 2. Collaborative learning. Divide the students into small groups (3-4 student/group), let them discuss the review questions, which can be split for different groups and use strategy like Jigsaw classroom 158

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

to communicate between the groups. After individual pre-class learning, the collaborative learning provide opportunity for the students to communicate to each other thoroughly. However, some introverted students may stay silence all the time, try to design an activity to involve every student. 3. Shared peer teaching. Like collaborative learning, the students also form groups, with one leader in each group. The leader will organize the discussion and write the final report. The leader in a group can be assigned, volunteered, or rotated to encourage more students to take the leadership role: the leader reinforces their own learning more actively, and obtain higher level of understanding by instructing others. This method enhances the communication among the students and emphasize the leadership role, although the leader needs to spend more time on the subjects. 4. Think-write-share. There are some variants like think-pair-share, think-talk-share for this method, which basically focus on the logic reasoning and peer learning. Generally, it creates student groups in two, where both feel more comfortable and open, share a similar discourse that leads to greater understanding. Writing helps clarify the points, enhance the construction and organization of new information. d. General Consideration to Assess the Learning Outcomes 1. Co-created rubrics. Allowing the students involve in the design of rubrics for assessments would erase the obstacles like language barriers, misunderstanding or misleading. In addition, co-created rubrics would increase the self-learning, self-efficacy to improve the performance. 2. Frequent and small grading bits. Set the assessment into small fragments and each of them get grading points: in case some students can’t finish it completely, partial credit can be still awarded. This strategy also reduces the possible misunderstanding of the project. 3. Pre-formative assessment. Formative assessments are integrated into the teaching and learning process, in another word, it’s not only the assessment but also the process of learning. By formative assessments the instructor identifies the needs and problems of the students during their learning, and the students have a clear picture of their academic progress, the strength and weakness so they know how to work effectively in the next step. 4. Pre-class assessment. As described above, for the pre-class course materials, a pre-class assessment should be set up to ensure the students prepare well for the class time. The pre-class assessment should be simple, precise and straight forward, to measure the lower level learning such as remembering and basic understanding. In addition, the pre-class assessment needs to provide connection to in-class activities that focus on higher level learning as comparison, analysis and application. 5. In-class assessment. The in-class assessment should contain at least two parts: recall and evaluation of pre-class assessment to review the overall course content, and formative evaluation of in-class activities to promote higher level learning: discussion, analysis, comparison, application and even creation. An exit-ticket that ensure the essential contents is one of the strategies to set advanced students free and the instructor can pay more attention on remained students. 6. Post-class assessment. Based on retrieval learning theory, recall the information after certain period will enhance the reorganization and long-term retention. The post-class assessment can serve for two purposes: evaluation of student learning, and evaluation of instructor’s teaching. The instructor can get feedback to modify the teaching practice.

159

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

7. Peer grading. Involving the students in grading process would help them further understand the course materials, recall the key concepts, and learn from each other. The instructor also can take part in the grading process to correct any bias or misunderstanding.

e. Case Study. This Section Will Set up Some Example Courses to Explain the Setting and Techniques Used in a Typical Flipping Classroom. 1. Discussion Example course: introduction to chemistry. Pre-class materials: (a). Three 5-10 minutes lecture video clips; (b). Text file of the lecture slides with scripts in notes format; (c). Pre-class assessment: answer one of the three questions as enter ticket for classroom: the definition of chemistry, a list of at least four fundamental chemistry fields, and the application of chemistry; (d).Instruction to watch the video, to take notes and assessment (the answer can be one-minute paper, one sentence summary, hand-drawing or audio record). These materials are available at least one week before the class time. The pre-class assessment as the enter ticket need to be ready before the class, post online or on paper in hands. In-class activity: (a). Collect and evaluate the enter tickets; (b). Ask the students to define chemistry, encourage the different views of the definition. Compare the different view, identify the key points of chemistry, the shared common points and difference from other disciplines like physics, biology etc. (c). Ask the students to explain the traditional six fundamental areas of chemistry, encourage novel ideas about these areas. Compare the different areas, emphasize the direction and application of these areas. (d). Ask the students to list any possible usage of chemistry, compare and explain the possible connection with everyone’s daily life. (e). Distribute a quiz sheet (6 multiple-choice questions, emphasizing on comparison and application) to cover the content, allow 5 minutes to complete it. (f). Collect the quiz sheets, explain the post-class assessment, encourage them to discuss about it. (g). Release any students who wish to leave, answer the additional questions, discuss some interesting issues related with chemistry, or tell some story about famous chemists in the history, etc. Post-class assessment: It can be distributed with rubrics in the classroom or post online, set the due date a few days after the class. Example: “Identify one item you use in your daily life (such as soap, cellphone), explain how the chemistry involves in its production.” Pros: The students learn the course materials in three stages that enhance the learning process from lower level to higher level. In-class discussion can significantly promote active learning, creative thinking and reasoning, and the post-assessment would enhance the reconstruction, reorganization and retention of the learned information. Cons: The instructor needs to prepare for the pre-class video clips and scripts, design the assessments and their rubrics, which are time-consuming. Also, the instructor needs to spend time in the classroom to monitor and host the discussion and overview, the involvement of the learners is limited and may not reach every one.

2. Collaborative Learning Example course: Introduction to ecology.

160

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Figure 2. Workflow of discussion mode in flipping classroom. The arrow indicates the timing of teaching, and the text boxes below indicates the activities conducted in a flipping classroom.

Pre-class materials: (a). Text file to explain five concepts: ecology, ecosystem, producer, consumer, and decomposer; (b). YouTube links about ecology and these concepts; (c). Pre-class assessment: select two common organisms and explain their ecological niche. (d). Instruction to understand the concepts, and the rubrics for pre-class assessment. These materials are available at least one week before the class time, the pre-class assessment as the enter ticket needs to write down on paper to take in the class. In-class activity: (a). Divide the students in groups with 3-4 student in each group. (b). Collect the enter tickets (anonymous) from each group. (c). Switch the enter tickets among the groups and ask them to discuss them, identify two best answers, and explain the reasons. (d). Ask each group to report their results, and the instructor summarize the answers, use multiple examples to explain each concept. (e). Distribute a quiz sheet (6 multiple-choice questions, emphasizing on analysis and application) to cover the content, allow 5 minutes to complete it. (f). Explain the post-class assessment, encourage the student to ask questions, talk to each other. (g). Release any students who wish to leave, answer the additional questions, discuss some interesting and important issues related with ecology, such as the impact of the quality of water and air on human health, and how the different niches affect the quality of water and air. Post-class assessment: It can be distributed with rubrics in the classroom or post online, set the due date a few days after the class. The completed post-class assessment will be posted online in a discussion board so every student can read each other’s. The students are required to read at least two of the peer’s assessments and grade them, describe the portion they like, and the portion needs to improve, explain the reasons. Example of a post-class assignment: “Select a group of organisms to form an ecosystem, explain how it works.”

161

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Figure 3. Workflow of collaborative learning in flipping classroom. The arrow indicates the timing of teaching, and the text boxes below indicates the activities conducted in a flipping classroom.

Pros: The students learn the course materials in three stages that enhance the learning process from lower level to higher level. In-class discussion can significantly promote active learning, creative thinking and reasoning, and the post-assessment would enhance the reconstruction, reorganization and retention of learned information. In addition, the instructor saves some time in pre-class materials, in-class discussion, and post-assessment grading, can focus more on higher level learning. By peer grading, the students can learn from each other and open their eyes at different angles of views. Cons: The instructor needs to encourage every student to participate in the group discussion, which is not easy for the introverts. In addition, to peer-grade the post-assessment, the instructor needs to provide clear rubrics to avoid misunderstanding and bias.

3. Shared Peer Teaching Example course: Conservation biology.

162

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Pre-class materials: (a). Three 5-10 minutes lecture video clips; (b). Text file of the lecture slides with scripts in notes format. (c). YouTube links that are related with lecture content. (d). Pre-class assessment: suppose you have all the techniques and resources you need, propose a method to protect the environment. Explain three key points: the method, the condition to support the method, and the cost to use the method. (d). Instruction to watch the video, take the notes and assessment (print, write or draw on a piece of paper, take to the class as the enter ticket. Meanwhile, take a picture of the work or typing in, and submit online before the class to compare with revised work). These materials are available at least one week before the class time, the pre-class assessment as the enter ticket need to have the author’s name on. In-class activity: (a). Divide the students in groups with 3-4 students, assign one leader in each group. (b). The leader will arrange each student talking about his/her method, make sure everyone understand all the methods proposed. (c). When one student explains the method, all the rest students can ask questions, write down comments and grading points. (d). At the end of discussion, all the students give the comments (with name on) to the author but keep the grades. (e). The leader will collect all the grading results and give to the instructor. (f). explain the post-class assessment, encourage them to ask questions and talk to each other. (g). Release any students who wish to leave, answer the additional questions, discuss some interesting or important issues related with environment and reservation. Post-class assessment: (a). Each student will read the comments or advice about his/her proposed method, modify and revise the method. (b). Each student will grade peers’ comments based on the level of helpfulness of the comments. (c). submit the revised work and the grades online. The final grade of each student will comprise the followed components: peers’ grading of the assignment; peers’ grading of the comments; improvement of the revised assignment. Pros: The students learn the course materials in three stages that enhance the learning process from lower level to higher level. In-class discussion can significantly promote active learning, and oral expression, creative thinking and reasoning. Discussion and revising own work will enhance the understanding, application and retention of the learned information. In addition, the instructor saves some time in inclass discussion. Every student has the chance to explain their ideas and learn from each other in higher level. The leader students get the chance to organize the discussion, improve their leadership capacity, and enforce their own learning. Cons: The instructor needs to explain the rules carefully to ensure the in-class and post-class activities move smoothly. In addition, the instructor needs to calculate the grades with a specific formula, which will be time-consuming if the class is large.

4. Think-Write-Share Example course: Basic microbiology Pre-class materials: (a). Three 5-10 minutes lecture video clips; (b). Text file of the lecture slides with scripts in notes format. (c). YouTube links that are related with lecture content. (d). Pre-class assessment: select a single species of microorganism to summarize its genetic, morphological, and pathological characteristics in the format of bulleted lists. (d). Instruction to watch the video, and to take notes and assessment (provide example microorganism, write down on paper briefly as the enter ticket). These materials are available at least one week before the class time. In-class activity: (a). Pair the students, encourage them to exchange enter tickets and explain to each other. (b). Ask each pair of the students to work together on a new microorganism, that is different from 163

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Figure 4. Workflow of shared peer teaching in flipping classroom. The arrow indicates the timing of teaching, and the text boxes below indicates the activities conducted in a flipping classroom. In-class activity will rotate until everyone has the chance to present and explain their ideas.

both of their pre-class choices, to summarize its genetic, morphological, and pathological characteristics. Write down on a piece of paper in bulleted list. (c). Compare the collaborative work with individual pre-class work to see the improvement. (d). Summarize the improvement and hand in the collaborative work as the exit ticket. (e). Explain the post-class assessment, encourage them to ask questions, and talk to each other. (f). Release any students who wish to leave, answer the additional questions, discuss some interesting or important issues related with microbiology. Post-class assessment: (a). Each student will summarize the common and different points between the pre-class microorganism and the group microorganism discussed in class. (b). Post the summary online (discussion board) for further communication. The final grade of each student will comprise the followed components: enter ticket; collaborative work; and the post-class summary. Pros: The students learn the course materials in three stages that enhance the learning process from lower level to higher level. In-class discussion can significantly promote active learning, creative thinking and reasoning. Paired discussion is more comfortable and open, every student can express their ideas and learn from each other. Writing helps the reconstruction, reorganization of the learned information, and promote higher level learning.

164

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Figure 5. Workflow of think-write-share in flipping classroom. The arrow indicates the timing of teaching, and the text boxes below indicates the activities conducted in a flipping classroom. In-class student pairs can be kept for next time or rotated.

Cons: The instructor needs to organize more groups, in case the total number of the students is not even, the instructor needs to play a partner role, or arrange three students in one group. An example of the pre-class assignment should provide for the students to follow. Smaller group may limit the discussion range or view, so the online discussion will promote further communication.

FLIPPING CLASSROOMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION The benefits of flipping classroom had been evidenced vastly and academically, it generally transforms content delivery into question-based discussion, improves both teaching engagement and learning engagement. The teaching engagement implies thoroughly consideration of course content, the design of

165

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

pre-, in- and post-class assignments, and the management of class activities. The learning engagement indicates the active attitude, problem-solving discussions, brainstorming among peers, and higher-level learning process according to Bloom’s taxonomy (Bloom,1956). Essentially, discussion is one of the key elements in flipping classroom, which is one form of team learning, promoting the student engagement, critical thinking and communication (Ofstad, & Brunner, 2013). Data indicated that flipping classroom effectively avoided so called “bulimic learning”, where students need to deal with memorization and regurgitation in huge amount (Zorek et al., 2010). Numerous data had supported the benefits of flipping classroom. The students had found this approach was motivating, and the improvement was effective and scalable with the support of technology (Davies et al., 2013). A controlled study indicated that flipping classroom was not only more effective but also saved seating time by two-thirds (Baepler et al., 2014). In a physics course, it was reported that flipping classroom increased student attendance and engagement, with double learning outcomes (Deslauriers et al., 2011). In a pharmacy jurisprudence course, the learning attitude was significantly improved, and the A students increased from 21% to 52% (Michaud-Sacks et al., 2014). It was also reported that the attendance, learning outcomes, and the perceived value in a flipping classroom were increased significantly with improved problem-resolving capacity (McLaughlin et al., 2014). Of course, not all the reports are positive. In an eight-year retrospective study, it was concluded “Increasing the amount of active learning within the foundational pharmacokinetics course increases performance in the clinical course but this increase in performance may be associated with decreases in student evaluations of the foundational course” (Persky et al., 2014). In addition, the students preferred the partially flipped format but not the fully flipped format (Jenkins, 2015), and the exam performance decreased in a flipping classroom (Bossaer et al., 2016). Nevertheless, as we have discussed above, the design and settings to flip a course is critical, which dramatically impact the outcomes. Teaching is not only a kind of science, but also a kind of art. The goal of teaching is learning essentially. All the techniques and strategies of teaching have a simple and single target: to improve learning. Flipping classroom as a pedagogical approach, the perceptions of the students are as important as the perspectives of the instructors. Although in most cases the student attitude was positive (Smith, 2013; Roach, 2014; Sharma et al., 2015), it’s also reported the “burdensome” of the pre-class course materials, and “less effective” to a few students (Smith, 2013). The anxiousness and unsettledness in flipping classroom were also mentioned by some students (Lage et al., 2000), and the guideless in pre-class materials might be another issue for a portion of the students (Talbert, 2011). In addition, some students “were less satisfied with how the structure of the classroom oriented them to the learning tasks in the course. The variety of learning activities in the flipped classroom contributed to an unsettledness among students that traditional classroom students did not experience.” (Strayer, 2007). Obviously, there is no single formula meets the needs of every student: survey indicated 19% of the students favored traditional lecturing, 30% preferred flipping classroom, and 48% favored a combination of flipped and traditional lecturing in a pharmacy course (Dvorkin-Camiel et al., 2014). Our research data indicated that the learning performance is significantly better, but some of the students still did not like it due to longer time preparation and follow-ups (unpublished data), which is coincident with some reports. So, the satisfaction of the students actually “influenced by the quality of the learning objectives, prerecorded lectures, and inclass active-learning activities.” (Wong et al., 2014). Clearly, avoid some general mistakes in design and misunderstandings would improve the outcomes, and pay attention to the general principles as discussed in last section would reduce and even remove the obstacles in the design and conduction of flipping classroom. In fact, learning can be enjoyable, but never easy. 166

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Figure 6. The comparison of learning objectives between traditional classroom & flipping classroom. The arrow indicates the timing of teaching, above the arrow shows the traditional classroom and below the arrow shows the flipping classroom. Obviously in traditional classroom the learning only happens after teaching and misses some important learning activities like creating. Peer teaching becomes one of the learning processes when the discussion moves, reinforces the learning actively, the stretching-out of learning activities meets the goals of retrieval practice.

The instructors may be reluctant to use flipping classroom as well. One of the concerns is that preclass lecture may limited the time to deliver all that need to cover in the course materials, especially in STEM fields. As discussed in the next section, technology provides all the possibilities to cover any content we suppose to. In the ancient time, a book is very precious, knowledge only can be obtained from a teacher. Presently information is available everywhere in computer, smart device, and cloud storage. Educators have lost the authority of knowledge long time ago, a student can access most information with a single click (Papert, 1987; Fabry, & Higgs, 1997; Christensen, 2002). Another concern is that in a large class with hundreds of students, it’s very hard to manage the in-class activities. There are effective designs of flipping classroom in large class, which can help to pave the way (Pastirik, 2006; Zappe et al., 2009; Jungić et al., 2015). The attitude of the students in flipping classroom particularly associate with their metacognition, which is briefly defined as the thinking of one’s thinking, the learning of one’s learning. It was developed in early 70’s in psychology, referred to “active monitoring and consequent regulation and orchestration of these processes in relation to the cognitive objects” (Flavell, 1979). In a flipping classroom, the discussion and collaborative learning significantly improved metacognition, with emphasis on critical thinking, task value, and peer learning (Van Vliet et al., 2015). Flipping classroom also increased metacognitive awareness, which significantly improved the learning performance especially in pre-class activities (Yilmaz & Baydas, 2017). In addition, the active learning activities and group work are the important elements in flipping classroom, self-pacing, self-control processes significantly improve the learning and metacognitive skills (Ibrahim et al., 2015; Karaoğlan Yılmaz et al., 2018).

167

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Another feature of flipping classroom is the three-stage process: pre-class, in-class, and post-class activities, which matches up the learning theory of retrieval practice. Retrieval practice is a learning strategy that deliberately recalls the information from memory to examine what is really acquired, which is an effective tool to promote conceptual learning about science (Karpicke & Blunt, 2011), and enhance the long-term retention (Roediger & Butler, 2011). Specifically, expended retrieval practice improved short-term retention and spaced retrieval practice improved long-term retention (Karpicke & Roediger, 2007). However, the retrieval practice had the most effects in three repeats (Rawson & Dunlosky, 2011), exactly matches the three stages of flipping classroom. In summary, the fundamental change in flipping classroom is the removal of traditional lecture, integrates learning actively in the life of the learners, emphasizes on learning skills that can benefit the learner lifelong. The resistance mostly comes from the inconvenience of ingrained habits. With the aid of technology, the students get familiar with the new rule and learn to be responsible for their own learning. The instructors also learn to transform their role from a content presenter to a skill coach and advisor. No doubt the instructor needs additional investment of time and effort especially at the beginning, and the investment will return quality improvement of learning.

STEM EDUCATION IN A FLIPPING WORLD The development of computer science and intelligent technology are dramatically changing our education and the world. It’s no doubt that STEM education is critical to our society but less students are interested in STEM fields. According to the National center of education statistics, only 15 percent of high school students are interested in a STEM career, which is a severe concern in modern education (Gray, 2004). Education reform was raised up decades ago in strengthening the global economic competitiveness (Act, 1988), and the intelligent technology is changing the education significantly. It was stated that cooperation, networking and open sharing were the primary targets to increase the flexibility and creativity of education (Sahlberg, 2006). “A true STEM education should increase students’ understanding of how things work and improve their use of technologies. STEM education should also introduce more engineering during precollege education. Engineering is directly involved in problem solving and innovation, two themes with high priorities on every nation’s agenda.” (Bybee, 2010). Flipping classroom provide a plausible direction to enhance the STEM education. For example, the students had significant increased performance with flipping classroom and mobile technology with increased retention in STEM disciplines (Talley & Scherer, 2013). The learning management systems such as Moodle, had supported the STEM education to reallocate the learning activities in flipping classroom with maximizing the student engagement (Sergis et al., 2017). Flipping classroom meet the requirement that “Engaging students in high quality STEM education requires programs to include rigorous curriculum, instruction, and assessment, integrate technology and engineering into the science and mathematics curriculum, and also promote scientific inquiry and the engineering design process.” (Kennedy & Odell, 2014). Intelligent technologies brought digital revolution to the world of education, which created both opportunities and challenges. The digital technology enables every person to learn any subject that is interesting or important to them at home, without going to schools. Reading, writing ang thinking have been transformed significantly along with the development of technology, and the traditional teaching methods has been challenged dramatically. Young students accept new technology much quickly and easily than their professors, which make teaching tools fall way behind learning tools. The outpace of 168

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

the instructors in the education innovation brought immense challenge in their teaching practice (Sutton & DeSantis, 2017). This is specifically true in online education. Growing students enrolled in online courses, online programs and even online schools. Data indicated that only 23-45 of the online instructors used related technology (Bonk, 2001). In fact, no matter how much technology is used in education, the motivation of participants (including the students, instructors and moderators) and the time invested are the critical elements for successful education. One of the key challenges in online teaching is the passive students, who need to do most of the course work by themselves, without direct contact with the instructor (Holly et al., 2008), and flipping classroom provide a unique blended format to fill the gap of online teaching in STEM fields, which have plenty hand-on requirements that need to be done in classroom or laboratory in real world. With flexible and creative design and course settings the flipping classroom can serve the STEM education at a higher level.

REFERENCES Act, E. R. (1988). Education reform act. Ash, K. (2012). Educators evaluate flipped classrooms. Education Week, 32(2), s6–s8. Baepler, P., Walker, J. D., & Driessen, M. (2014). It’s not about seat time: Blending, flipping, and efficiency in active learning classrooms. Computers & Education, 78, 227–236. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.06.006 Bahar, A., & Adiguzel, T. (2016). Analysis of Factors Influencing Interest in STEM Career: Comparison between American and Turkish High School Students with High Ability. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 17(3). Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. In Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd. BonkC. J. (2001). Online Teaching in an Online World. https://www.publicationshare.com/docs/faculty_survey_report.pdf Bossaer, J. B., Panus, P., Stewart, D. W., Hagemeier, N. E., & George, J. (2016). Student performance in a pharmacotherapy oncology module before and after flipping the classroom. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(2), 31, 1–6. Bybee, R. W. (2010). What is STEM education. Science, 329(5995), 996. doi:10.1126cience.1194998 PMID:20798284 Christensen, R. (2002). Effects of technology integration education on the attitudes of teachers and students. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34(4), 411–433. doi:10.1080/15391523.20 02.10782359

169

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Davies, R. S., Dean, D. L., & Ball, N. (2013). Flipping the classroom and instructional technology integration in a college-level information systems spreadsheet course. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(4), 563–580. doi:10.100711423-013-9305-6 Deslauriers, L., Schelew, E., & Wieman, C. (2011). Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science, 332(6031), 862–864. doi:10.1126cience.1201783 PMID:21566198 Dvorkin-Camiel, L., Jacobson, S., & Nigro, S. C. (2014). Students’ preference for delivery style in a large team-based learning course. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(5), 111. Fabry, D. L., & Higgs, J. R. (1997). Barriers to the effective use of technology in education: Current status. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 385–395. doi:10.2190/C770-AWA1-CMQR-YTYV Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. The American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Gray, K. (2004). Is high school career and technical education obsolete? Phi Delta Kappan, 86(2), 128–134. doi:10.1177/003172170408600209 Holly, C., Legg, T. J., Mueller, D., & Adelman, D. S. (2008). Online teaching: Challenges for a new faculty role. Journal of Professional Nursing, 24(4), 254–258. doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2007.07.003 PMID:18662662 Ibrahim, M., Watts, A., & Callaway, R. (2015, October). Preservice Teachers’ Characteristics Effecting Metacognitive Skills in a Flipped Classroom. In E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 362-376). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Jamieson, L. H., & Lohmann, J. R. (Eds.). (2009). Creating a Culture for Scholarly and Systematic Innovation in Engineering Education: Ensuring U.S. engineering has the right people with the right talent for a global society. American Society for Engineering Education. Jenkins, S. (2015). Flipping the introductory American politics class: Student perceptions of the flipped classroom. PS, Political Science & Politics, 48(4), 607–611. doi:10.1017/S1049096515000840 Jungić, V., Kaur, H., Mulholland, J., & Xin, C. (2015). On flipping the classroom in large first year calculus courses. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 46(4), 508–520. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2014.990529 Karaoğlan Yılmaz, F. G., Olpak, Y. Z., & Yılmaz, R. (2018). The effect of the metacognitive support via pedagogical agent on self-regulation skills. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(2), 159–180. doi:10.1177/0735633117707696 Karpicke, J. D., & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775. doi:10.1126cience.1199327 PMID:21252317 Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. III. (2007). Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(4), 704–719. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.704 PMID:17576148

170

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. L. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International, 25(3), 246–258. King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30–35. doi:10. 1080/87567555.1993.9926781 Kristine, F. J. (1985). Developing study skills in the context of the general chemistry course: The prelecture assignment. Journal of Chemical Education, 62(6), 509. doi:10.1021/ed062p509 Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43. doi:10.1080/00220480009596759 Lo, C. K., & Hew, K. F. (2017). A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: Possible solutions and recommendations for future research. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 4. doi:10.118641039-016-0044-2 PMID:30613253 McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A., Griffin, L. M., Esserman, D. A., & Mumper, R. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: A course redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school. Academic Medicine, 89(2), 236–243. doi:10.1097/ ACM.0000000000000086 PMID:24270916 Michaud-Sacks, M. C., Feinberg, D., & Teng, Y. (2014, July). Promoting active learning with problembased learning (PBL) in a flipped classroom format for pharmacy jurisprudence. 115th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. NAE. (2005). Educating the Engineer of 2020: Adapting Engineering Education to the New Century. 2005 National Academic of Engineering, Washington, DC. Ofstad, W., & Brunner, L. J. (2013). Team-based learning in pharmacy education. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 77(4). Article, 70, 1–11. Papert, S. (1987). Information technology and education: Computer criticism vs. technocentric thinking. Educational Researcher, 16(1), 22–30. doi:10.3102/0013189X016001022 Pastirik, P. J. (2006). Using problem-based learning in a large classroom. Nurse Education in Practice, 6(5), 261–267. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2006.02.003 PMID:19040887 Persky, A. M., & Dupuis, R. E. (2014). An eight-year retrospective study in “flipped” pharmacokinetics courses. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 78(10). Article, 190, 1–7. Rawson, K. A., & Dunlosky, J. (2011). Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: How much is enough? Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, 140(3), 283–302. doi:10.1037/a0023956 PMID:21707204 Roediger, H. L. III, & Butler, A. C. (2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(1), 20–27. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003 PMID:20951630 Sahlberg, P. (2006). Education reform for raising economic competitiveness. Journal of Educational Change, 7(4), 259–287. doi:10.100710833-005-4884-6

171

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Sergis, S., Vlachopoulos, P., Sampson, D. G., & Pelliccione, L. (2017). Implementing teaching model templates for supporting flipped classroom-enhanced STEM education in Moodle. In Handbook on Digital Learning for K-12 Schools (pp. 191–215). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-33808-8_12 Sharma, N., Lau, C. S., Doherty, I., & Harbutt, D. (2015). How we flipped the medical classroom. Medical Teacher, 37(4), 327–330. doi:10.3109/0142159X.2014.923821 PMID:24934251 Smith, J. D. (2013). Student attitudes toward flipping the general chemistry classroom. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 14(4), 607–614. doi:10.1039/C3RP00083D Strayer, J. (2007). The effects of the classroom flip on the learning environment: A comparison of learning activity in a traditional classroom and a flip classroom that used an intelligent tutoring system (Doctoral dissertation). The Ohio State University. Sutton, K. K., & DeSantis, J. (2017). Beyond change blindness: Embracing the technology revolution in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(3), 223–228. doi:10.108 0/14703297.2016.1174592 Talbert, R. (2011, Feb. 23). How the inverted classroom saves students time. Casting Out Nines. Talbert, R. (2014). Inverting the linear algebra classroom. PRIMUS (Terre Haute, Ind.), 24(5), 361–374. doi:10.1080/10511970.2014.883457 Talley, C. P., & Scherer, S. (2013). The enhanced flipped classroom: Increasing academic performance with student-recorded lectures and practice testing in a” flipped” STEM course. The Journal of Negro Education, 82(3), 339–347. doi:10.7709/jnegroeducation.82.3.0339 Tobin, T. J., & Honeycutt, B. (2017). Improve the flipped classroom with universal design for learning. In Handbook of Research on Innovative Pedagogies and Technologies for Online Learning in Higher Education (pp. 449–471). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-1851-8.ch019 Van Vliet, E. A., Winnips, J. C., & Brouwer, N. (2015). Flipped-class pedagogy enhances student metacognition and collaborative-learning strategies in higher education but effect does not persist. CBE Life Sciences Education, 14(3), ar26. doi:10.1187/cbe.14-09-0141 PMID:26113628 Wang, J., Jou, M., Lv, Y., & Huang, C. C. (2018). An investigation on teaching performances of modelbased flipping classroom for physics supported by modern teaching technologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 84, 36–48. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.018 Wladis, C., Hachey, A. C., & Conway, K. (2014). An investigation of course-level factors as predictors of online STEM course outcomes. Computers & Education, 77, 145–150. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.015 Wong, T. H., Ip, E. J., Lopes, I., & Rajagopalan, V. (2014). Pharmacy students’ performance and perceptions in a flipped teaching pilot on cardiac arrhythmias. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(10), 185. doi:10.5688/ajpe7810185 PMID:25657372 Yilmaz, R. M., & Baydas, O. (2017). An examination of undergraduates’ metacognitive strategies in pre-class asynchronous activity in a flipped classroom. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(6), 1547–1567. doi:10.100711423-017-9534-1

172

 Flipping the Classroom in STEM Education

Zappe, S. E., Leicht, R. M., Messner, J., Litzinger, T., & Lee, H. W. (2009). ” Flipping” the classroom to explore active learning in a large undergraduate course. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings. Zorek, J. A., Sprague, J. E., & Popovich, N. G. (2010). Bulimic learning. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 74(8), 157. doi:10.5688/aj7408157 PMID:21179268

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Bloom’s Taxonomy: A set of learning objectives to clarify the learning progress in a hierarchical model, and the cognitive domain is Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, and Synthesis. This model has been modified into different versions, such as the pyramid version to reveal the different learning levels from low to high: remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, create. Flipping Classroom: A teaching strategy that delivers the course materials before the classroom lecture and focusing on discussion in classroom to improve active learning, engagement, and diverse academic performance. Jigsaw Classroom: A teaching method that divides the students into groups, each group discusses a special topic/question, then regroup the students so each student in the second has the chance to explain what is discussed in previous group. This method fosters student cooperation rather than competition. Metacognition: Awareness and regulation of one’s cognitive processes, used to improve learning outcomes. Online Teaching: The educational approach that all the course materials are delivered online without physical or on-campus activities. Retrieval Learning Theory: Also called retrieval practice, a learning method to recall the information learned previously, and then reorganize it back to memory. Retrieval practice usually involve repeatedly retrieving, in short or long interval period. STEM: The educational curriculum that covers four specific disciplines in both interdisciplinary and applied aspects: science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Virtual Reality: A three-dimensional image/video simulation that allow real-time interaction in vison, motion, and emotion by electronic sensors.

173

174

Chapter 9

Curbing Student Digital Distraction With NonTraditional Teaching Strategies Abraham Flanigan Georgia Southern University, USA Jackie HeeYoung Kim Georgia Southern University, USA

ABSTRACT Student use of mobile phones, laptop computers, and other digital devices for leisure purposes has become nearly omnipresent in college classrooms across the globe. The emergence of the digital distraction phenomenon has left many educators searching for strategies to curb the amount of habitual off-task behavior taking place in their classrooms. The chapter supplies educators with a menu of strategies to diminish the occurrence of student digital distraction in their classrooms. Specifically, the authors discuss evidence-based non-traditional strategies that can be applied to reduce student digital distraction in the traditional face-to-face setting, and they position the flipped classroom model as a viable approach for instructors who wish to curb student digital distraction while simultaneously boosting student engagement and learning. Finally, they discuss the importance of empowering students to take control over their digital device use and learning outcomes by training them to become autonomous, self-regulated learners.

INTRODUCTION Learning is affected by the context in which it takes place (e.g., Trigwell & Prosser, 1991). The emergence and widespread availability of mobile devices (e.g., smart phones, laptops) has produced a situation wherein college students are often confronted with two competing courses of action during class—stay engaged with the classroom activities or be pulled off-task by their mobile devices (Anshari, Almunawar, Shahrill, Wicaksono, & Huda, 2017; Flanigan & Babchuk, 2015). As a result, understanding DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch009

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

how student learning takes place in today’s contemporary college classrooms requires that researchers, practitioners, and stakeholders are attuned to the pervasiveness of off-task digital device usage during class—a phenomenon commonly referred to as digital distraction (McCoy, 2020). This chapter provides college educators with a comprehensive understanding of the digital distraction phenomenon and offers evidence-based recommendations to curb student digital distraction using nontraditional instructional methods. We begin by providing readers with an overview of the occurrence, causes, and consequences of student digital distraction in college classrooms. We then delve into strategies to curb off-task device use. We first focus on non-traditional strategies that instructors can apply in the traditional classroom setting before turning out attention to the flipped classroom approach. Finally, we discuss why and how instructors should help their students become autonomous, self-regulated learners capable of overcoming the temptation created by their digital devices during class.

BACKGROUND Prevalence, Consequences and Causes of Student Digital Distraction Digital distraction is rampant in college classrooms across the globe. Whether students are enrolled in colleges or universities in South Africa (Parry & le Roux, 2018), China (Wu, Mei, & Ugrin, 2018), the United States (Lepp, Barkley, Karpinski, & Singh, 2019), Germany (Vorderer, Krömer, Schneider, 2016), Turkey (Demirbilek & Talan, 2017), or elsewhere, they have admitted to and been observed chronically using electronic devices for leisure purposes during class. The following sections overview the prevalence, consequences, and causes of the digital distraction phenomenon in college classrooms. Prevalence of digital distraction in the classroom. Many college students bring their mobile phones (Parry & le Roux, 2018) and/or laptop computers with them to class (Ragan et al., 2014; Ravizza et al., 2017). Most of the students who bring devices with them to class believe they have the right to use their electronics for leisure purposes during class if they do not distract other students (Santos et al., 2018). And, many students act on these beliefs. As we will see, mobile phones and laptop computers contribute to a surplus of off-task behavior in college classrooms. Mobile phone use. Mobile phones are the preeminent source of distraction for many college students. Anywhere from 70-90% of college students send text messages on their phones during typical class periods (Kornhauser, Paul, & Siedlecki, 2016; Parry & le Roux, 2018). College students typically guesstimate exchanging about 20 text messages during given class periods (e.g., Dietz & Henrich, 2014; Pettijohn et al., 2015). Aside from texting, mobile phone users also use their devices to visit social networking sites, shop online, play games, and engage in a variety of other activities (McCoy, 2020; Jamet et al., 2020; Rosen, Carrier, & Cheever, 2013). Off-task phone usage occurs nearly once every five minutes during a typical lecture and lasts about one minute each occurrence (Kim et al., 2019), resulting in students using their phones for approximately 25-30% of typical class periods (Kim et al., 2019; McCoy, 2016). Laptop use. Laptop computers also induce a considerable amount of distraction. In fact, laptop users often spend between 40-to-60% of class time using their computers for off-task purposes (Fried, 2008; Ragan et al., 2014; Ravizza et al., 2017). As one student admitted, “In my own class, I know that when I look around practically everybody is on Facebook all the time” (Aagaard, 2015, p. 93). Furthermore, laptop users still give into the temptation to use their mobile phones during class as well. One group of researchers observed 187 undergraduate psychology students during live class periods and found that 175

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

many of the students who used their laptops for off-task purposes also used their mobile phones for non-class purposes (Jamet, Gonthier, Cojean, Colliot, & Erhel, 2020)—indicating that laptop users place themselves at a heightened risk of experiencing a double dosage of distraction during class. Although many students believe that their computers make it easier for them to take notes (Kay & Lauricella, 2011) and learn during class (Houle, Reed, Vaughan, & Clayton, 2013; Morehead et al., 2019), it appears that most laptop users spend a considerable portion of class time using their computers—and their mobile phones—for non-class purposes. Onset of digital distraction. Students seem to become more susceptible to the temptation created by their electronic devices as time goes along during class. Ragan and associates (2014) paired self-report and observational data to examine college students’ use of laptops during 165-minute-long, real-time lectures. Results indicated that off-task laptop use began near the start of class, with approximately 55% of participants using their laptops for off-task purposes less than ten minutes into the observed lectures. The researchers also found that off-task mobile device use peaked during the middle of the class period—nearly 80% of the laptop users used their computers for off-task purposes during the middle onethird of the observed lectures—before tapering off near the end of the class period. Likewise, mobile phone users have self-reported that instances of sending text messages, scrolling through social media, or shopping on their phones peak during the middle of class when fatigue and boredom begin to set in (Wammes et al., 2019). Confidence in going undetected. College students seem confident in their ability to hide their rampant use of electronic devices from their instructors. In the only known study to quantify student beliefs about instructor awareness of texting in the classroom, most college students surveyed (54%) believed their instructors would be “shocked” if they knew how much texting occurred during class (Tindell & Bohlander, 2012). Furthermore, only about 5% of the students surveyed believed it would be “somewhat difficult” or “very difficult” to text during class without being detected; the majority indicated that it would be “somewhat easy” (24%) or “very easy” (23%). Taken altogether, it appears that college students believe they have the right to use their devices during class (Santos et al., 2018), do so regularly (Parry & le Roux, 2018; Ragan et al., 2014; Ravizza et al., 2017) and believe they do so undetected by their instructors (Tindell & Bohlander, 2012). Consequences of digital distraction in the classroom. Unsurprisingly, off-task electronic device use has deleterious consequences for students. Specifically, we discuss the impact that digital distraction has on college students’ academic achievement outcomes and their relationships with their instructors. Digital distraction and academic achievement. Digital distraction causes students to disengage from the learning activities taking place around them in the classroom, which ultimately hinders their learning and achievement (Demirbilek & Talan, 2017; Glass & Kang, 2018). The detriment to lecture learning stemming from digital distraction is connected to the derailment of task-appropriate engagement. Across two separate studies, Kuznekoff and associates (Kuznekoff & Titsworth, 2013; Kuznekoff, Munz, & Titsworth, 2015) showed that sending and receiving text messages during simulated lectures negatively affects the quality and quantity of lecture notes and harms lecture learning. Across both studies, students who texted during the simulated lectures stored approximately 30% fewer lecture ideas into their notes and scored 10-15% lower on tests of lecture content than their peers who did not text during the lectures. The consequences uncovered by Kuznekoff and associates (Kuznekoff & Titsworth, 2013; Kuznekoff, Munz, & Titsworth, 2015) indicate that the natural side effects stemming from digital distraction are incongruent with the strategies that most college students rely upon to learn course content and succeed academically. Most college students take notes as their 176

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

primary strategy for learning during lectures (Morehead et al., 2019) and review their lecture notes as their primary study strategy when preparing for course exams and quizzes (e.g., Blasiman et al., 2017; Morehead et al., 2019). Off-task device use erodes the quantity of lecture ideas students capture in their notes, which subsequently hinders the study value of those notes and ultimately diminishes academic achievement. Succumbing to digital distraction in the classroom comes with a heavy price. Most notably, the amount of time spent digitally distracted during class is linked to reductions in final exam scores (Glass & Kang, 2018; Ravizza et al., 2014; Parry & le Roux, 2018; Wammes et al., 2019), course grades (Demirbilek & Talan, 2017; Kates, Wu, & Coryn, 2018), and cumulative GPA (Bellur et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2018). Some evidence suggests that laptop users are more susceptible to these consequences due to the double dosage of distraction they receive from using both their computer and phone for off-task purposes during typical class periods (Jamet et al., 2020). Student awareness of the consequences. Clearly, succumbing to digital distraction extracts a considerable toll on students’ academic achievement. However, digital distraction remains rampant in college classrooms even though students are aware of the consequences. Across two separate studies (Froese et al., 2012; Gingerich & Lineweaver, 2014), college students who had access to their mobile phones during classroom lectures accurately predicted that they would score about 30% lower on tests following those lectures than their peers who did not have access to their phones during the lectures. Confessions from a few undergraduate students illustrate how awareness of consequences does not stem the tide of digital distraction. For instance, one undergraduate admitted, “If I’m texting or something else, then that’s all I’m focused on. Then I get out of class and it’s like I learned nothing” (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2015, p. 43). Yet another student confessed, “Literally, when I am on my phone I do not hear or see anything…the only time I’ll look up is because everyone is getting up because the lecture is done” (le Roux & Parry, 2019, p. 5). Such statements underscore the notion that college students are keenly aware of the negative influence that digital distraction has on their attention and learning, yet they continue to engage in the behavior anyway. Digital distraction and student-instructor rapport. Many college students seem confident in their ability to use devices for off-task purposes without being detected by their instructors (Tindell & Bohlander, 2012). Instructors, however, tell a different story. In fact, college instructors are well-aware of student misbehaviors in their classrooms (Johnson, Claus, Goldman, & Sollitto, 2017; Shrivastava & Shrivastava, 2014). For instance, Flanigan and Babchuk (2020) interviewed college-level instructors across seven different disciplines (e.g., natural sciences, mathematics, computer science, marketing) about their perceptions of, and reactions to, student digital distraction. Findings from these interviews made it clear that these instructors collectively viewed student digital distraction as a fixture in their classrooms, causing them to experience a sense of angst that stemmed from students’ chronic misuse of digital devices. One earth sciences instructor noted, “It’s one of the few areas where I don’t think students respect the instructors. I’ll ask students to put the device away and students are actually almost combative about it…it’s incredible” (p. 20). Moreover, one of the marketing instructors said, “It seems mildly insulting because you’re putting in effort and you don’t think it is being reciprocated…I just feel mildly irritated because I feel that my effort is not worth what it should be [to the students]” (p. 20). Such statements led Flanigan and Babchuk (2020) to conclude that student digital distraction appears to create a rift between students and instructors—a rift that threatens the quality of the student-instructor relationship and negatively impacts instructors’ professional satisfaction. In addition to opening themselves

177

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

up to unwanted academic pitfalls, it appears that students also put the quality of their student-instructor relationships at risk when they use their devices for off-task purposes during class. Causes of digital distraction in the classroom. Why do college students use their phones and computers for off-task purposes when they know that doing so brings about undesirable consequences? Two causes have consistently emerged in the existing literature: temptation created by easy, unfettered access to digital devices during class and boredom stemming from passive, instructor-centered lectures. Both causes are discussed in turn. Temptation created by the readily available nature of mobile technology. Unfettered access to electronic devices strains student motivation to remain on-task during class—a phenomenon referred to as motivational interference (Fries, 2006). Because college students have practically unrestricted access to their digital devices during class (Lepp et al., 2019; McCoy, 2016) and tend to rate using these devices for leisure purposes as more appealing than engaging in academic tasks (Fries et al., 2008), the readily available nature of mobile technology creates a situation in which students’ abilities to appropriately self-regulate their digital device use is constantly challenged (le Roux & Parry, 2019). Unfortunately, the human capacity to exert self-control is limited and depletes across time (Baumeister et al., 1998). Indeed, le Roux and Parry’s (2019) interviews with undergraduates revealed that the presence of electronic devices in academic settings places students’ academic goals in near constant conflict with their desire to engage in more pleasurable, leisure activities—a state of motivational interference that usually ends with students giving into the impulse to use their devices. One student interviewed by le Roux and Parry (2019) described his tendency to give into this temptation by saying, “We’re aware of the costs, but, at that point in time, that immediate satisfaction factor is just too high. And it’s just [too high] to actually counter” (pp. 5-6). The sentiment shared by this student highlights an important consideration: by bringing their devices with them to class, students place themselves in a compromising position in which their academic aspirations constantly run up against their personal desire to use their electronic devices. Unfortunately, this conflict oftentimes ends with students giving into the temptation to use their devices and disengaging from class activities. Boredom stemming from passive learning experiences. Boredom is consistently cited as a contributing factor in students’ decisions to divert their attention away from classroom activities towards their more appealing devices (McCoy, 2020; Kornhauser et al., 2016; Pettijohn et al., 2015). Boredom during class often stems from students’ perceptions that their instructors are overly reliant on traditional lecture-based teaching methods—namely, PowerPoint presentations (Selwyn, 2016; Williams & Cox, 2011). One undergraduate student interviewed by Parry and le Roux (2018) described the connections among PowerPoint presentations, boredom, and digital distraction by saying: Most of the lectures are quite boring to say the least. It’s stuff that you can read when you’re at home. It’s basically someone reading [PowerPoint] slides that you already have. So, it’s not engaging. So, then I’m like, well I’m not going to do anything, so I’m gonna play on my phone (p. 10). Other undergraduates have echoed this student’s sentiment regarding instructor reliance on PowerPoint presentations and their decisions to disengage from the activities in the classroom (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2015; Selwyn, 2016). For many students, the decision to stop paying attention during class also stems from the awareness that they can go online after class, retrieve the PowerPoint slides, and study the information on their own (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2015; Williams & Cox, 2011). Although many college students appreciate it when 178

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

their instructors upload PowerPoints online because it helps them take notes during class (Morehead et al., 2019), access to lecture slides outside of class compels some students to disengage during class. One admitted cyber-slacker said, “In the classes where you can just sit back, the PowerPoints are already uploaded (to Blackboard) or there is no required note taking, then I’m definitely going to check social media” (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2015, p. 43). Such statements suggest that well-intentioned instructors might accidentally induce digital distraction in their classrooms when they make lecture slides available for their students.

Minimizing Student Digital Distraction in the Traditional Classroom Setting College instructors are keenly aware of the amount of digital distraction taking place in their classrooms, yet they do not appear unified in their perceived responsibility to address the phenomenon. Instead, Flanigan and Babchuk’s (2020) interviews with a diverse sample of college instructors revealed a sharp disconnect in how instructors viewed their obligation to intervene when they see students using their devices for leisure purposes during class. These instructors essentially separated themselves into two distinct camps: non-interventionists and interventionists. In one camp were instructors who felt that students bear the responsibility to use their devices appropriately. As one computer science instructor noted, “These are adults and I’m not going to police their off-task use of phones. If you want to distract yourself, this isn’t elementary school, it’s not compulsory, you can do that” (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020, p. 9). Instead of monitoring student behavior during class, instructors with this non-interventionist orientation believed their sole responsibility during class was to teach content and that any energy spent policing digital distraction robbed them of valuable instructional time. As one mathematics instructor explained, “It would require a greater level of vigilance than I am willing to put in to keep them from doing it. It takes up time to call out students every time it happens; it’s lost instructional time.” (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020, p. 9). As a result of these beliefs, instructors with a non-interventionist approach let students live with the consequences of their own decisions. In the other camp, instructors felt compelled to address student digital distraction out of a sense of responsibility to protect the integrity of the learning environment. For many of these instructors, the existing literature on student digital distraction was too compelling to ignore. For instance, an earth sciences instructor said, “Based on some of the data that was coming out about people being distracted in the classroom, I decided to stop the use of computers in my classroom” (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020, p. 9). To these instructors, student digital distraction represents an insidious intrusion into their classrooms which, if left unattended, compromises the quality of student engagement and learning that takes place in their classrooms. A math instructor summarized the need to address digital distraction as it occurs by saying: A lot of my students struggle with the concepts—they don’t think they are ‘math people’ and give up pretty quick and pull out their phones. If I don’t tell them to put the phones away, they won’t pay attention or learn the content. I would lose them like that (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020, p. 9). Given the robust evidence of the consequences stemming from digital distraction (e.g., Demirbilek & Talan, 2017; Glass & Kang, 2018), we implore college instructors to take a proactive approach towards curbing student digital distraction in their classrooms. Fortunately, instructors have a variety of nontraditional strategies at their disposal. In addition to establishing and enforcing classroom technology 179

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

policies, instructors can (a) provide active learning opportunities during class, (b) incentivize students to voluntarily surrender their mobile phones, (c) designate “laptop-free” zones in their classrooms or lecture halls, and (d) transform student phones and laptops into tools for learning. Each of these strategies are discussed in turn. Establish and enforce technology policies. Any approach to curbing student digital distraction in the classroom should begin with a clear, well-reasoned, and properly communicated technology policy. Course technology policies should be included within the course syllabus and be rationalized to students during class to increase student buy-in (Finn & Ledbetter, 2013). Instructors are more likely to have students view their course policies as credible—and adhere to them—if they provide a sound rationalization for their policies (Cheong, Shuter, & Suwinyattichaiporn, 2016; Finn & Ledbetter, 2013). For instance, instructors can introduce students to the literature on the effects of digital distraction and position that literature as the reason for banning the use of mobile phones during class (Flanigan & Kiewra, 2018). Selling students on the credibility of a classroom technology policy can convince students that the policy is fair and reasonable, but that does not mean that students will always abide by the policy. In addition to rationalizing their policies, instructors need to follow through and enforce their policies in order to maintain credibility and adherence (Cheong et al., 2016). The importance of following through on course policies was examined by Redner, Lang, and Brandt (2019), who investigated the effects of incorporating an electronics ban in live, face-to-face undergraduate classrooms. Instructors banned the use of electronic devices in one section of an undergraduate behavior analysis course and had no policy for device use in the other section of the course. Students in the ban section were verbally reprimanded for their device use and lost all participation points for that day if they were caught using an electronic device during class. Findings from this intervention revealed that digital distraction occurred less frequently when a ban was enforced. Furthermore, students in the ban section had higher average quiz scores that semester than their peers in the no-ban section of the course. Such findings indicate that establishing and enforcing classroom technology policies reduces the occurrence of digital distraction and protects the integrity of the classroom learning environment. Provide active learning opportunities. Not all instructors are comfortable reprimanding their students during class. The instructors interviewed by Flanigan and Babchuk (2020) described a sense of uneasiness about confronting students in front of their classmates, out of the fear that doing so would hinder the quality of rapport that they have with their students. As one marketing instructor commented, “You want to call them on it and tell them in front of everybody to put their phone away. You just can’t. You’ll get under their skin and that’s tough to repair” (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020, p. 10). Instead of relying on more traditional reprimands and punishments, these instructors were more apt to try and prevent students from getting off-task in the first place by regularly asking the students questions, embedding individual and small group problem-solving activities into lessons, leading whole group discussions during class, and employing a variety of other cognitively and behaviorally engaging instructional strategies. Past research has confirmed that providing students with active learning experiences during class reduces the frequency of digital distraction (e.g., Baker et al., 2012; Tindell & Bohlander, 2012) and boosts student learning (Freeman et al., 2014; Prince, 2004). Given that student digital distraction most often stems from boredom during class (McCoy, 2016), it appears that alleviating that boredom by providing students with activities that both behaviorally and cognitively engage them in the learning process is a viable way to curb student digital distraction and support student learning without threatening the quality of student-instructor rapport.

180

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Incentivize voluntary surrender of mobile phones. Motivating students to voluntarily surrender their mobile phones during class can curb digital distraction and boost student learning (Katz & Lambert, 2016; Whittington, 2019). In one study, 104 college students in a semester-long undergraduate psychology course were asked to voluntarily turn off and place their mobile phones on a table near the front of the classroom at the start of class (Katz & Lambert, 2016). Students earned extra credit points for every day that they voluntarily turned in their phone. Students who surrendered their phone at the start of every class period earned a 3% boost to their final course. Findings showed that the more times a student surrendered his or her phone that semester, the better they did on course exams. Furthermore, students enjoyed this experience. Over 90% of the students who surrendered their phone at least once described the experience as enjoyable and more than 60% of the students felt that the incentive program led to better classroom discussions and made it easier to concentrate during this class. And, 98% of the participants indicated that they would appreciate if this strategy would be adopted in their future courses. In a second study, students could voluntarily turn their mobile phones off and place them inside manila envelopes on their desks during class time (Whittington, 2019). One hundred and fifty-five students across six sections of an undergraduate psychology course participated in this study. During the first half of the semester, three of the six sections were randomly selected for inclusion in the experimental condition (i.e., given the option to place their phones inside of manila envelopes during class) while the other three sections represented the control condition (i.e., no option to place phones inside of manila envelopes). After the midterm, however, participants in the initial control group were given the option to join the experimental group for the remainder of the semester—an approach which allowed for betweenand within-groups comparisons at the study’s conclusion. Students earned a 2.5% boost to their final course grade for participating in this research. Findings indicated that students who abstained from using their mobile phones did better on the midterm and final exam than students who did not surrender their phones during class in the time period leading up to those exams. Interestingly, students who opted into the study during the second half of the semester did not score significantly higher on their final exam than on their midterm. Overall, students enjoyed having the option of placing their mobile phones inside of manila envelopes and out of their sight. Nearly 80% of participants rated the experience as helpful for their learning, almost all the participants reported they would recommend that a friend participate in a similar experience, and only 5% reported the experience as not being helpful for their learning. Across both studies, participants had overwhelmingly positive reviews of their experience and students who surrendered their phones did better on course exams than students who maintained access to their phones during class. These two findings provide evidence that motivating students to surrender their devices is a simple, effective, and well-received strategy for curbing student digital distraction during class. Designate “laptop-free” zones. Students seated nearby classmates who are using their laptops for off-task purposes are more likely to become distracted themselves and to learn less during class than their peers who are not seated nearby somebody using a laptop inappropriately (Sana, Weston, & Cepeda, 2013). Sorting the classroom into semester-long “laptop-free” and “laptop-permitted” zones can minimize the risk of digital distraction contagion (Aguilar-Roca, Williams, & O’Dowd, 2012; Parry, le Roux, & Cornelissen, 2019). Separating non-laptop users from their counterparts allows instructors to minimize the potential for non-users to unintentionally be pulled off-task after seeing their classmates engage in enjoyable leisure activities during class (e.g., scrolling through social media, sending instant messages, online shopping). Research indicates that students are in favor of such policies and appreciate the gesture taken by instructors who attempt to provide students with an environment conducive to learning (Aguilar-Roca et al., 2012; Parry et al., 2019). 181

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Transform electronic devices into learning tools. Much attention has rightfully been devoted to the downsides of having electronic devices in the classroom. Yet, mobile phones and laptops also have the potential to aid student learning during class (Imazeki, 2014; Tessier, 2013; Piraino & Wilson, 2015). As such, instructors would be remiss if they did not at least consider ways to unlock the potential upsides of having a classroom full of students with mobile phones in their pockets or laptop computers sitting right in front of them. We discuss two such upsides: letting students look up lecture-relevant information online and using student devices in lieu of costly classroom response systems. Internet searches. Students can easily use their devices to look up course-relevant information from credible online sources (Tessier, 2013; Williams & Pence, 2011). Undergraduate students enrolled in a semester-long environmental issues course used their mobile devices to do a preliminary search of information related to that day’s lecture topic at the beginning of each class period and shared their findings with their classmates before the instructor transitioned into that day’s planned lesson (Tessier, 2013). At the end of the semester, students indicated that they enjoyed doing online searches at the start of each class and felt that the activities improved their understanding of course content. Polling platforms. Mobile phones and laptops can be used in place of financially costly classroom responses systems (i.e., “clickers”) (Imazeki, 2014; Piraino & Wilson, 2015). Interactive polling websites, such as PollEverywhere.com, let instructors ask questions and assess student comprehension in real-time during class. Students are provided with a link to an online poll where they can submit answers to questions posed by their instructor. Responses can be submitted in a variety of formats, including multiple-choice, true/false, or short-answer questions. Furthermore, students can submit their own questions or provide answers to each other’s questions. Most students enjoy using these platforms and believe that online polling exercises during class increase engagement and improve their learning (Shon & Smith, 2011; Wong, 2016). Summary of non-traditional teaching techniques. Establishing and following up on a technology policy within the classroom seems to be the first line of defense against student digital distraction. Yet, traditional—and oftentimes uncomfortable—reprimands and punishments are not the only options available for college instructors who hope to curb student digital distraction in their classrooms. Embedding active learning experiences into their lessons, incentivizing students to relinquish their devices during class, designating laptop-free zones in their classrooms, and allowing students to use their devices as learning tools are just a few of the non-traditional strategies that instructors can leverage to curtail student digital distraction in their classrooms.

The Flipped Classroom: A Non-Traditional Setting to Curb Student Digital Distraction In addition to making alterations to their classroom management (e.g., laptop-free zones) or instructional design (e.g.., on-the-fly active learning strategies, using devices as learning tools) to curb student digital distraction in a traditional classroom setting, instructors might also reimagine their classrooms in non-traditional formats that simultaneously boost learning and reduce student digital distraction. One such approach is the Flipped Classroom (FC) model that shifts instructional activities outside of the classroom and positions one-on-one interactions and student-centered instructional activities as the primary modes of learning during class (Michael, 2006; Roehling, 2018). Such an approach has positive effects on student attitudes and learning (e.g., Stone, 2012) and seems well-positioned to curb student tendencies to reach for their devices during class. 182

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Elements of flipped classrooms. It seems plausible that educators can mitigate the causes of students’ digital distraction by adopting the FC model. The FC model results in an interactive learning environment that promotes personalized, differentiated instruction and engagement (Roehling et al., 2017)—elements of a learning environment that are not likely to lead to the boredom and passivity that often puts students on the road towards digital distraction. Switching from a traditional classroom to the FC model can seem daunting, yet numerous resources exist that provide educators with helpful recommendations for flipping their classrooms. For instance, Bergmann and associates (2012) provided a clear description of five characteristics that should be present in flipped classrooms. Specifically, these scholars proposed that (a) students transform from passive listeners to active learners, (b) technology, a source of distraction, often facilitates the learning activities during class, (c) class time and traditional homework time are exchanged so that homework is done first and class time takes on a fluid structure to help personalize instruction, (d) content is given context as it relates to real-world scenarios, and (e) class time is used either to help students grasp especially challenging concepts or to help students engage in higher orders of critical thinking and problem solving. Furthermore, Roehling (2018) supplied a comprehensive evidence-based guide to help educators who are new to this approach. Such resources would be invaluable for educators who wish to try their hand at flipping some or all their instructional delivery. Digital distraction often arises when students rely entirely on instructors’ performance in teaching by playing a role as a passive listener and allowing teachers to function as a sage at the center of a stage. The FC model shifts the roles in teaching and learning so that teaching revolves around students’ performance, needs, interests, learning styles, and engagement (Keefe, 2007). This reversal of roles in the classroom gives more time for students to engage in hands-on learning and deep reflection activities (DeRuisseau, 2016)—behaviors that are incongruent with using one’s digital devices for off-task purposes. All the while, the FC model proves useful for boosting student learning (Ellis, Carette, Anseel, & Lievens, 2014; Stefano, Gino, Pisano, & Staats, 2016). Facilitating engagement in the flipped classroom. Engagement is considered a prerequisite for learning (Fredricks, Blumenfeld, & Paris, 2004; Guo, Kim, & Rubin, 2014; Shell et al., 2010). There are several emerging models characterizing the elements of an engaging flipped classroom. For example, Hamdan et al. (2013a, 2013b) identified the F-L-I-P™ scheme, an acronym for: Flexible Environment, Learning Culture, Intentional Content, and Professional Educator. These four pillars of the flipped classroom are: (1) Flexible Environment: A flipped classroom allows for a variety of learning modes to create personalized learning environments that will meet students’ interests, learning styles, and career goals. (2) Learning Culture: Flipped classrooms shift the center of learning from teachers to students through engaging pre- and in-class active learning activities with regular interaction among students and the teacher. (3) Intentional Content: Content taught in classrooms is redistributed intentionally and deliberately so that students can prepare themselves before coming to class in order to take part fully in various active learning activities. (4) Professional Educators: Educators of flipped classrooms are required to be better content deliverers through technology and other diverse instructional resources. Furthermore, educators need to be better instructional designers and facilitators in constructing projectbased, problem-solving projects for pre- and in-class activities, giving students feedback whenever necessary, and continuously assessing their progress. By adhering to these four pillars of designing a flipped classroom, instructors can ensure that they provide students with flexible learning environments chalked full of meaningful active learning experiences. Sequence of events in the FC model. There is a logical flow of events in the flipped classroom paradigm that encourages student engagement in the learning process (Katz & Kim, 2017). First, before 183

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

each class starts, students need to acquire knowledge and skills required to participate in in-class activities on their own via the pre-class activity materials delivered through the instructor-chosen platform. For example, students watch online videos on YouTube, listen to recorded audios on the Online Course Management (OCM) platform, read textbooks, and/or utilize additional resources on the Internet before coming to class. Additional pre-class activities could be presented through the discussion board where students prepare for in-class activities by researching the relevant topics, creating related videos (upon completion of research) to apply learned concepts, planning skits to demonstrate understanding of concepts during class, and applying concepts and theories to their own lives via multimedia presentations. Students are typically held accountable for engaging with course content by regularly completing online quizzes before coming to class. Then, students come to class where the teacher first discovers students’ misconceptions and tailors her/his instruction based on students’ weak areas of understanding. Next, the teacher facilitates in-class activities, consisting of application-, synthesis-, and evaluation-level activities which further deepen students’ learning beyond the learning that took place during the pre-class modules. For instance, performance skits, small and large group discussions, group problem-solving activities, reciprocal peer teaching, and collaborative research activities are all examples of the applied, active experiences students are given in the classroom (Roehling, 2018). This active learning process will increase students’ engagement and learning (DeRuisseau, 2016; Gilboy, Heinerichs, & Pazzaglia, 2015), and potentially mitigate digital distraction as an added benefit. One of the most effective elements of the FC model for engagement is the spared time that instructors can use for multiple active learning activities—from group discussions to homework assistance to project-based presentations. Much of this time could be devoted to allowing students to use their digital devices as tools for learning—commonly referred to as the “bring your own devices” (BYOD) approach (Afreen, 2014). Students could use their smart phones, tablets, or laptops to participate in online polling and discussions, ask and answer each other’s questions, and research class-relevant topics, among other hands-on activities. In summary, the FC model helps students learn at their own pace, spend more time in preparatory work, and get more engaged during classroom activities (Johnson, 2013; Kong, 2014; Roach, 2014). Thus, it is plausible that such an approach to course design would lead to a dynamic learning environment in which boredom and passivity do not lead students down the path towards digital distraction where checking their text messages, scrolling through social media, or shopping online feel more appealing than engaging with classroom activities.

Train Students to Use Self-Regulated Learning Strategies Instructors have a variety of non-traditional strategies at their disposal to curb student digital distraction and minimize its effects in their classrooms. However, constantly planning ways to keep students off their devices and on task during class is stressful for instructors and reduces their professional satisfaction (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020). As such, it is imperative that students are taught strategies that help them self-regulate their use of electronic devices on their own during class. What is self-regulated learning? Self-regulated learning (SRL) occurs when students take ownership over their learning process by autonomously identifying and applying task-appropriate learning strategies (Zimmerman & Schunk, 1989; Zimmerman, 1990). SRL has been defined as “self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions that are planned and cyclically adapted to the attainment of personal goals” (Zimmerman, 2000, p. 14). Rather than scrolling through Snapchat or TikTok, self-regulated 184

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

students deliberately behave in ways that help them learn the information or skills being taught to them during class. Examples of SRL techniques include (a) monitoring one’s comprehension of to-be-learned information through the use of self-questioning, (b) scanning one’s memory for relevant prior knowledge before beginning a new learning task, (c) connecting new, incoming information to one’s prior knowledge, (d) asking questions when in need of clarification, and (e) establishing and monitoring one’s progress towards learning goals (e.g., Azevedo & Cromley, 2004). Autonomous application of such proactive learning strategies leads self-regulated students to succumb to digital distraction less often (Flanigan, unpublished dissertation; Wei et al., 2012) and experience higher levels of academic achievement than their less autonomous peers (e.g., Komarraju & Nadler, 2013; Zimmerman, 1990). The social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986; Schunk, 1995) conceptualizes SRL as a situationally specific process and not a general trait. Students are not generally self-regulated or non-self-regulated (Schunk, 2001). Instead, student use of SRL processes varies based on the contexts in which they find themselves. For instance, a biology major might be highly motivated and self-regulated in her major courses but take a less deliberate approach to learning content in an introductory-level philosophy or sociology course that she takes as a general education requirement. Ben-Eliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2015) explored how context affects SRL tendencies by examining how self-regulation varied in classes that college students identified as their favorite and least favorite during a given semester. Participants were more likely to apply SRL processes in their favorite courses. For instance, college students were more likely to concentrate attention on lectures, use deep learning strategies, behaviorally engage during class, and employ metacognitive monitoring strategies in their favorite courses than in their least favorite courses. Additional research showed that college students spent less time digitally distracted in their favorite courses than in their least favorite (Flanigan & Peteranetz, 2019). Taken together, findings from Ben-Eliyahu and Linnenbrink-Garcia (2015) and Flanigan and Peteranetz (2019) suggest that students’ digital distraction tendencies might fluctuate along with their use of SRL strategies across different contexts. SRL tendencies and digital distraction. Little known research has explicitly examined the link between SRL strategy use and digital distraction frequencies among college students. However, the existing research in this area indicates that digital distraction frequencies decrease as the application of SRL processes increases. First, Wei and associates (2012) surveyed 190 college students about their text messaging habits during class, sustained attention, and effort regulation during typical class periods in a variety of undergraduate disciplines (e.g., biology, computer science, education, mathematics, music). Students who scored low on effort regulation (i.e., giving a concerted effort to apply task-specific learning strategies) also reported higher texting frequencies and less sustained attention during class than their more effortful classmates. Second, 441 college students enrolled in undergraduate public speaking courses were surveyed by McGloin and associates (2017) about their course-specific goal orientation and their use of laptops and smart phones during class. Findings revealed that participants were less likely to use their laptops or smartphones for off-task purposes during class if they had established and monitored their own progress towards mastery-oriented learning goals for that particular course (e.g., “It is important to me that I understand this course content as thoroughly as possible.”). Finally, Flanigan (unpublished dissertation) surveyed 401 undergraduate anthropology, sociology, and computer science students to examine the links among SRL tendencies, academic motivation, and digital distraction. Findings revealed that SRL tendencies and academic motivation were related to students’ off-task device use during class. Participants who motivated themselves to work hard by establishing 185

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

and monitoring their progress towards learning-approach goals in their courses (e.g., “I will figure out how to apply the content in this course to my professional career”) spent less time using their electronic devices during typical class periods than their peers who did not establish course-relevant goals. Furthermore, digital distraction frequency was inversely related to students’ perceptions of the utility of course content for their academic and professional goals (i.e., endogenous instrumentality of course content)—indicating that students can motivate themselves to stay off their devices by identifying links between what they are currently learning and the future goals they have for themselves. Taken altogether, the existing research demonstrates that students who engage in SRL processes spend less time using their devices for off-task purposes during class. Presumably, these students are so cognitively and behaviorally engaged in the learning process that they do not have the time to pull their phones out of their pockets or scroll through social media pages on their computers. Furthermore, students who motivate themselves by setting and pursuing course goals or identifying the relevance of course content to their academic or professional aspirations seem less susceptible to the temptation to use their devices during class than their less goal-directed classmates. Training students to apply SRL strategies. Fortunately, students can be trained to apply SRL strategies to their learning process (Azevedo & Cromley, 2004; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). Two approaches have been taken to teach students how to self-regulate their learning process: embedded strategy instruction and structured workshops. Both approaches are discussed in turn. Embedded strategy instruction. One common approach to train students to apply SRL processes involves embedding SRL strategy instruction alongside normal classroom instruction (Schunk, 2001; Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). For instance, while teaching about the different phases of mitosis, instructors can supply students with questions they can ask themselves to self-monitor their comprehension throughout lectures (e.g., “Can I explain how the metaphase is different from the anaphase?”) or help students establish learning or performance goals to motivate them to remain on task during class. Furthermore, instructors can train students to take lecture notes, organize their notes, and study from those notes to commit information to memory (Kiewra, Luo, Colliot, & Lu, 2020; Luo, Kiewra, & Samuelson, 2016). Instead of focusing solely on communicating course content, instructors can help their students become independent learners by teaching and modeling effective strategy use (Kiewra, 2010). Findings from the existing research on the relationship between SRL strategy use and digital distraction tendencies suggest that embedded SRL strategy instruction should focus on helping students (a) identify and apply task-appropriate learning strategies (Wei et al., 2012), (b) establish and track their progress towards course-specific learning goals (Flanigan, unpublished dissertation; McGloin et al., 2017), and (c) make connections between course content and their future goals (Flanigan, unpublished dissertation). By embedding instruction of these kinds of SRL processes into their courses, instructors can train and motivate students to self-regulate their learning process and overcome the temptation created by the electronic devices they bring with them to class. Structured workshops. A second approach to SRL training involves comprehensive training programs (e.g., Azevedo & Cromley, 2004; Bol et al., 2016). The work done by Dörrenbächer and Perels (2016) illustrates a common approach towards training college students to apply SRL strategies. College students attended six 90-minute SRL training sessions that introduced participants to research on the benefits of specific SRL strategies (e.g., setting goals, time management techniques, identifying sources of internal motivation) before giving participants opportunities to identify how each strategy could be implemented into their own learning routine and time to practice applying those strategies. Half of the participants were also trained to use a learning diary to self-monitor their use of SRL strategies after attending the 186

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

workshops. Participants reported their SRL strategy use for eight weeks following the last workshop. After eight weeks had passed, participants were still reporting using more SRL strategies than they had before attending the workshops. The effects of the SRL training program were most pronounced for those students who tracked their use of SRL strategies in a learning diary, suggesting that teaching students to self-monitor their learning process is an integral component of effective SRL training. Summary of SRL training approaches. Electronic devices create an allure that is oftentimes difficult for students to resist on their own. Fortunately, instructors who take the time to embed SRL strategy instruction into their courses or who help develop and implement SRL training programs at their respective universities can provide students with the tools and motivation necessary to self-regulate their use of digital devices during class. Instead of trying to shoulder the burden for eradicating off-task device use in their classrooms, instructors would be wise to help empower their students to overcome the temptation to succumb to digital distraction on their own.

CONCLUSION The emergence of the digital distraction phenomenon has spurred much research in recent years (Flanigan & Babchuk, 2020; Langan et al., 2016; McCoy, 2020). Findings from this research make it very clear that off-task technology use occurs regularly during class and is detrimental for the off-task student (Demirbilek & Talan, 2018; Ravizza et al., 2017) and for their classmates seated nearby (Sana et al., 2013). It appears that a variety of factors contribute to the digital distraction phenomenon, including low student interest and engagement during lectures (Gupta & Irwin, 2016; Langan et al., 2016), boredom (McCoy, 2020; Kornhauser et al., 2016; Pettijohn et al., 2015), and when students perceive a low level of instructor competence and caring (Ledbetter & Finn, 2016). The present chapter provided a menu of non-traditional options from which college instructors may choose as they try to proactively curb student digital distraction in their classrooms. Recommendations included alterations to classroom management (e.g., designating laptop-free zones), instructional delivery (e.g., using mobile devices as learning tools or incorporating active learning technique), or course design (e.g., adopting a flipped classroom approach). Furthermore, we embraced the importance of empowering students to overcome the temptation to succumb to digital distraction by helping them become autonomous, self-regulated learners. Instead of placing the burden entirely on themselves to curb student digit distraction, instructors should bring students into the fold and empower them to self-regulate their use of digital devices. In the end, it is ultimately up to students whether they will pull a mobile phone out of their pocket or click over to social media on their laptop during class. As Newport (2019) noted, perhaps the goal in today’s technology-driven society should be to help students protect their minds from the constant intrusion of social media and other digitally-based distractions. By offering recommendations to address digital distraction in the classroom, we endeavored to help educators find strategies that they can tailor to the own classes to remove the intrusion of digital distraction from the learning environment.

REFERENCES Aagaard, J. (2015). Drawn to distraction: A qualitative study of off-task use of educational technology. Computers & Education, 87, 90–97. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.03.010

187

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Afreen, R. (2014). Bring your own device (BYOD) in higher education: Opportunities and challenges. International Journal of Emerging Trends & Technology in Computer Science, 3(1), 233–236. Aguilar-Roca, N. M., Williams, A. E., & O’Dowd, D. K. (2012). The impact of laptop-free zones on student performance and attitudes in large lectures. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1300–1308. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.002 Anshari, M., Almunawar, M. N., Shahrill, M., Wicaksono, D. K., & Huda, M. (2017). Smartphones usage in the classrooms: Learning aid or interference? Education and Information Technologies, 22(6), 3063–3079. doi:10.100710639-017-9572-7 Azevedo, R., & Cromley, J. G. (2004). Does training on self-regulated learning facilitate students’ learning with hypermedia? Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 523–535. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.523 Baker, W. M., Lusk, E. J., & Neuhauser, K. L. (2012). On the use of cell phones and other electronic devices in the classroom: Evidence from a survey of faculty and students. Journal of Education for Business, 87(5), 275–289. doi:10.1080/08832323.2011.622814 Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc. Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(5), 1252–1265. doi:10.1037/00223514.74.5.1252 PMID:9599441 Bellur, S., Nowak, K. L., & Hull, K. S. (2015). Make it our time: In class multitaskers have lower academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 63–70. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.027 Ben-Eliyahu, A., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2015). Integrating the regulation of affect, behavior, and cognition into self-regulated learning paradigms among secondary and post-secondary students. Metacognition and Learning, 10(1), 15–42. doi:10.100711409-014-9129-8 Bergmann, J., Overmyer, J., & Wilie, B. (2012). The flipped class: Myths versus reality. The Daily Riff. Retrieved 4 June 2013 from http://www.thedailyriff.com/articles/the-flipped- class-conversation-689.php Blasiman, R. N., Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2017). The what, how much, and when of study strategies: Comparing intended versus actual study behaviour. Memory (Hove, England), 25(6), 784–792. do i:10.1080/09658211.2016.1221974 PMID:27561889 Bol, L., Campbell, K. D., Perez, T., & Yen, C. J. (2016). The effects of self-regulated learning training on community college students’ metacognition and achievement in developmental math courses. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 40(6), 480–495. doi:10.1080/10668926.2015.1068718 Cheong, P. H., Shuter, R., & Suwinyattichaiporn, T. (2016). Managing student digital distractions and hyperconnectivity: Communication strategies and challenges for professorial authority. Communication Education, 65(3), 272–289. doi:10.1080/03634523.2016.1159317 Demirbilek, M., & Talan, T. (2018). The effect of social media multitasking on classroom performance. Active Learning in Higher Education, 19(2), 117–129. doi:10.1177/1469787417721382

188

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

DeRuisseau, L. R. (2016). The flipped classroom allows for more class time devoted to critical thinking. Advances in Physiology Education, 40(4), 522–528. doi:10.1152/advan.00033.2016 PMID:28145270 Dietz, S., & Henrich, C. (2014). Texting as a distraction to learning in college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 163–167. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.045 Dörrenbächer, L., & Perels, F. (2016). Self-regulated learning profiles in college students: Their relationship to achievement, personality, and the effectiveness of an intervention to foster self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences, 51, 229–241. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2016.09.015 Ellis, S., Carette, B., Anseel, F., & Lievens, F. (2014). Systematic reflection: Implications for learning from successes and failures. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(1), 67–72. doi:10.1177/0963721413504106 Finn, A. N., & Ledbetter, A. M. (2013). Teacher power mediates the effects of technology policies on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 62(1), 26–47. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.725132 Flanigan, A. E. (2018). How instructional design, academic motivation, and self-regulated learning tendencies contribute to cyber-slacking (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of NebraskaLincoln, Lincoln, NE, USA. Flanigan, A. E., & Babchuk, W. A. (2015). Social media as academic quicksand: A phenomenological study of student experiences in and out of the classroom. Learning and Individual Differences, 44, 40–45. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2015.11.003 Flanigan, A. E., & Babchuk, W. A. (2020). Digital distraction in the classroom: Exploring instructor perceptions and reactions. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–19. doi:10.1080/13562517.2020.1724937 Flanigan, A. E., & Kiewra, K. A. (2018). What college instructors can do about student cyber-slacking. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 585–597. doi:10.100710648-017-9418-2 Flanigan, A. E., & Peteranetz, M. S. (2019). Digital distraction across courses: Self-regulation of digital device use in favorite versus least favorite courses. 2019 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Paper presentation conducted at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY. Fredricks, J. (2011). Engagement in school and out-of-school contexts: A multidimensional view of engagement. Theory into Practice, 50(4), 327–335. doi:10.1080/00405841.2011.607401 Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept: State of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–119. doi:10.3102/00346543074001059 Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(23), 8410–8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111 PMID:24821756 Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906–914. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2006.09.006

189

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Fries, S. (2006). Contemporary theories on motivation to learn: Deficits and future prospects. Zeitschrift fur Padagogische Psychologie, 20, 73–83. doi:10.1024/1010-0652.20.12.73 Fries, S., Dietz, F., & Schmid, S. (2008). Motivational interference in learning: The impact of leisure alternatives on subsequent self-regulation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(2), 119–133. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.10.001 Froese, A. D., Carpenter, C. N., Inman, D. A., Schooley, J. R., Barnes, R. B., Brecht, P. W., & Chacon, J. D. (2012). Effects of classroom cell phone use on expected and actual learning. College Student Journal, 46(2), 323–332. Gilboy, M. B., Heinerichs, S., & Pazzaglia, G. (2015). Enhancing student engagement using the flipped classroom. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 47(1), 109–114. doi:10.1016/j.jneb.2014.08.008 PMID:25262529 Gingerich, A. C., & Lineweaver, T. T. (2014). OMG! Texting in class= u fail:(empirical evidence that text messaging during class disrupts comprehension. Teaching of Psychology, 41(1), 44–51. doi:10.1177/0098628313514177 Glass, A. L., & Kang, M. (2019). Dividing attention in the classroom reduces exam performance. Educational Psychology, 39(3), 395–408. doi:10.1080/01443410.2018.1489046 Guo, P. J., Kim, J., & Rubin, R. (2014). How video production affects student engagement: An empirical study of MOOC videos. In Proc. L&S 2014 (pp. 41-50). ACM Press. 10.1145/2556325.2566239 Gupta, N., & Irwin, J. D. (2016). In-class distractions: The role of Facebook and the primary learning task. Computers in Human Behavior, 55(Part B), 1165-1178. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.022 Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. (2013a). The flipped learning model: A white paper based on the literature review. Retrieved http://researchnetwork.pearson.com/wpcontent/uploads/ WhitePaper_FlippedLearning.pd Hamdan, N., McKnight, P., McKnight, K., & Arfstrom, K. (2013b). A review of flipped learning. Retrieved from http://www.flippedlearning.org/cms/lib07/VA01923112/Centricity/Domain/41/LitReview_FlippedLearning.pdf Hew, K. F. (2016). Promoting engagement in online courses: What strategies can we learn from three highly rated MOOCS. British Journal of Educational Technology, 47(2), 320–341. doi:10.1111/bjet.12235 Houle, P. A., Reed, D., Vaughan, A. G., & Clayton, S. R. (2013). Using laptop computers in class: A student motivation perspective. The Journal of Learning in Higher Education, 9(2), 83–92. Imazeki, J. (2014). Bring-your-own-device: Turning cell phones into forces for good. The Journal of Economic Education, 45(3), 240–250. doi:10.1080/00220485.2014.917898 Jamet, E., Gonthier, C., Cojean, S., Colliot, T., & Erhel, S. (2020). Does multitasking in the classroom affect learning outcomes? A naturalistic study. Computers in Human Behavior, 106, 106264. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2020.106264

190

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Johnson, G. B. (2013). Student perceptions of the flipped classroom (Master’s thesis). The University of British Columbia. Retrieved from: https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/ items/1.0073641 Johnson, Z. D., Claus, C. J., Goldman, Z. W., & Sollitto, M. (2017). College student misbehaviors: An exploration of instructor perceptions. Communication Education, 66(1), 54–69. doi:10.1080/0363452 3.2016.1202995 Kates, A. W., Wu, H., & Coryn, C. L. (2018). The effects of mobile phone use on academic performance: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 127, 107–112. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.08.012 Katz, A., & Kim, J. H. (2017). Teaching strategies and tactics in K-12 blended education: The flipped classroom model to integrate online instructional components for differentiated instruction. In N. Ostashewski (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Optimizing K-12 Education through Online and Blended Learning. IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-0507-5.ch009 Katz, L., & Lambert, W. (2016). A happy and engaged class without cell phones? It’s easier than you think. Teaching of Psychology, 43(4), 340–345. doi:10.1177/0098628316662767 Kay, R., & Lauricella, S. (2011). Exploring the benefits and challenges of using laptop computers in higher education classrooms: A formative analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 37(1), 1–18. doi:10.21432/T2S598 Keefe, J. (2007). What is personalization? Phi Delta Kappan, 89(3), 217–223. doi:10.1177/003172170708900312 Kiewra, K. A. (2002). How classroom teachers can help students learn and teach them how to learn. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 71–80. doi:10.120715430421tip4102_3 Kiewra, K. A., Luo, L., Lu, J., & Colliot, T. (2020). Learning strategies that help students SOAR to success. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1093/ acrefore/9780190264093.013.868 Kim, I., Kim, R., Kim, H., Kim, D., Han, K., Lee, P. H., Gloria, M., & Lee, U. (2019). Understanding smartphone usage in college classrooms: A long-term measurement study. Computers & Education, 141, 103611. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103611 Komarraju, M., & Nadler, D. (2013). Self-efficacy and academic achievement: Why do implicit beliefs, goals, and effort regulation matter? Learning and Individual Differences, 25, 67–72. doi:10.1016/j. lindif.2013.01.005 Kong, S. C. (2014). Developing information literacy and critical thinking skills through domain knowledge learning in digital classrooms: An experience of practicing flipped classroom strategy. Computers & Education, 78, 160–173. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.009 Kornhauser, Z. G. C., Paul, A. L., & Siedlecki, K. L. (2016). An examination of students’ use of technology for non-academic purposes in the college classroom. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 5(1), 1–15. doi:10.14434/jotlt.v5n1.13781

191

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Kuznekoff, J. H., Munz, S., & Titsworth, S. (2015). Mobile phones in the classroom: Examining the effects of texting, twitter, and message content on student learning. Communication Education, 64(3), 344–365. doi:10.1080/03634523.2015.1038727 Kuznekoff, J. H., & Titsworth, S. (2013). The impact of mobile phone usage on student learning. Communication Education, 62(3), 233–252. doi:10.1080/03634523.2013.767917 Langan, D., Schott, N., Wykes, T., Szeto, J., Kolpin, S., Lopez, C., & Smith, N. (2016). Students’ use of personal technologies in the university classroom: Analysing the perceptions of the digital generation. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 25(1), 101–117. doi:10.1080/1475939X.2015.1120684 le Roux, D. B., & Parry, D. A. (2019). Off-task media use in academic settings: Cycles of self-regulation failure. Journal of American College Health, 1-8. Advance publication available. doi:10/1080/074484 81.2019.1656636 Ledbetter, A. M., & Finn, A. N. (2016). Why do students use mobile technology for social purposes during class? Modeling teacher credibility, learner empowerment, and online communication attitude as predictors. Communication Education, 65(1), 1–23. doi:10.1080/03634523.2015.1064145 Lee, J., Lin, L., & Robertson, T. (2012). The impact of media multitasking on learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 37(1), 94–104. doi:10.1080/17439884.2010.537664 Lepp, A., Barkley, J. E., Karpinski, A. C., & Singh, S. (2019). College students’ multitasking behavior in online versus face-to-face courses. SAGE Open, 9(1), 1–9. doi:10.1177/2158244018824505 Luo, L., Kiewra, K. A., & Samuelson, L. (2016). Revising lecture notes: How revision, pauses, and partners affect note taking and achievement. Instructional Science, 44(1), 45–67. doi:10.100711251-016-9370-4 McCoy, B. R. (2016). Digital distractions in the classroom phase II: Student classroom use of digital devices for non-class related purposes. Journal of Medical Education, 7(1), 5–32. McCoy, B. R. (2020). Gen Z and digital distractions in the classroom: Student classroom use of digital devices for non-class related purposes. Journal of Medical Education, 11(2), 5–19. McGloin, R., McGillicuddy, K. T., & Christensen, J. L. (2017). The impact of goal achievement orientation on student technology usage in the classroom. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(2), 240–266. doi:10.100712528-017-9134-4 Michael, J. (2006). Where’s the Evidence That Active Learning Works? Advances in Physiology Education, 30(4), 159–167. doi:10.1152/advan.00053.2006 PMID:17108243 Morehead, K., Dunlosky, J., & Rawson, K. A. (2019). How much mightier is the pen than the keyboard for note-taking? A replication and extension of Mueller and Oppenheimer (2014). Educational Psychology Review, 31(3), 753–780. doi:10.100710648-019-09468-2 Morehead, K., Dunlosky, J., Rawson, K. A., Blasiman, R., & Hollis, R. B. (2019). Note-taking habits of 21st century college students: Implications for student learning, memory, and achievement. Memory (Hove, England), 27(6), 807–819. doi:10.1080/09658211.2019.1569694 PMID:30747570

192

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Newport, C. (2019). Digital minimalism: choosing a focused life in a noisy world. Portfolio (Penguin Random House). Parry, D. A., & le Roux, D. B. (2018, June). Off-task media use in lectures: Towards a theory of determinants. In Annual Conference of the Southern African Computer Lecturers’ Association (pp. 49-64). Springer. Parry, D. A., le Roux, D. B., & Cornelissen, L. A. (2019). Managing in-lecture media use: The feasibility and value of a split-class policy. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 1–21. doi:10.100712528019-09232-z Pettijohn, T. F., Frazier, E., Rieser, E., Vaughn, N., & Hupp-Wildsde, B. (2015). Classroom texting in college students. College Student Journal, 49(4), 513–516. Piraino, A., & Wilson, L. (2015, March). An engaging distraction: Cell phones in the classroom. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2511-2516). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Prince, M. (2004). Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(3), 223–231. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00809.x Ragan, E. D., Jennings, S. R., Massey, J. D., & Doolittle, P. E. (2014). Unregulated use of laptops over time in large lecture halls. Computers & Education, 62, 24–31. Ravizza, S. M., Hambrick, D. Z., & Fenn, K. M. (2014). Non-academic Internet use in the classroom is negatively related to classroom learning regardless of intellectual ability. Computers & Education, 78, 109–114. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.007 Ravizza, S. M., Uitvlugt, M. G., & Fenn, K. M. (2017). Logged in and zoned out: How laptop Internet use relates to classroom learning. Psychological Science, 28(2), 171–180. doi:10.1177/0956797616677314 PMID:28182528 Redner, R., Lang, L. M., & Brandt, K. P. (2019). Evaluation of an electronics intervention on electronics use in a college classroom. Behavior Analysis: Research and Practice, 20(1), 4–12. Roach, T. (2014). International Review of Economics Education Student perceptions toward flipped learning: New methods to increase interaction and active learning in economics. Biochemical Pharmacology, 17, 74–84. doi:10.1016/j.iree.2014.08.003 Roehling, P. V. (2018). Flipping the college classroom: An evidence-based guide. Palgrave Pivot. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-69392-7 Roehling, P. V., Root Luna, L. M., Richie, F. J., & Shaughnessy, J. J. (2017). The benefits, drawbacks, and challenges of using the flipped classroom in an introduction to psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 44(3), 183–192. doi:10.1177/0098628317711282 Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Facebook and texting made me do it: Mediainduced task-switching while studying. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 948–958. doi:10.1016/j. chb.2012.12.001

193

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Sana, F., Weston, T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24–31. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003 Santos, I. M., Bocheco, O., & Habak, C. (2018). A survey of student and instructor perceptions of personal mobile technology usage and policies for the classroom. Education and Information Technologies, 23(2), 617–632. doi:10.100710639-017-9625-y Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp. 281–303). Plenum. doi:10.1007/9781-4419-6868-5_10 Schunk, D. H. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. J. Zimmerman & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 125–151). Routledge. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist, 32(4), 195–208. doi:10.120715326985ep3204_1 Selwyn, N. (2016). Digital downsides: Exploring university students’ negative engagements with digital technology. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(8), 1006–1021. doi:10.1080/13562517.2016.1213229 Shell, D. F., Brooks, D. W., Trainin, G., Wilson, K. M., Kauffman, D. F., & Herr, L. M. (2010). The unified learning model: How motivational, cognitive, and neurobiological sciences inform best teaching practices. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-90-481-3215-7 Shon, H., & Smith, L. (2011). A review of Poll Everywhere audience response system. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 29(3), 236–245. doi:10.1080/15228835.2011.616475 Shrivastava, A., & Shrivastava, M. (2014). Classroom distraction due to mobile phones usage by students: College teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of Computer and Information Technology, 3(3), 638–642. Stefano, G. D., Gino, F., Pisano, G. P., & Staats, B. R. (2016). Making experience count: The role of reflection in individual learning. Harvard Business School Technology & Operations Mgt. Unit Working Paper No. 14-093. Stone, B. B. (2012). Flip your classroom to increase active learning and student engagement. Paper presented at the 28th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, WI. https:// www.uwex.edu/disted/conference/Resource_library/proceedings/56511_2012.pdf Tessier, J. (2013). Student impressions of academic cell phone use in the classroom. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(1), 25–29. doi:10.2505/4/jcst13_043_01_25 Tindell, D. R., & Bohlander, R. W. (2012). The use and abuse of cell phones and text messaging in the classroom: A survey of college students. College Teaching, 60(1), 1–9. doi:10.1080/87567555.2011.604802 Vorderer, P., Krömer, N., & Schneider, F. M. (2016). Permanently online–Permanently connected: Explorations into university students’ use of social media and mobile smart devices. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 694–703. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.085

194

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

Wammes, J. D., Ralph, B. C., Mills, C., Bosch, N., Duncan, T. L., & Smilek, D. (2019). Disengagement during lectures: Media multitasking and mind wandering in university classrooms. Computers & Education, 132, 76–89. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2018.12.007 Wang, F. H. (2017). An exploration of online behavior engagement and achievement in flipped classroom supported by learning management system. Computers & Education, 114, 79–91. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2017.06.012 Wei, F. Y. F., Wang, Y. K., & Klausner, M. (2012). Rethinking college students’ self-regulation and sustained attention: Does text messaging during class influence cognitive learning? Communication Education, 61(3), 185–204. doi:10.1080/03634523.2012.672755 Whittington, B. L. (2019). Benefits of a voluntary cell phone abstinence intervention in general psychology courses. Teaching of Psychology, 46(4), 299–305. doi:10.1177/0098628319872575 Williams, A. J., & Pence, H. E. (2011). Smart phones, a powerful tool in the chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemical Education, 88(6), 683–686. doi:10.1021/ed200029p Williams, J. A., & Cox, D. (2011). I got distracted by their being distracted. Eastern Educational Journal, 40(1), 48–56. Wong, A. (2016). Student perception on a student response system formed by combining mobile phone and a polling website. Journal of Education and Development Using Information and Communication Technology, 12(1), 144–153. Wood, E., Zivcakova, L., Gentile, P., Archer, K., De Pasquale, D., & Nosko, A. (2012). Examining the impact of off-task multi-tasking with technology on real-time classroom learning. Computers & Education, 58(1), 365–374. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.029 Wu, J., Mei, W., Liu, L., & Ugrin, J. C. (2020). The bright and dark sides of social cyberloafing: Effects on employee mental health in China. Journal of Business Research, 112, 56–64. doi:10.1016/j. jbusres.2020.02.043 Zata, C., & Neiterman, E. (2019). Does size matter? Instructors’ and Students’ perceptions of students’ use of technology in the classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education, 18, 379–393. doi:10.28945/4411 Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3–17. doi:10.120715326985ep2501_2 Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press. doi:10.1016/ B978-012109890-2/50031-7 Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (Eds.). (1989). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research, and practice. Springer Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4

195

 Curbing Student Digital Distraction With Non-Traditional Teaching Strategies

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Active Learning: Student-centered, interactive approach to learning in which students become behaviorally and cognitively engaged in the learning process, as opposed to passively receiving information from their instructor (often in the form of a lecture). Digital Devices: Portable, web-enabled electronic devices (e.g., smart phones, iPads, laptop computers, smart watches) that can be carried from place to place. Digital Distraction: Student use of digital devices (e.g., smart phones, laptop computers) for off-task purposes while attending to academic tasks in the classroom. Flipped Classroom Model: Pedagogical approach in which students are responsible for engaging with course content on their own outside of the classroom before attending in-class lessons wherein students engage in a variety of applied, active learning experiences to deepen their content mastery. Self-Regulated Learning: Occurs when students take ownership over their learning process through the deliberate application of cognitive, behavioral, and metacognitive strategies geared towards achievement of academic goals.

196

197

Chapter 10

Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space Kathy Bussert-Webb The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA Karin Lewis The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA

ABSTRACT The authors explore children’s and mothers’ perceptions and experiences regarding school and an after-school tutorial agency. The latter serves a South Texas colonia, an unincorporated Southwestern settlement lacking basic services. They asked, “What are participants’ perceptions and experiences regarding this agency and school?” Latinx participants, who spoke Spanish as a mother tongue, included 19 children, their eight mothers, two agency staff, and 15 teacher candidates (TCs). TCs were Bussert-Webb’s university students who tutored the children and used iPads for multimodal, multilingual experiences. Using Third Space and social justice frameworks and qualitative analysis, these themes emerged: power, engagement, and diversity; participants described traditional educational experiences at school and nontraditional ones at the agency. Implications connect to hybridity and power redistributions in and out of schools to affirm and extend the languages, cultures, and modalities of nondominant children and families.

INTRODUCTION The U.S. Department of Education’s (2015) action plan states, “In too many schools, there is unnecessary testing … consuming too much instructional time and creating undue stress for educators and students” (para. 2). Test-preparation environments leave teachers little time for innovation, which hinders nondominant youth educationally and demotivates them (Howe & Lisi, 2020). Furthermore, this testing milieu decreases teacher-child dialogue and teacher-family connections – important for minoritized youth, as DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch010

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

standardization ignores languages, cultures, and modalities (Williamson, 2017). For instance, in testing environments, teachers tend to rely on traditional instruction and assessments, with little affirmation of student and family funds of knowledge or assets (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005). We use the term nondominant (Gutiérrez, 2008) and minoritized (Flores & Rosa, 2015) to communicate social justice issues, as these terms politicize multifactor oppression. Culture represents shared, involving worldviews, values, traditions, and relationships (Nieto & Bode, 2018). Modalities involve communicating and representing communication systems across cultures using semiotic resources; interdisciplinary, postmodern theories undergird multimodalities (Serafini, 2014). Affirming and extending nondominant learners’ families, languages, cultures, and modalities motivates them to learn (Nieto & Bode) and helps them academically (Sánchez, Nicholson, & Hebbard, 2019). Conversely, public schools’ accountability milieu undermines these affirmations and negatively affects Latinx students (Sánchez et al., 2019). Alas, we do not blame teachers for what our participants reported and the homework we witnessed. High-stakes tests carry enormous consequences for students and educators, including child grade-level retention, staff dismissals, and school shut-downs (Nichols, Glass, & Berliner, 2012). These exams connect to No Child Left Behind (NCLB) (U.S. Department of Education, 2002). Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) replaced NCLB (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). However, Texas officials retained the state’s accountability focus, despite research showing high-stakes testing’s detrimental effects (Nichols & Berliner, 2007). Texas has the highest U.S. accountability pressure (Nichols et al., 2012). The testing emphasis contrasts a Third Space like Esperanza, our research site. (All names are pseudonyms.) Third Space combines official and unofficial spaces, in this case schooling and home. The following section shows how our theories connect to our neighborhoodbased research. Our study explores the perceptions and experiences of 19 Latinx children and their eight mothers’ regarding schools and Esperanza, the after-school tutorial agency the youth attended voluntarily for homework help. Participants reported that schools concentrated on traditional practices, while Esperanza engaged them in nontraditional, or innovative practices. Participants noted preference for the educational practices experienced at Esperanza, once children finished schoolwork. Traditional practices rely on one answer assessments, decontextualized worksheets, individual seatwork, and teacher talk, encountered mostly in a behaviorism model (Howe & Lisi, 2020). Conversely, nontraditional practices involve authentic and alternative assessments, multimodalities, meaningful groupwork, student engagement in problem-solving and themes, and culturally sustaining pedagogy; constructivism supports these practices (Alim & Paris, 2017; Howe & Lisi). Within culturally sustaining, nontraditional pedagogies, familismo teaching focuses on knowing and respecting students and their contexts; embracing their family and linguistic funds of knowledge; and small teams or groupwork (Sánchez et al., 2019). Bardis (1959) described familism as strong family feelings, co-existence, and mutual support of family goals. Familismo teaching is important as a nontraditional practice because for Latinx (our study participants), family connections are the most important cultural value and are tools for co-existence and survival (Villarreal, Blozis, & Widaman, 2005; Sánchez el al.). Familismo teaching is essential for Latinx students because of the structural inequities they experience, such as discrimination (Villarreal et al.). We found familismo teaching at our research site. Because of our interest in familismo, it was important to consider child and guardian perceptions and experiences. Although we invited male guardians, only mothers chose to participate. Our research question was, “What are participants’ perceptions and experiences regarding this agency and school?” We did not focus on parents’ schooling and tutorial experiences when they were young. 198

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Instead, we highlighted how they as parents perceived and experienced both entities. Based on our theoretical frameworks of Third Space and social justice, we present a pedagogical model (Figure 1), which educators may implement for nontraditional educational practices in and out of school.

BACKGROUND Theoretical Frameworks Third Space and social justice were appropriate frameworks for this study because of our interest in nontraditional practices and minoritized languages and cultures. Minoritized languages denote schooling practices that force youth to disavow “their home language varieties with the standardized national language (Flores & Rosa, 2015, p. 150); Flores and Rosa also discussed the terms of minoritized youth, e.g., children who experience overt or covert racism. In this section, we describe Third Space and social justice. We then explain community-based service learning (CSL) connected to Third Space (Moran, 2018), social justice (Maynes, Hatt, & Wideman, 2013), and nontraditional, innovative practices. In a Third Space framework, we can transpose first and second spaces (Moje, et al., 2004). Home could be first or informal space, while schools and corporations may be second, more formal spaces or vice-versa. Importantly, we can reconstruct these spaces to “form a third, different or alternative, space of knowledges and Discourses” (Moje, et al., p. 41). Third Space allows multiple perspectives to create new discourses and redistribute power relations (Gutiérrez, Baquedano‐López, & Tejeda, 1999). Third Space is also welcoming. Many Third Space aspects connect to social justice to promote minoritized people’s educational equity. Post-colonialist Bhabha (2004) associated Third Space with liminality (in-between spots) and nonbinaries. In multilingual education, Bhabha’s ideas reflect continua (Hornberger, 2013). Third Space occurs naturally amidst the U.S./Mexico borderlands, which Anzaldúa (2007) called nepantla. Hybridity appears a given in Esperanza (not school, not home), yet Third Space can also occur in public school classrooms where teachers affirm children’s languages, cultures, and modalities and incorporate child and family strengths into rich curricular dialogue and activities (Gutiérrez et al., 1999); familismo teaching connects well to Third Space. Gutiérrez et al. applied Bhabha’s ideas to nontraditional practices in schools serving Latinx students. Third Space principles are hybridity (blending), heterogeneity (diversity), discourse (communication connected to identities) transformation (change), and power (with participants’ attempts to equalize relationships) (Bhabha, 2004; Gutiérrez, Morales, & Martínez, 2009). Efforts to create a balanced footing remains challenging in programs involving adult and child collaborative projects and in programs that offer schoolwork support, such as our research site. However, for transformative Third Spaces, youth must sense their agency to move toward reciprocal, egalitarian relationships with those providing services, such as tutoring (Gutiérrez et al.). When we connect Third Space principles, something new emerges (Bhabha, 2004; Gutiérrez et al., 2009). Creating something unknown may make us feel vulnerable. Yet, as per the Queensland Government (2011), not knowing represents the in-between spot supporting innovation. In this Australian model, three circles connect in a Venn Diagram. The left circle represents indigenous ways of thinking and being. The right circle is Western knowledge. Not knowing, in the middle, represents a third cultural place

199

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

to listen and learn. “When Western and Indigenous systems are acknowledged and valued equally, the overlapping or merging of views represents a new way of educating” (Queensland Government, p. 9). The Queensland Government (2011) highlighted curricular face, place, and space. Face means educators building relationships with neighborhoods and families, and knowing students personally, while space entails affirming spaces for indigenous curriculum; place signifies valuing students’ backgrounds and using this place-based knowledge in the curriculum (Queensland Government). We modified the Queensland Government’s (2011) ideas by connecting Third Space to social justice. In Figure 1 Transformation, the inner circle, occurs when we value nondominant families’ communities, cultures, and languages. In this pedagogical model, educators transform themselves and others by being open to growth, while children and families transform themselves when they connect school and home; these people’s understanding of socio-political-historical contexts are also important aspects of this transformation. Figure 1 represents Third Space principles of hybridity, heterogeneity, discourse, power, and transformation; the latter four connect to social justice. We added the speech bubbles (going in and out) to reflect a Freirean aspect of justice – learning to read the word and the world, or reading words and our world critically (Freire, 2000). These speech bubbles connect to the socio-political-historical milieu because Third Space and social justice do not exist in a vacuum. Figure 1. Pedagogical Model of Third Space and Social Justice

Third Space principles further mesh with social justice because both value heterogeneity. For example, Third Space and social justice educators affirm differences, such as adult and child ages and nondominant languages. Freire (2000) believed it was important to honor the lived experiences of oppressed people. He could not fathom “how, in Brazil, we can maintain feminist, black, Indian, working class groups separately struggling for a less perverse society” (Freire, 1997, p. 86). Next, Third Space and social justice pedagogies allow time for dialogue so that educators, families, and children can construct and reconstruct identities from social interactions. Freire (2000) engaged in loving dialogue with Brazilian farmers; he transformed them when they played a game. Initially, they

200

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

believed only Freire possessed knowledge. When Freire could not answer a farmer’s question, they earned a point, and vice-versa. The farmers won. This dialogue opposes banking education, in which educators merely transmit official, sanctioned knowledge. Given Freire’s interest in dialogue, it is important for educators, students, and families to become acquainted as individuals in a collective struggle. Thus, investing time to converse with students and families remains essential in social justice pedagogy (Freire). Regarding power and transformation, participants must sense their agency (Gutiérrez et al., 1999). Gutiérrez (2008), a Third Space scholar and social justice advocate, believed Third Space is most effective when individuals are transformed, when they transform the way they perceive their environment, and when the environment becomes more just. Freire (2000) also wanted nondominant people to realize instances of power – their oppression, the oppression of others, and to use their power to help in creating a just world (transformation). According to Freire (2000), when minoritized people realize instances of power and privilege, they begin to participate in their emancipatory process “with an increasingly critical awareness of their role as Subjects of the transformation … [If not], they will merely imagine they have reached power” (p. 127) [original emphasis]. CSL relates to Third Space, social justice, and innovative educational practices. In CSL, children and TCs collaborate and engage in authentic learning experiences, which do not necessarily follow school curricula; either description of CSL connects to Third Space (Moran, 2018) and social justice (Maynes et al., 2013). Furthermore, in CSL, TCs engage with those receiving services in reciprocal ways and affirm children’s strengths and lived experiences (Maynes et al.). Children teach TCs and vice-versa, a mutually beneficial experience. CSL reflects Freire’s (2000) dialogue and mutual respect, which opposes deficit perspectives (Freire). CSL involves critiquing systemic (societal) inequities and professor, TC, and community connectedness (Maynes et al.). TCs discuss what they learned during tutoring, and professors assist TCs to connect this learning to theory and course content. (In the case of this study, Bussert-Webb supervised the CSL.) In the next section, we explain extant literature connected to these theories and our research question.

Literature Review The literature informs the school-related experiences and perceptions of children and parent respondents in the present study. To address traditional practices, we examine discrete-skills pedagogy and Englishonly test preparation in schools serving predominantly low-income, nondominant learners. We then explore minoritized parents’ experiences with their children’s schools. The last section of this review reveals positive examples of Third Space and familismo teaching. This review connects to social justice because of schooling inequities toward minoritized children and families and their languaging (Flores & Rosa, 2015). Languaging also operates in a Third Space because languaging signifies bi/polylingual use of hybrid or third languages for sense-making (García, 2009). Researchers have documented decontextualized school practices and low expectations for low-income minoritized children (Bussert-Webb, 2008; Gorski, 2013; Oakes, 2005; Poza, 2016). In a study of 793 high-school students from 12 states, Mexican-heritage students reported school (especially homework) lacked challenge (Martínez, 2009). This deficit argument persists: Minoritized children lack X and Y skills, so they need a decontextualized regimen limited to those skills (Turner, 2008). Hence, elementarylevel homework may involve youth writing English spelling words from decontextualized lists three times each; this represents a sub-skills or bottom-up model (Garan, 2004).

201

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Poza (2016) described this bottom-up reading model that Melissa, a Mexican-heritage, low-income student, endured. School staff identified this fifth-grade student as at-risk. Melissa struggled with many “academic tasks, including standardized tests … She missed part of her [Spanish] language arts instruction time every morning for Language! class … to boost her test scores and English proficiency” (Poza, p. 27). Poza observed Melissa and her peers copying poems word-for-word, allowing no time for dialogue and multimodalities. Melissa resisted this decontextualized remediation in English, stating, “But it’s so boooring. No aprendemos na-da! Puro spelling and grammar!” [We don’t learn anything. Only spelling and grammar!] (Poza, p. 28). This pedagogy represents sequential, explicit language instruction (Poza). Garan (2004) synthesized the Language! program similarly. Garan (2004) described a Latinx boy whose writing mirrored the sub-skills reading pedagogy he experienced. When asked to describe his dog, he wrote, “The dog is good. The cat is good …” (p. 114). According to Gutiérrez et al. (2009), “Reductive literacy practices are increasingly commonplace in school districts with large numbers of English learners” (p. 221). Gutiérrez et al. stated a school district used a reading intervention program for English learners in high school, which creators intended for early-childhood readers, thus displaying low educator expectations. Classroom teachers are not at fault. Instead, researchers discovered this code-based pedagogy connects to English-only, high-stakes testing (Kibler, Heny, & Andrei, 2016; Poza, 2016). Secondary teachers of English as a second language (ESL) and English in a southeastern U.S. city reported high-stakes tests influenced their focus on mechanics (Kibler et al.). Rinard (2010) cited other accountability pressures, such as schools not meeting state-mandated adequate yearly progress (AYP). Indeed, accountability pressures create de facto language education practices and policies (Menken, 2016). Specifically associated with minoritized students, California teachers indicated accountability policies centered on improving writing test scores of Mexican-heritage adolescents (Rinard, 2010). These pressures prompted teachers in a California school to teach formulaic writing, e.g., the five-paragraph essay. Rinard concluded, “What they were actually teaching was the genre of the worksheet … and an assessment genre,” designed to help emergent bilinguals pass state-level tests (p. 140). Accountability environments relate to teaching children that only certain ways of speaking and writing are acceptable, e.g., standard English (Flores & Rosa, 2015). Therefore, as teachers prepare students for standardized tests, they teach youth to model their writing after White, standard English. Teachers in these contexts may consider low-income, minoritized students’ languaging as deficient, but monolinguals cannot language (Flores & Rosa). Because of these accountability pressures, it is difficult for public school teachers to enact nontraditional practices with minoritized children. Sensing the clock ticking, educators tend to focus on preparing emergent bilinguals for high-stakes tests administered in English (García & Kleifgen, 2010; Menken, 2016). After fifth grade, Texas public school children must take the basic-skills batteries in English (Texas Education Agency, 2019). Although Spanish exams are available in third, fourth, and fifth grades, local primary schools tend to practice quick-exit bilingual education to transition students into English-only assessments (Hinton, 2015). Unfortunately, minoritized children with little academic preparation in their mother tongue struggle with English tests (Chuang, Joshi, & Dixon, 2012; Lutz, 2016; Thomas & Collier, 2003). Some believe the responsibility to teach mother-tongue literacy skills to children rests with guardians. In Reyes (2011), Mexican-heritage families promoted their three-year-old-children’s bilingualism and biliteracy. However, parents tend to quit teaching their children Spanish literacy when children start school because of schools’ English-only testing focus. In Bussert-Webb, Díaz, & Yanez (2017), parents 202

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

from the study neighborhood aspired for their children to learn English for school purposes; see also Smith and Murillo (2012). Low-income immigrant families may perceive English as the language of U.S. power and success (Wong Fillmore, 2000). Another myth is the uninvolved immigrant parent. Hernández (2003) surveyed parents and teachers in the same colonia as the present study. Parents reported being highly involved in their children’s education, but the teachers disagreed with the parents’ statements; parental efforts did not fit the teachers’ middle-class norms, even though most teachers were Latinx (Hernández). Similarly, Bussert-Webb and Díaz (2019) conducted studies in the study neighborhood and city; they found parents involved in their children’s schooling in ways invisible to some, e.g., teaching their children social skills. Most nontraditional, Third Space practices we found in the literature were of TCs and children engaging in CSL in non-school sites or of educators implementing familismo teaching with their own students. For CSL, Moran’s (2018) TCs engaged ninth-grade students in co-creating videos, without ever meeting face-to-face. Although Moran found the CSL to be effective overall in helping TCs, the future English teachers stated that meeting with their young charges in person would have helped to build relationships. In Maynes et al. (2013), TCs met with children for four weeks in agencies, or non-school sites, for the TCs’ practicums. Community partners and TCs found the CSL to be beneficial, especially regarding liberatory or social justice learning (Maynes et al.). In both studies, TCs affirmed the youth and engaged them in nontraditional pedagogy, e.g., creating videos and helping people in libraries, museums, and day camps. Others have studied nontraditional teaching in schools. Instead of English-only, deficit practices, public schools can be sites of Third Space, where educators nurture and extend diverse languages and cultures. Gutiérrez et al. (1999) observed a combined second and third grade dual-language classroom with a six-week unit on reproduction. The bilingual Latinx teacher used colloquial Spanish [chi-chis] and formal Spanish (busto) [bust] and encouraged students to connect science to their cultural experiences and languaging. When a child described sperm this way, “Es como un tadpole” [it’s like a] the teacher embraced his personal connection and languaging. Languaging, which includes code-switching and translating, represents bilinguals’ full linguistic repertoire for communication (García, 2009). Another Third Space program provided Latinx children with nontraditional multilingual, multimodal experiences on school grounds. Alanís and Machado-Casas (2018) explained la Clase Mágica (the Magical Class), an after-school technology enrichment program in San Antonio, Texas. For service learning, TCs helped youth during technology clubs unconnected to school curricula. Latinx TCs and children were Spanish-English bilingual. TC and child dyads created digital products to enhance their child partners’ literacies and languages, while youth helped TC to develop pedagogical knowledge and skills (Alanís & Machado-Casas). Next, Gutiérrez’s (2008) description of a nontraditional University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) program also offered promise as a socially-just Third Space for nondominant high school students. The Latinx migrant students attended a four-week summer residential program, where UCLA staff and students challenged traditional conceptions of academic literacy and instruction. Students read, wrote, watched films, acted out, and dialogued about testimonios (personal testimonies) and academic literature connected to socio-historic contexts and students’ lived experiences. Moreover, they use Spanish, English, and hybrid language practices to communicate (Gutiérrez). Last, Sánchez et al. (2019) described how they implemented familismo teaching in their university composition classes with mostly Latinx students. The authors encouraged their students’ languaging in writing, conferenced with students, and created families or small groups for writing. Sánchez et al., who 203

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

found this type of teaching helped students’ academic performance and college retention, emphasized that this teaching pedagogy is important for Latinx students because of systemic inequities the students encounter, e.g., racial and linguistic discrimination and poverty (Villarreal et al., 2005).

METHODS Qualitative Case Study Our research explored people’s lived experiences and narrative reflections; hence, our inquiry is qualitative in nature. We engaged in a case study, which represents a single example, bound in time (2017-2018) and space (one neighborhood) (Merriam, 1998). This section explains our positionality, the research site, procedures, and data analysis.

Positionality As qualitative researchers, we recognize our subjectivity (Creswell, 2007). Bussert-Webb’s positionality comes as a former remedial reading teacher and as a parent (Bussert-Webb, 1999, 2015; Bussert-Webb et al., 2017). Bussert-Webb’s daughter attended a Spanish-English dual language school in a local school district for five years. Our knowledge of local schools also emanates from our roles as teacher educators and professors of in-service teachers and administrators in our Master’s and doctoral programs. We read and listen to what TC and in-service educators write about accountability pressures and their inability to dialogue with students in these contexts. Bussert-Webb has taught at this borderland university since 2000; Lewis began teaching here in 2013. For one year, Bussert-Webb taught children a cultural arts program after-school at local primary school and collaborated with school staff (Bussert-Webb, 2008). For several years, she observed TCs teaching lessons in local public schools. She also collaborated with the city’s largest school district for two years on a multimodality grant and visited local elementary and middle schools (Bussert-Webb & Henry, 2016). As social justice advocates, we acknowledge our passion for Esperanza and our long-term commitment to its staff and families. Bussert-Webb began sending her TCs to this agency for CSL projects in 2003. Lewis started sending her TCs to the same site in 2013. In 2006, Bussert-Webb began supervising and teaching her TCs on site at this agency and commenced CSL research.

Site Our qualitative case study took place at Esperanza, a non-government organization (NGO), or non-profit group; Esperanza has run for over 15 years. Approximately 50 children attend Esperanza for homework assistance yearly. Parent volunteers and two part-time staff members prepare and serve the children meals and advocate for children’s families. For instance, the coordinator participates in public-school meetings with parents to advocate for colonia children and families. Esperanza staff also translate correspondence from schools and celebrate Mexican-related holidays with families, e.g., Day of the Child, Mexican Mother’s Day, and Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Mexico’s patron saint. All except two Esperanza participants attended primary and secondary schools in the local school district, which scored best for state-mandated assessments, compared to other high-poverty U.S. districts, 204

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

as per the Education Equality Index (EEI) (Dauter & Olivieri, 2017). Esperanza functions in the colonia. Colonia children attend the city’s schools and the colonia sits within city limits. However, the city surrounding the colonia refuses to annex it. (Imagine a donut hole.) Hence, a colonia is an unincorporated Southwestern settlement lacking basic services, such as trash pick-up (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2017). Colonia residents fought for running water, paved roads, sidewalks, and other services deemed acceptable in developed countries (Bussert-Webb et al., 2017). However, this colonia, .6 square miles (1.6 km2), faces other obstacles, as it represents the poorest neighborhood for its size, with $4,000 per capita and a $25,000 median-household income; 54% of residents live below the poverty line. Children represent 40% of the colonia’s 7,000 residents (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Since Esperanza serves only about 50 children yearly, less than 4% of colonia children attend Esperanza. The colonia falls behind the surrounding city of 200,000; this lag connects to systemic inequities, not ability. For school readiness, colonia kindergarten children performed above most children from affluent neighborhoods (Bussert-Webb et al., 2017). Despite the children’s high Early Development Instrument (EDI) scores, something happens during formal schooling. Only 31% of adults in the colonia earned high school diplomas. For people at least 25-years-old, the colonia’s college graduation rate is only 1.3%, compared to the surrounding city’s 16% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). Although this colonia has challenges, it also demonstrates strengths, such as shared language and religion (mostly Catholicism), generosity, and helpfulness (Bussert-Webb et al., 2017; Donelson & Esparza, 2016). About 99% of residents in this neighborhood are L1 Spanish-speaking Latinx (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). We recognize social-justice inequities and colonialism (Anzaldúa, 2007) linked to this colonia, including the low teacher expectations and marginalization (Bussert-Webb et al., 2017). Thus, as reflective teacher educators and qualitative researchers, we acknowledge our positionality as participant-observers. We are Anglos, but Bussert-Webb is fluent in Spanish; Lewis is bilingual in another language. Our research assistant spoke Spanish as her mother tongue.

Participants Our study was under Institutional Review Board (IRB) purview; participants signed consent/assent forms before we engaged in data gathering. All were Latinx from Spanish-speaking homes. Clara and her sister, Reina, attended a charter school; others attended public elementary and middle schools. Only Clara reported attending school in Mexico. Due to U.S. political tensions, we refrained from asking participants immigrant-related questions. Child participants lived in the colonia and voluntarily attended Esperanza after school. Participants were children, their mothers, TCs, and Esperanza staff. Taking part were 19 children (12 females and seven males, ages six to 13) and their eight mothers. We invited all guardians, yet only mothers participated. Undergraduate TCs were in Bussert-Webb’s site-based literacy methods course in 2017: 12 female and three male, 12 secondary- and three elementary-certification students. Although Latinx TCs spoke Spanish as a mother tongue, they differed from the children and parents in educational attainment and socio-economic status (SES). Two Esperanza staff members also participated. Parents, children, and one Esperanza staff member lived in the colonia. No parent mentioned English proficiency; all asked for questionnaires in Spanish. Children were bilingual, but few reported biliteracy. Most youth expressed difficulty with both English and Spanish literacy. After our May program, some children attended mandatory summer school to retake the State 205

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR), administered in English. Ironically, schools’ English-only emphasis may connect to the children’s academic English difficulties (Thomas & Collier, 2003).

Procedures and Esperanza Activities All data gathering took place in Esperanza, the after-school tutorial agency children attended for homework help. Our research assistant and we took turns interviewing children. Bussert-Webb engaged her 2017 students (TCs) in a focus group. For child and TC participants, although audio-recording for accuracy, the researcher typed as a participant spoke. For member-checking, we read aloud what we typed, asking participants to make changes to simultaneous transcripts. We transcribed and edited recordings for accuracy. Research procedures and participants were consistent both years, except TCs participated in summer 2017 only. The 2017 tutorial program involved TCs assisting children with multilingual newsletter articles using iPads, which Bussert-Webb obtained with endowed chair funds. The purpose of Esperanza’s newsletter was to teach children contextualized digital skills and to showcase the children’s multimodal talents to families and the colonia. Additionally, TCs helped their young charges with schoolwork and created and implemented multimodal, funds-of-knowledge lessons with the children in teams. Each group consisted of two children and one TC or two children and two TCs. These teams or families were consistent with familismo teaching Sánchez el al. (2019) described, as was our emphasis on TCs’ and affirming the youth’s rich linguistic repertoires and the family involvement aspects of the program (Sánchez el al.). TCs worked with the children daily from 3:30 pm to 5:30 pm. When the children and Esperanza staff left, Bussert-Webb and TCs convened class in an Esperanza room until 9 pm. For CSL, the TCs composed reflections connecting their service to course content. A few weeks before BussertWebb’s 2017 program, Esperanza staff helped children to create cloth tapestries to present to the youth’s mothers for Mexican Mother’s Day. Esperanza staff encouraged children to help each other with the art and Spanish language, which reinforced familismo teaching (Sánchez el al., 2019). In 2018, we gathered data from January to May. Instead of TCs working with the children, BussertWebb assisted at Esperanza twice weekly on her own time; she taught the children how to create mother-focused Keynote presentations in Spanish on iPads. The children presented their Power Points to their mothers and in some cases, grandmothers; the multimodal presentations involved music, words, and visuals for Mexican Mother’s Day on May 10, 2018. Each child typed reasons why they loved their mothers and things they appreciated about them; they also downloaded parts of their mothers’ favorite songs in Spanish. Staff and Bussert-Webb encouraged the children to use their full linguistic repertoires (including languaging) to create the Power Point presentations. Again, Esperanza staff and Bussert-Webb paired the youth so they could assist each other with technology and Spanish. This small group support reinforced familismo teaching, as did the affirmations of families and languages (Sánchez el al., 2019). In both 2017 and 2018, parents engaged by conversing with Esperanza staff, TCs, and Bussert-Webb. Furthermore, parents observed their children, attended college-admission and financial aid presentations from a local community college, assisted staff in preparing food, and brought Sunday-best clothes and shoes to share with other families for the 2018 event. For the latter, Esperanza’s coordinator called parents and asked if they could share clothes that did not fit their children so that all children would feel special for the children’s presentations to their mothers. Tutorial staff were always present; they helped

206

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Bussert-Webb to supervise tutorials and they assisted children. Lewis conducted naturalistic observations during tutorials, events, the university course, and assisted with data gathering and analysis.

Data Sources Researcher fieldnotes based on participant observations were data sources, as were photos we took of children, TCs, and parents working together; Lewis also shot photos during the May 10, 2018, event. Child data consisted of semi-structured interviews (one 25-question interview each year). Sample questions were, “How is this program different from school?” and “What did you teach your tutor?” Each child completed a rapport-building activity with a TC, daily learning logs, interviews, a language/literacy motivation questionnaire, and electronic newsletter articles in Spanish, English, and purposeful languaging. Data sources from children’s mothers and Esperanza staff included open-ended questionnaires consisting of 10 items each. A parent question was, “¿Cómo ayuda Ud. a su hijo/a con las tareas escolares?” [How do you help your child with homework?]. A sample staff question was, “In what ways is this tutorial center different from school?” Reflecting on CSL experiences tied to course content is essential for TCs (Maynes et al., 2013). Bussert-Webb’s students submitted reflective digital journal entries, describing their tutoring experiences wedded to course content. Other TC data sources included reflective narratives, focus group discussions, technology-infused lesson plans, and rapport-building analyses (based on initial ice-breaking conversations with children). A sample focus group prompt was, “Tell me about the children.”

Data Analysis We used thematic analysis involving iterative multiple readings (individually and together as co-authors) for coding, sorting, categorizing, and identifying patterns and emergent themes. Our analysis focused on seeking patterns and disconfirming and affirming data (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). We read all data (including photos we took), then reread the data several times, noting insights based on our theoretical frameworks and research question. An initial theme, children feeling rushed in school, intertwined with a more salient theme, engagement. Other initial themes in earlier iterations, cultural and linguistic affirmations, became the diversity theme. We engaged in four aspects of trustworthiness (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). For credibility, we read data separately to identify initial themes and then we discussed emerging themes. Regarding dependability, we detailed our sources and processes. Throughout data analysis, for transferability we read manuscripts from diverse perspectives, e.g., postcolonialism (Anzaldúa, 2007; Flores & Rosa, 2015) and postmodernism applied to multimodalities (Serafini, 2014). For confirmability, we included member-checking and connected findings with extant literature and peer-debriefing (Lincoln & Guba). Peer debriefing involved conversations with each other, agency tutorial staff, and colleagues who previously engaged TCs in CSL at Esperanza. Last, we chose representative quotes to illustrate themes.

FINDINGS Emerging themes were power, engagement, and diversity; these themes overlapped and informed each other. 207

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Power This theme relates to child and parent power. We begin by mentioning child power at Esperanza. Although TCs tutored the children, both groups constructed meaning and knowledge together. For example, one Esperanza staff member and some TCs had never used iPads, while some children had; thus, they were able to teach each other. When asked to describe their tutors, some child interviewees called the TCs their friends. Because they were teaching each other, TCs, staff, and children began to see each other as co-creators. Although Spanish was their mother tongue, some TCs had attended English-only schools and struggled with Spanish. Yet their Spanish hesitation afforded children more power, as the youth taught some TCs Spanish. When asked what they taught their tutors, children interviewees said they taught TCs Spanish words and songs, online games the children played, YouTube navigation, and Spanish and Mexican superheroes, e.g., Kaliman (a flying man) and Lucha Libre (free-style wrestling). Supergirl, 6, taught her tutor a pedagogical strategy: “I showed her how to do T-charts the first time that she seen me.” Another aspect of power connects to knowing personal details about others. When asked what the children learned from TCs, the youth mentioned how stressed some TCs were about their teacher-licensure exams. Some TCs shared this fear with children, as the children discussed failing STAAR tests. Furthermore, some youth mentioned they learned about the TCs’ families, while one boy said he learned his TC played the same musical instrument as he; this TC confided to the child he was nervous about using an iPad. These instances demonstrated TCs took emotional risks with the children and engaged in dialogue, which helped the children feel more equal. The 2017 and 2018 Mexican Mother’s Day celebrations and preparations for these events (depicted in Figures 2 and 3) also connected to the children’s experiences of power, as per our fieldnotes. In Figure 2, Chloe is helping Diamond, a year older than Chloe, with technology. Younger children (such as Pink, age 9) assisted much older ones in embedding videos, using Apps, creating screen recordings, and editing. In other instances, younger friends and siblings helped each other in Spanish when they created the 2018 Power Point presentations. During the event, these younger children told older ones which words to say and helped older ones in reading Spanish aloud, as some younger children knew more Spanish than older ones. Thus, they reversed age-related binaries and assumptions, e.g., that older children are more skilled and knowledgeable than younger ones. Thus, the youth shared power to help each other to achieve success. Mothers also described their sense of power at Esperanza. Some shared they felt validated as Spanish speakers because their children presented in Spanish for the Mexican Mother’s Day celebration. Esperanza staff members recalled what parents said, “Moms said they felt proud to hear their children present in Spanish” and “Los motive a que siguen manteniendo sulenguaje materno” [It motivated them that their children are maintaining their mother tongue]. In Figure 2 Diamond, 11, presents to her grandmother, seated in a decorated chair of honor. Esperanza staff and Bussert-Webb created this special seat, which helped mothers to feel important. These young women are dressed in fancy dresses. Esperanza’s coordinator asked neighborhood parents to lend semi-formal clothes for the event, so all families would share power and resources. Contributing for the event gave families agency and accessed colonia strengths of unity and helpfulness. In in Figure 2 Diamond’s grandmother is sitting in the seat of honor because Diamond’s mother could not attend; her employer would not excuse her from work. Thus, Esperanza staff called the grandmother and asked her to send photos for Diamond’s PowerPoint presentation; Esperanza staff also helped Diamond 208

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Figure 2. Peer Assistance with Grandmother in Seat of Honor: May 10, 2018

to write Spanish notes in the PowerPoint slides to Diamond’s grandmother and invited the grandmother to the May 10 event at the agency. Esperanza staff realized grandmothers were important for Mexican Mother’s Day, too, which demonstrated respect for Mexican cultural elements and inclusion. This revelation regarding inclusion regardless of age also connected to younger siblings not in the program. During the 2018 event some younger children not in the program sat with their mothers in the chair of honor. Sharing power is about inclusion. Including people (regardless of age) helps them to feel they belong and that they are important. Conversely, when people feel they do not belong, they may feel powerless. Some mothers mentioned in their questionnaires that they felt unwelcome at school. Some also mentioned feeling useless in assisting their children with English-only homework. One mother explained her frustration helping her seven-year-old son, Val, for first- and second-grade homework. Val’s mother also connected the Englishonly instruction to her son’s mandated repetition of second grade. However, she did mention how her son’s kindergarten teacher shared power with her by providing homework instructions in Spanish and trusting the mother’s ability, Batallo y batallo con las tareas en inglés. Todas las instrucciones están en inglés. El repitió el segundo. En kinder, ayudó mucho la maestra. Ella dio todas las instrucciones en español. Se las mandaba a mí para que le ayudara … Antes le ayudaba, pero ahora viene aquí con Ustedes [I struggle a lot with his homework in English. All instructions are in English. He flunked second grade. In kindergarten, his

209

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

teacher helped a lot. She gave me homework instructions in Spanish, and she sent these directions to me so I could help him. I helped him with homework previously, but now I send them to you all]. Val’s mother appreciated the kindergarten teacher’s Spanish support, yet this guardian became so frustrated later in Val’s schooling that she took him to Esperanza for help. The previous quote from Val’s mother converges with other data regarding parents’ feelings of helplessness connected to schools’ English-only emphasis. For instance, Mikey’s mother wrote about her son’s academic struggles in third grade, “Sus grados hiban bajando bastante, asi que decidi buscar la manera de ayudarlo llevandolo a este programa y Bendito Dios … mi baby se recupero rapidamente” [His grades were plummeting and so I decided to find some way to help, so I brought him to this program and praise God, my baby recuperated rapidly]. As the quotes from Val’s and Mikey’s mothers demonstrate, when parents could not help their children with homework, they turned to Esperanza for support. Esperanza provided a neighborhood-based program where people translate homework instructions for parents and youth and assist children academically. A TC stated regarding this issue, “Sophia told me that her mom understands English but is not able to speak it. Therefore, she is forced to work on her homework by herself so tutoring her is a great benefit for her because she does not get this type of help at home.” (We noticed even teachers’ instructions to parents were in English, e.g., cover pages, due dates, and instructions.) This program thus represented an equalizer to help minoritized children gain access to bilingual and biliterate people willing to share their knowledge and skills. Esperanza also mitigates a state education, which appears not to recognize these language and literacy inequities.

Engagement Power connects to engagement, because children and families cannot feel powerful if they are marginalized. Thus, the next finding relates to the children’s engagement in this Third Space program and school. When we asked the children to compare school and Esperanza’s tutorial program, most mentioned enjoying their engagement and being intrinsically motivated; one girl took pride in being the first to arrive from school. The children’s quotes reflected hegemonic school practices, e.g., disengaging pedagogy, individualized seatwork, and mandatory summer school resulting from failed STAAR tests. School experiences influenced children’s disclosures of disconnect. The following quotes reveal how the children yearned for engagement and educator attention. As one TC wrote, “Students in poor areas want to succeed and don’t deserve to be ignored by their teachers.” Because of space considerations, we did not include all youth quotes regarding Esperanza versus school: Sophia, 10: Here, we get more time to do work and at school they kinda rush us to do the work. Reina, 8: They help you more [here]. They give you activities. And in school, unless we have holidays or testing or finishing with our assignments, then we can do activities, but it makes me bored because we can’t talk. Diamond, 11: Here, … we have someone to help us and in school we have a classroom with a lot of people and just one teacher. Here you get to do fun stuff more. We don’t do tests, like the STAAR.

210

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Frozen, 14: I feel great here. I’m always the first one here. I come walking from school … This one helps me more than school, because in school they just talk about social studies and then we were doing some exams and now it’s the end … so I think I’m going to have to go to summer school because I failed my math exam. Futbalista, 10: We have way more fun. The tutors get to be with us a bit more and in school you have more students and here it’s just one or two. Ella, 11: It’s more creative in a way, it’s less strict. You can be more free [sic] with your options. Red, 12: This program involves technology everyday with an iPad and it’s fun. Blue, 13: [Here] It’s way different. I only have one teacher, one tutor. I’m his only student. And he’s more fun. I use an iPad. It’s not boring like school. [Researcher: What do you do in school?] Sit behind a desk and listen to the teacher yak. I don’t pay attention. I don’t even get to use my phone. They will check it to see if it’s off. Batman, 7: I usually work by myself at school. [Researcher: Why?] Because our teacher tells us to do our work by ourselves. Here I work with my tutor. Moana, 9: No, no iPad in school. I never used an iPad before. Because here they help you. In school they do not. As these quotes demonstrate, children’s engagement at Esperanza was associated with increased time for dialogue, one-on-one attention, collaboration, intrinsic motivation, enjoyment, freedom, and technology. Conversely, the children described school as feeling rushed, boring, and constrained by strictness; they mentioned having no technology, being unassisted, failing, and receiving teacher-talk. For example, Blue said technology was used to monitor and control him in school while the teacher delivered lectures. This engagement theme related to parents, also. Unlike Esperanza, local public schools are formal. To visit their children’s school, parents must sign in at the office and present Texas driver’s licenses to office staff. To help at local schools, parents must supply social-security numbers to the district office. Security officers patrol campuses surrounded by chain-link fences. Esperanza’s coordinator said parents fear of school and of English prompted her to accompany some parents to teacher meetings. In contrast, we witnessed parents lingering to talk to Esperanza staff for translations and advice regarding their children’s academic and social-emotional progress. The mother of Mikey, nine, mentioned the program helped her son’s engagement and transformation, Les agradezco … a todas las personas que hacen posible este programa porque no solo apoyan a nuestros hijos sino también a nosotros los padres que no sabemos inglés. Mi hijo es muy tímido, pero este programa le a [sic] ayudado a ser un poco más expresivo. La verdad no pensé que lo hicieren participar el 10 de mayo y lo lograron y en español. Mil gracias. [I thank everyone who make this program possible because it helps not just our children, but also us parents who don’t know English. My son is very timid, but this program has helped him to be more expressive. Truthfully, I didn’t think you’d have him participate in the May 10 event, but he did it, and in Spanish. Many thanks!]

Diversity Engagement connects to the next finding, diversity, because it is difficult to be engaged in a program or school if one’s diversity is ignored. Thus, diversity theme connects to language and culture affirmations/ rejections that children and mothers experienced in Esperanza and school. Six children reported taking 211

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

no bilingual education classes; others described transitional bilingual education; we confirmed this with parents. Some youth said they were in bilingual-designated classrooms, yet their teachers spoke only English and discouraged them from speaking Spanish. Clara, 10, questioned her teacher’s dictate of English only, stating, “I don’t understand, I’m Latino.” This demonstrates Clara connected language and culture. Clara, who said she loved to express herself orally and in writing in Spanish, said that as a Latinx, she should be able to speak Spanish in school because Spanish is her mother tongue. Clara attended kindergarten in Mexico and reported being a top student at her U.S. charter school; Clara and her family left Mexico around 2012. When asked how they felt about speaking Spanish and languaging at school, most youth mentioned feeling uncomfortable; Diamond, nine, said, “Nervous!” When asked why, she replied, “Because I feel like people will make fun of me.” Some, like Mateo, nine, said they no longer participated in bilingual instruction because they “got better in English.” Schools’ English priority minimized children’s print experiences in Spanish as well. A TC wrote, “Batman [age 7] did not appear to have any instruction in Spanish. He cannot read, write in his native language …” When asked if they ever received homework in Spanish, only three children said yes; they responded, “Once, when I was in second grade,” “Yes, it was like when I first went to school I didn’t know English and they gave me a Spanish book of math,” and “Yes, reading.” All but one child mentioned disliking speaking Spanish and languaging in school, but most said they enjoyed both at Esperanza. We heard children and parents use hybrid language practices often at Esperanza. A TC explained how this Third Space transformed the language development of Futbalista, 12, “She was able to speak in Spanish … and mix the languages … without it being a problem because it wasn’t at home and it was in a classroom and it was okay for her …” We also witnessed children type in Spanish at Esperanza for the 2017 and 2018 iPad projects. Also, the parent questionnaires revealed most parents perceived Spanish reading and writing to be as important as English print literacy. Esperanza staff and TCs (who grew up locally) affirmed children and parents linguistically and culturally and encouraged collaboration. While making tapestries in May 2017, Esperanza staff taught children written Spanish greetings; see Figure 3. Esperanza’s assistant coordinator explained, “Las madres no entienden ingles” [Mothers don’t know English]. Children selected notes based on several examples staff provided, e.g., “Se dice mamá, pero es la mujer más validosa del mundo” [She’s called mother, but she’s the most important woman in the world]. Staff used a Mexican cultural element (Mexican Mother’s Day) to anchor Spanish to the children’s family experiences. For the May 2018 event, each child presented Power Point presentations to their mothers (and in some cases grandmothers) and gave them with roses. If siblings attended the program, they presented together, but each one had a speaking role. After all presentations, the children joined forces in singing Señora in Spanish (by Denise de Kalafe). Our field-notes revealed insights into Esperanza’s Spanish affirmations. The coordinator told children, “[Spanish] is part of who we are … Spanish is important so you can communicate with your grandparents.” We observed her assistant reading aloud Stone Soup (a folktale of unknown origin) to children in Spanish. Bussert-Webb and Esperanza staff also invited local college representatives to give presentations in Spanish in 2017 and 2018 about financial aid. Asking college staff to present in Spanish to Esperanza children and parents also showed respect for family contexts and financial struggles, as audience members did not need to leave their community. Our fieldnotes reveal that many parents and some children asked questions of the financial aid representatives and listened attentively. These affirmations of family contexts and mother tongues relate to familismo teaching (Sánchez et al., 2019). 212

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Figure 3. Girls Collaborating: Mother’s Day Tapestries, May 10, 2017

We witnessed Esperanza’s affirmation of the Mexican culture, also. Afterwards, parents participated in raffles and Esperanza staff served pan dulce (Mexican sweetbread) and coffee; parents stayed to talk to each other and Esperanza and college staff members. Esperanza family and community volunteers provided youth with homemade Mexican-style meals daily. Based on our fieldnotes, Esperanza smelled like home. The 2017 and 2018 Mother’s Day events also demonstrated care for Mexican cultural elements. A painting of la virgin de Guadalupe (Mexico’s cultural and religious icon) hung behind the chair of honor. This image was significant culturally, as Mexico’s Mother Mary motivates Mexican mothers in the U.S. to garner resilience (Castañeda-Liles, 2018). Figure 2 also shows Spanish words on the chalkboard and balloon. After the presentations, staff served a tres-leche cake (made with different milks) and gave mothers candy-filled mugs (purchased in Mexico) with this inscription, “Aquí toma la mamá más hermosa del mundo” [Drinking from this cup is the most beautiful mother in the world]. We heard only Spanish during the 2018 event. Based on our fieldnotes, mothers were crying and smiling. TC and staff affirmations of the children’s linguistic and cultural identities influenced Futbalista’s gender identity, who said, “During this program that I learned it was okay to be different and not like a regular normal girl.” Futbalista decided she wanted to be a professional U.S. football player. We thought a language difference caused us to misunderstand her goal. “No,” she wanted to play professionally “American football, not soccer.” This finding relates to Nieto’s and Bode’s (2018) definition of culture, which involves worldviews. Futbalista appeared fearless to express this new-found goal to her tutor, the researchers, and other children. Like all participants, she selected the pseudonym for herself. Multimodalities and age represented other types of diversity experiences at Esperanza. Pink’s 2017 TC was a theatre major, who attempted many drama activities to get Pink to express herself verbally – to no avail. No adult at Esperanza could get her to say more than two words at once. The theatre TC appreciated Pink as she was; he helped her to express herself through drawing and iPad graphics, since she told him she loved art. Pink’s mother said the program helped Pink to communicate more. Next, in 2018, Bussert-Webb taught Pink how to change photo sizes in the Key Notes App and appointed Pink as her assistant editor. Pink, so hesitant and withdrawn at the beginning of our 2017 program, walked

213

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

around in spring 2018 assisting even older peers with their photos; Bussert-Webb noticed older peers accepted Pink’s help and thanked her. Hence, the respect for age-related diversity and Pink’s agentive role helped to transform her. We explored this role reversal under the power theme, also. Regarding other transformative perceptions, some children mentioned they began to like reading and writing in Spanish and combining languages when writing. (Their teachers told them it was incorrect and to be avoided.) One child (age seven) initially said he hated technology because he reported having no experience with it in school, yet his TC said he began to love technology and ask for more “iPad tricks” when she taught him how to Air-drop and use the Notes App.

DISCUSSION In this section, we theorize the emerging themes of power, engagement, and diversity – positive for Esperanza, negative for schools. We dislike these dichotomies. However, these differences surfaced many times during data analysis. Findings regarding school appeared the opposite of Third Space, nontraditional practices, and culturally sustaining pedagogies (Alim & Paris, 2017). Again, we emphasize the influence of high-stakes testing on traditional teaching and assessment in schools, as teachers in teach-to-the test environments are left to develop innovation on their own in isolation (Howe & Lisi, 2020). Regarding power, children discussed limited power in school and parents reported their inability to help their children with English-only homework. Children were expected to complete individual seat work during school and decontextualized homework (worksheets from publishers, spelling words several times, and so forth). This finding connects to Martínez’s (2009) study regarding Mexican-heritage high school students, whom reported little challenge in individual seatwork at school. From the different groups studied, Mexican-heritage students reported feeling the least challenge doing homework (Martínez). However, based on data analysis, the Third Space of Esperanza appeared to transform children and parents, as they shared power and broke age-related binaries (Gutiérrez, 2008). We believe we may have found more requisite aspects of Third Space, e.g., participants’ changed perceptions of the world and the world’s changed perceptions of participants (e.g., schoolteachers realizing and acting on child and family linguistic assets), (Gutiérrez, 2008), if it were not for the purpose of Esperanza’s agency. As Bussert-Webb et al. (2017) discovered, Esperanza’s founders designed the program to help children with schoolwork. Thus, if children receive two hours of decontextualized busywork in English, Esperanza staff, TCs, and well-meaning professors will have little time to engage children in dialogue and critical inquiry projects (Bussert-Webb et al., 2017). We found the same quandary with our second theoretical framework, as social justice involves participants acting against “social, political, and economic contradictions” (Freire, 2000, p. 35). We did find some hints of children’s critiques; Blue criticized teacher-talk and school technology bans, while Clara questioned her school-teacher’s English-only dictate. We also found parents complained about the English-only focus of the schoolteachers, but we do not know of any who took their complaints to school staff. Some mothers reported feeling powerless to assist their children academically in English and no parent reported being able to read, write, or speak in English. The quote from Val’s mother demonstrated how teachers used (perhaps inadvertently) English as a tool for power, denying parents the opportunity to help their children in a language comprehensible to parents (Hornberger, 2013). Mexican-heritage students reported that their parents’ scant homework assistance related to parents’ low-educational attainment (Martínez, 2009). In another study, Bussert-Webb and Díaz (2019) discovered that parents tried as best 214

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

they could to help their children with homework from school, but the parents expressed frustration due to their children’s English-only homework. Indeed, it is a grave injustice and a human rights violation not to provide information in Spanish to parents and to deny children education in their mother tongue (UNESCO, 1948, 2003). What the children and parents described about school countered nontraditional practices (Howe & Lisi, 2020) and familismo teaching (Sánchez et al., 2019). Despite today’s disturbing diversity-bashing, schooling in one’s mother tongue represents a right and resource (García, 2009), and an academic advantage (Thomas & Collier, 2003). Despite obstacles with the traditional, English-only curriculum that children reported, Esperanza staff and TCs engaged children in Third Space and nontraditional practices when the children finished their homework. Power redistributions were easier to achieve when TCs, children, parents, and Esperanza staff worked together on projects, whether an electronic newsletter or digital presentations. Children helped some TCs with technology and Spanish, for instance. The ability to feel competent and helpful assists with agency, essential in Third Space (Gutiérrez, 2008). Furthermore, the TCs revealed personal information, including their fear of Texas licensure exams, to their young charges. We relinquish power when we make ourselves vulnerable, as Freire did with farmers, who knew more about agriculture than Freire (2000). The TCs also engaged in dialogue with the children and they got to know each other personally, important aspects of social justice and Third Space. After all, liminal spaces can redistribute power relations (Gutiérrez et al., 1999). As for engagement, Blue, in middle school, summed up our findings regarding school when he said all he did in school was listen “to the teacher yak.” Goodlad (1984) found 70% of instruction in U.S. high schools focused on teachers talking, which mirrored what our participants mentioned. Blue’s and other youth’s feelings of powerlessness in school also connects to Mehta’s and Fine’s (2019) high school study. Yet Mehta’s and Fine’s discovery regarding the periphery paralleled our Esperanza findings, … Much of the most powerful learning seemed to occur … at the school’s ‘periphery’ – in electives, clubs, and extracurriculars … In these spaces, students had real choices, learning by doing was the norm, there was time to explore matters in depth, and students were welcomed as producers rather than receivers of knowledge (p. 5). Connected to diversity, child and parent participants experienced sparse school-related Spanish, languaging, and multimodal instruction. In contrast, Esperanza combined multimodalities and languaging by opening “implementational and ideological spaces for fluid, multilingual, oral, and contextualized practices and voices at the local level” (Hornberger, p. 150). For 21st Century success, children should produce multilingual, multimodal materials, as child participants did when they created visuals and newsletter articles at Esperanza (in English, Spanish, and languaging) (Espinosa, Ascenzi-Moreno, & Vogel, 2016). Indeed, this languaging exists in a Third Space, as it combines both languages (Gutiérrez, 2008). Languaging is also an example of a nontraditional practice because languaging does not bracket languages, e.g., English only during this time, and Spanish during that time, or much worse, as per our findings, English-only (García, 2009). Last, we encountered several examples of familismo teaching during our observations at Esperanza. For instance, Esperanza staff and TCs attempted to know and respect the children, their colonia, and contexts; embraced the youth’s families and linguistic funds of knowledge; and engaged the children in small teams to make the tapestries, PowerPoints, the electronic trilingual newsletters, and other

215

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

multimodal products (Sánchez, Nicholson, & Hebbard, 2019). This familismo is a prime example of nontraditional teaching.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS We encountered four limitations. First, researcher outsider status may have influenced participants statements, as they may have sensed our passion for Esperanza; we acknowledge this subjectivity. Second, we are Anglos reporting Latinx children and families; however, Latinx TCs and Esperanza staff shared similar insights. Third, we did not go deeply enough with questions, as our IRB was limited to another focus; we could submit a new IRB and ask more questions relevant to our research question. Fourth, we did not interview public school teachers, as this was not part of our IRB; we could do so in future studies. Ironically, English-only test-preparation in schools and the marginalization that colonia youth and mothers reported (and that TCs and we observed) came from local schools, in which most educators are Latinx (Bussert-Webb, 2015). Thus, anti-Spanish teaching and othering of low-income Spanish-dominant youth and families occur even in schools along the U.S./Mexico border where most educators represent the children’s linguistic and cultural backgrounds. These issues connect to accountability pressures teachers face, English-only tests, Texas and U.S. policies, linguistic terrorism, racism, and xenophobia (Anzaldúa, 2007; Hornberger, 2013; Flores & Rosa, 2015). These policies reflect the privileging of English (Hornberger, 2013; Palmer & Lynch, 2008), which hinders nondominant children and families from leveraging languages, cultural strengths, and funds of knowledge (González et al., 2005). If schools can move beyond these hegemonic policies to support equitable practices, nondominant children can succeed and experience well-being (Khote, 2018). Affirming Third Spaces, such as Esperanza, offer hope for these youth and their families and schools. These Third Spaces, which resist traditional schooling practices, may help subaltern people to build their multilingual, multimodal practices (Bhabha, 2004). Opportunities for nontraditional practices are possible in U.S. schools (Gutiérrez et al., 2009; Stewart & Hansen-Thomas, 2016). For example, UCLA’s Third Space pedagogy that Gutiérrez (2008) described is viable if we spend time reflecting and engaging with others authentically. Children are not testing robots occupying classroom space. They are sentient beings with feelings, families, cultures, languages, and funds of knowledge (González et al., 2005). The teaching/learning relationship takes time to cultivate and requires respect and interest in students’ lived experiences for deep learning versus knowledge transmission (Freire, 2000). Both out-of-school and in-school educators can develop connections between community and family contexts with schools. This can be done with K-12 homework related to CSL, in which students provide service in their neighborhoods connected to course content (Maynes et al., 2013). To add a social justice dimension, the youth can connect their observations to structural inequities (Freire, 2000). Another idea is to involve parents during school and in after-school programs on campuses to affirm families’ funds of knowledge (Rubin, Sutterby, & Abrego, 2013). González et al. (2005) found that this familismo teaching was effective in promoting student learning; obviously, languaging could be involved, as parents could teach students their mother tongues during school (García, 2009). Because of the inextricable connection to social justice, we cannot let the Latinx education crisis continue (Gándara, 2010). By 2060, Latinx will constitute one-third of the U.S. population by 2060 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012). Latinx children and children and families of all races, ethnicities, religions, and 216

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

generations are our future because diversity brings innovation (Friedman & Mandelbaum, 2012). Third Space and nontraditional practices, such as familismo, languaging, CSL, and multimodalities also offer this innovation (Gutiérrez et al., 2009). We must move beyond internal transformation to ascertain how nondominant students and families perceive their environment, and how the environment changes in harmony with nondominant people (Gutiérrez, 2008).

REFERENCES Alanís, I., & Machado-Casas, M. (2018). Examining bilingual teacher candidates’ use of digital media. In G. Onchwari & J. S. Keengwe (Eds.), Handbook of research on pedagogies and cultural considerations for young English language learners (pp. 239–256). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-3955-1.ch012 Alim, H. S., & Paris, D. (2017). What is culturally sustaining pedagogy and why does it matter. In H. S. Alim & D. Paris (Eds.), Culturally sustaining pedagogies: Teaching and learning for justice in a changing world (pp. 1–23). Teachers College Press. Anzaldúa, G. (2007). Borderlands/La frontera: The new mestiza (3rd ed.). Aunt Lute Books. Bardis, P. D. (1959). A familism scale. Marriage and Family Living, 21(4), 340–341. doi:10.2307/347107 Bhabha, H. (2004). The location of culture (2nd ed.). Routledge. Bussert-Webb, K. (1999). To test or to teach: Reflections from a holistic teacher-researcher in south Texas. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42(7), 582. Bussert-Webb, K. (2008). Qué hago? Latino/a children describe their activities in an “exemplary” school. Journal of Latinos and Education, 8(1), 38–54. doi:10.1080/15348430802466753 Bussert-Webb, K. (2015). Parrying the pathologization of a strong, unified Mexican-American community. Creative Approaches to Research, 8(2), 46–69. Bussert-Webb, K., & Díaz, M. E. (2019). Myth busting: Low-income Latinx immigrant parental involvement. In G. Onchwari & J. S. Keengwe (Eds.), Handbook of research on engaging immigrant families and promoting academic success for English language learners (pp. 205–228). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-8283-0.ch011 Bussert-Webb, K., Díaz, M. E., & Yanez, K. A. (2017). Justice and space matter in a strong, unified Latino community. Peter Lang. doi:10.3726/978-1-4539-1783-1 Bussert-Webb, K., & Henry, L. (2016). Latino/a children’s digital literacy access and online reading skills. The Journal of Literacy and Technology, 17(3 and 4), 2-40. Castañeda-Liles, M. D. S. (2018). Our lady of everyday life: La Virgen de Guadalupe and the Catholic imagination of Mexican women in America. Oxford University Press. Chuang, H., Joshi, R., & Dixon, L. (2012). Cross-language transfer of reading ability: Evidence from Taiwanese ninth-grade adolescents. Journal of Literacy Research, 44(1), 97–119. doi:10.1177/1086296X11431157

217

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Sage. doi:10.4135/9781452230153 Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications. Dauter, L., & Olivieri, S. (2017). Measuring the performance of students from low-income families in schools and cities across the country. Oakland, CA: Great! Schools. Donelson, A., & Esparza, A. (2016). The colonias reader: Economy, housing and public health in U.S.Mexico border colonias. University of Arizona Press. Espinosa, C., Ascenzi-Moreno, L., & Vogel, S. (2016). A translanguaging pedagogy for writing: A CUNY-NYSIEB guide for educators. ACUNY-NYSIEB. Retrieved from https://www.cuny-nysieb.org/ wp-content/uploads/2016/05/TLG-Pedagogy-Writing-04-15-16.pdf Flores, N., & Rosa, J. (2015). Undoing appropriateness: Raciolinguistic ideologies and language diversity in education. Harvard Educational Review, 85(2), 149–171. doi:10.17763/0017-8055.85.2.149 Freire, P. (1997). Pedagogy of the heart (D. Macedo & A. Oliveira, Trans.). Continuum. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed: 30th anniversary edition (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). Continuum. Friedman, T., & Mandelbaum, M. (2012). That used to be us: How America fell behind in the world it invented and how we can come back. Picador. Gándara, P. (2010). The Latino education crisis. Educational Leadership, 67(5), 24–30. http://www. ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/feb10/vol67/num05/The-Latino-Education-Crisis.aspx Garan, E. M. (2004). In defense of our children: When politics, profit, and education collide. Heinemann. García, O. (Ed.). (2009). Bilingual education in the 21st century: A global perspective. Malden, MA: Wiley/Blackwell. García, O., & Kleifgen, J. (2010). Educating emergent bilinguals: Policies, programs, and practices for English language learners. Teachers College Press. González, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practice in households, communities, and classrooms. Erlbaum Associates. Goodlad, J. I. (1984). A place called school. Prospects for the future. McGraw-Hill. Gorski, P. (2013). Reaching and teaching students in poverty: Strategies for erasing the opportunity gap. Teachers College Press. Gutiérrez, K. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164. doi:10.1598/RRQ.43.2.3 Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano‐López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286–303. doi:10.1080/10749039909524733

218

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Gutiérrez, K., Morales, P., & Martínez, D. (2009). Re-mediating literacy: Culture, difference, and learning for students from nondominant communities. Review of Research in Education, 33(1), 212–245. doi:10.3102/0091732X08328267 Hernández, R. (2003). Culture clash in a south Texas colonia: Teachers’ and parent’s attitudes and practices regarding parental involvement (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Houston, Houston, TX. Hinton, K. A. (2015). “We only teach in English”: An examination of bilingual-in-name-only classrooms. In D. Freeman & Y. Freeman (Eds.), Research on preparing inservice teachers to work effectively with emergent bilinguals (pp. 265–289). Emerald Group. doi:10.1108/S1479-368720150000024012 Hornberger, N. (2013). Biliteracy continua. In M. R. Hawkins (Ed.), Framing languages and literacies: Socially situated views and perspectives (pp. 149–168). Routledge. Howe, W. A., & Lisi, P. L. (2020). Becoming a multicultural educator: Developing awareness, gaining skills, and taking action. Sage. Khote, N. (2018). Translanguaging in systemic functional linguistics: A culturally sustaining pedagogy for writing in secondary schools. In R. Harman (Ed.), Bilingual learners and social equity (pp. 153–178). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-60953-9_8 Kibler, A., Heny, N., & Andrei, E. (2016). In-service teachers’ perspectives on adolescent ELL writing instruction. TESOL Journal, 7(2), 350–392. doi:10.1002/tesj.211 Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage. doi:10.1016/0147-1767(85)90062-8 Lutz, A. (2016). Biliteracy and the educational achievement of Latino high school students. International Journal of Education and Social Science, 3(2). http://www.ijsse.com/ Martínez, S. (2009). Mexican American high school students’ perceived levels of challenge in school. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 31(3), 297–316. doi:10.1177/0739986309336826 Maynes, N., Hatt, B., & Wideman, R. (2013). Service learning as a practicum experience in a pre-service education program. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 43(1), 80–99. https://journals.sfu.ca/cjhe/ index.php/cjhe/index Mehta, J., & Fine, S. (2019). In search of deeper learning: The quest to remake the American high school. Boston, MA: Harvard. Menken, K. (2016). High-stakes tests as de facto language education policies. In E. Shohamy, I. G. Or, & S. May (Eds.), Language education and assessment: Encyclopedia of language and education (3rd ed., pp. 385–396). Springer. Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Moje, E., Ciechanowski, K., Kramer, K., Ellis, L., Carrillo, R., & Collazo, T. (2004). Working toward third space in content area literacy: An examination of everyday funds of knowledge and discourse. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(1), 38–70. doi:10.1598/RRQ.39.1.4 Moran, C. (2018). Learners without borders: Connected learning in a digital third space. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 18(2), 233–254.

219

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Nichols, S., & Berliner, D. (2007). Collateral damage: How high-stakes testing corrupts America’s schools. Harvard Education Press. Nichols, S., Glass, G., & Berliner, D. (2012). High-stakes testing and student achievement: Updated analyses with NAEP data. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(20), 20. doi:10.14507/epaa.v20n20.2012 Nieto, S., & Bode, P. (2018). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (7th ed.). Pearson. Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality (2nd ed.). Yale University. Palmer, D., & Lynch, A. (2008). A bilingual education for a monolingual test? The pressure to prepare for TAKS and its influence on choices for language of instruction in Texas elementary bilingual classrooms. Language Policy, 7(3), 217–235. doi:10.100710993-008-9100-0 Poza, L. (2016). “Puro spelling and grammar”: Conceptualizations of language and the marginalization of emergent bilinguals. Perspectives on Urban Education, 13(1), 20-41. Retrieved from https://files. eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103877.pdf Queensland Government. (2011). Embedding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives in schools: A guide for school learning communities. Author. Retrieved from http://indigenous.education. qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/eatsips-docs/eatsips_2011.pdf Reyes, I. (2011). Literacy practices and language ideologies of first-generation Mexican immigrant parents. In K. Potowski & J. Rothman (Eds.), Bilingual youth: Spanish in English-speaking societies (pp. 89–112). John Benjamins Publishing. doi:10.1075ibil.42.07rey Rinard, B. J. (2010). The persuasive and evaluative essays of adolescent English learners: How context shapes genre (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California Davis, Davis, CA. Rubin, R., Sutterby, J., & Abrego, M. (2013). Engaging the families of ELLs: Ideas, resources, and activities. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315853352 Sánchez, Y., Nicholson, N., & Hebbard, M. (2019). Familismo teaching: A pedagogy for promoting student motivation and college success. In I. Baca, Y. I. Hinojosa, & S. W. Murphy (Eds.), Bordered writers: Latinx identities and literacy practices at Hispanic-serving institutions (pp. 105–124). SUNY Press. Serafini, F. (2014). Reading the visual: An introduction to teaching multimodal literacy. Teachers College Press. Smith, P. H., & Murillo, L. A. (2012). Researching transfronterizo literacies in Texas border colonias. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 15(6), 635–651. doi:10.1080/1367005 0.2012.699945 Stewart, M., & Hansen-Thomas, H. (2016). Sanctioning a space for translanguaging in the secondary English classroom: A case of a transnational youth. Research in the Teaching of English, 50(4), 450–472. Texas Education Agency. (2019). STAAR Spanish resources. Austin, TX: Author. Retrieved from https:// tea.texas.gov/Student_Testing_and_Accountability/Testing/STAAR_L/STAAR_Spanish_Resources

220

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

Thomas, W., & Collier, V. (2003). The multiple benefits of dual language. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 61–61. http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el200310_thomas.pdf Turner, R. (2008). Greater expectations: Teaching academic literacy to underrepresented students. Stenhouse. UNESCO. (1948). The universal declaration of human rights. Paris, France: Author. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/information/50y/nfsunesco/doc/hum-rights.htm UNESCO. (2003). Education in a multilingual world: UNESCO Education Position Paper. Paris, France: United Nations. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0012/001297/129728e.pdf U.S. Census Bureau. (2010). American FactFinder. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http:// factfinder.census.gov U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). U.S. Census Bureau projections show a slower growing, older, more diverse nation a half century from now. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.census. gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb12-243.html U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Public Law 107-110, 107th Congress. No Child Left Behind Act. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf U.S. Department of Education. (2015). Fact sheet: Testing action plan. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/fact-sheet-testing-action-plan U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.ed.gov/ESSA U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. (2017). State community development block grant colonias. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.hudexchange.info/programs/ cdbg-colonias/ Villarreal, R., Blozis, S. A., & Widaman, K. F. (2005). Factorial invariance of a pan-Hispanic familism scale. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27(4), 409–425. doi:10.1177/0739986305281125 Williamson, T. (2017). Avoiding the gaze of the test: High stakes literacy policy implementation. Texas Education Review, 5(2), 66–90. Wong Fillmore, L. (2000). Loss of family languages: Should educators be concerned? Theory into Practice, 39(4), 203–210. doi:10.120715430421tip3904_3

221

 Familismo and Nontraditional Educational Possibilities in Third Space

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Colonia: An unincorporated Southwestern community with high poverty rates and limited access to government services. Community Service-Learning (CSL): A service experience to address community needs in a reciprocal relationship, integrating reflections connected to course content. Familismo Teaching: Knowing and respecting students and their contexts; embracing their family and linguistic funds of knowledge; and groupwork. Latinx: A gender neutral term that refers to people who identify more with Latin America than Spain. Pedagogy: How we teach and establish and maintain relationships to students. Social Justice: A theory in which people uncover and address inequities and power imbalances. Third Space: A hybrid or liminal space that can be transformative.

222

223

Chapter 11

Micro-Credentials in Higher Education Amy K. Rottmann Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA Molly H. Duggan Lenoir-Rhyne University, USA

ABSTRACT Micro-credentials are becoming an efficient and financially sound method of delivering skills and content knowledge to adult learners. This chapter will define micro-credentials, explore how higher education and business organizations view and utilize them, and discuss the challenges of creating and implementing them. This chapter will conclude with a description of how a small private non-profit university created several micro-credentials by adapting components of their Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s program. It will also outline the reasons behind the implementation, the research conducted to validate the change, and the process of creating the micro-credentials through template design.

INTRODUCTION Micro-credentials, also commonly known as digital badges, have become a growing instructional method in online learning. Pearson Education and UPCEA conducted a survey focused on the implementation of micro-credentials, and they found that 64% of organizations viewed micro-credentials as the future for alternative credentialing (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Micro-credentials have grown in popularity because they offer learners self-paced, student-centered, flexible, and skill-based learning experiences (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016; Gamrat, Zimmerman, Dudek, & Peck, 2014; Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). Successful completion of a micro-credential gives learners the ability to document their learned skills through digital badges that can be shared with supervisors and prospective employers (Gamrat, et al., 2014; Hurst, 2015). Higher education institutions (HEI) have started to view micro-credentials as an effective learning tool that can increase their revenue. Micro-credentials increase HIE’s revenue by DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch011

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

providing an array of cost-effective learning experiences to adult learners who are seeking additional skills but not a full degree. As faculty in a small private nonprofit university, we are expected to assist the university in increasing revenue by increasing enrollment in our programs through recruitment efforts. However, we are also encouraged to propose initiatives that may also increase revenue for the university. We had initially heard about micro-credentialing at a webinar we attended as a professional development opportunity. We allowed the idea of micro-credentialing to marinade for about an hour, and then we commenced in emailing one another concerning ways we may be able to implement them in our fully online master’s programs. Although we had an initial idea of what micro-credentialing was, we did not have a full understanding of how to design them, how it could increase our revenue, or if we would be supported by our senior leadership to embark on this new endeavor. We just knew that micro-credentialing was an innovative way to meet the needs of our university’s expectations, our adult learners’ needs, and our desire to create instruction that engages learners in a meaningful and applicable way. This chapter will define micro-credentials and explore how higher education and business organizations view and utilize them. It will also examine the challenges of creating and implementing them through the lens of an HEI. This chapter will then conclude with a description of how our small private non-profit university supported us in creating several micro-credentials through adapting components of their Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s program. It will also outline the reason behind the implementation, the research conducted to validate the change, and the process of micro-credential creation through template design.

BACKGROUND Micro-credentials have evolved since their conception. Initially, they were merely digital badges that were first established in online discussion forums and other social media platforms as a way to differentiate average users from advanced users (Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). However, their purpose has migrated beyond demonstrating differences among users into a method of demonstrating skills and abilities, thus becoming micro-credentials. This evolution of micro-credentialing now provides learners with the ability to engage in a performance-based assessment that is a less expensive and a faster method of acquiring skills than a traditional degree (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016; Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). Today micro-credentials are represented by icons or graphics that serve as digital badges to indicate that a learner has successfully completed a learning experience from an accredited institution (Kerver & Riksen, 2016). The digital badges are created through metadata (Gamrat, et al., 2014). Metadata is data connecting to other data; it is “descriptive markers placed in a stream of data, which informs a machine about contents” (Gibson et al., 2015, p. 407). The metadata has embedded markers that support the relationships between the issuer, standards, activities, artifacts created, experiences, and quality of evidence (Gamrat et al., 2014; Gibson et al., 2015). As micro-credentials are completed, based on the metadata, learners can earn a digital badge and move to the next chosen digital badge. Micro-credentials provide learners with the ability to have a large learning experience in smaller generally sequenced learning (Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). The sequencing of digital badges supports the scaffolding of skills and knowledge that related to each other (Hurst, 2015; Willcox, Sarma, & Lippel, 2016). The sequencing, however, can change based on a learner’s abilities as some micro-credentials allow learners to select their level of assessment based on different levels of achievement. Initially, learn224

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

ers can earn stamps to represent the basic understanding, and then move to earn badges that represent higher levels of understanding through an assessment that requires critical thinking, reflective practice, and real-world application (Gamrat, et al., 2014). Micro-credentials also require assessments that have external validity and reliability (Foshay & Hale, 2017). Lower level badges could be earned by the successful completion of a quiz. A higher-level badge could require a learner to demonstrate their understanding of the skills or content by connecting it to a real-world application in written or video format (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Performance-based evidence is highly regarded in micro-credentialing as it increases external validity and reliability (Foshay & Hale, 2017). Some examples of performance-based evidence include observations, a collection of work samples, and projects (Foshay & Hale, 2017). Each evidence should be coupled with a rubric as it “centers on the identification of psychologically meaningful trait[s]” (Foshay & Hale, 2017, p. 71). Offering different digital badge levels increases learner motivation by creating a gaming feel that motivates learners to pursue an award (Devedžić & Jovanović, 2015; Gibson, Ostashewski, Flintoff, Grant, & Knight, 2015; Hurst, 2015). Learners can then create a digital learning portfolio that demonstrates the skills they have acquired through micro-credentialing. The digital badges are visual representations of competency-based skills that have encoded data which clarifies the value associated with the digital badge (Devedžić & Jovanović, 2015; Dyjur & Lindstrom, 2017; Foshay & Hale, 2017; Hurst, 2015).

Micro-Credential Stakeholders To effectively create and implement micro-credentials, it is important to understand the ecosystem or stakeholders of micro-credentialing. The three main stakeholders in micro-credentials are as follows (Kerver & Riksen, 2016; Hurst, 2015): • • •

Badge Earner: (student) learners who obtain badges by demonstrating mastery of a skill(s) or competency through successful completion of assessments. Badge Issuer: (higher education institutions or companies) who create, define, revise, evaluate, authenticate, and issue the badges. Badge Consumer: (employers or higher education institutions) who assess and verify the content of the digital badges’ credibility and determine if the badges hold academic credit for their institution.

Higher education institutions (HEI) have started using micro-credentialing as a method to provide an array of cost-effective learning experiences which makes them both badge issuers and consumers (Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). HEI offers micro-credentials to foster co-curricular learning through active engagement of skills (Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). Also, they provide the necessary scaffolding of skills that prepare learners for the workplace (Willcox, Sarma, & Lippel, 2016; Zalaznick, 2017). Another reason HEI offers micro-credentialing is its ability to increase revenue. HEI such as Perdue University and Carnegie Mellon University recognizes the benefits of offering micro-credentials and have created opportunities for adult learners to earn micro-credentials (Hurst, 2015). HEI that offer micro-credentials reported that micro-credentials are responsible for 81% of their unit or enrolled user revenue (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Also, 97% of a baccalaureate college’s unit revenue comes from micro-credential course offerings which are “significantly higher than doctorate-granting universities (75%), master’s colleges or universities (77%), and community colleges (86%)” (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016, p. 7). 225

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

HEI have several options when creating revenue from micro-credentials. The University of California at Davis Extension offers “Specializations” through Coursera, a venture-backed startup that works with colleges to develop online courses. Coursera charges students $49 month to take four online courses to earn a non-credit certificate (Young, 2017). Other HEI, such as MIT, offer MicroMasters degrees through edX.org, which follows the same curriculum as an in-person master’s program but only covers 30% of that material (Young, 2017). MIT charges students in the MicroMasters regular tuition for five courses plus $1,000 in fees (Young, 2017). The University of Buffalo also offers micro-credentialing and charges for 11 credits with no cost beyond their regular tuition rates (Office of Micro-Credentials, n.d.). HEI are also offering micro-credentials to businesses to “re-skill,” upskill, or career-shift” which also increases revenue (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). In fact, job recruiters prefer to see micro-credentials from universities versus skill-building websites (Zalaznick, 2017). Many HEI, unfortunately, are not seeing the benefit in revenue due to micro-credentialing as only one in five higher education institutions currently offer micro-credentialing (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Research suggests that 26% of baccalaureate colleges and only 12% of master’s institutions offer them (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Also, 23% of public institutions offered micro-credentials, while only nine percent of private institutions offered them (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Increasing revenue is important to HEI, but so is providing students with an exceptional academic experience that prepares them for the real world. As higher education institutions create more micro-credential opportunities, so are professional organizations. Global businesses such as IBM, Microsoft, Oracle, AICPA, GED, AHIMA are embracing micro-credentials, and millions of badges have been earned in more than 120 countries as a result (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). In addition to business organizations using micro-credentials, so are healthcare professionals, military services, and advanced manufacturing (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016; Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). Micro-credentials with a performance-based assessment are highly recognized because they support job-embedded training (Foshay & Hale, 2017). Professional organizations view micro-credential opportunities as easier and more efficient in the professional realm. The reason for this is because their “professionally-focused learning goals require smaller, simpler, more applied learning programs that are shaped by industry need, less expensive than degrees, and sometimes smaller than courses” (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016, p. 3). Also, microcredentialing in professional organizations provides learners with the ability to learn and develop skills that can span across professional networks and positions (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Understanding the stakeholders is key, but it is also important to differentiate micro-credentials from certifications as there are distinctions between credentials such as certifications, certificates, and microcredentials. Certifications are earned after a learner completes an assessment, which could be a test, portfolio, or demonstration of knowledge in a controlled condition that is often connected to a practice of study or job (Foshay & Hale, 2017). Once certification is earned, it has a time-limit in remaining valid, and learners must complete additional education or reassessment to renew the certification (Foshay & Hale, 2017). Certificates do develop skills through formal study, but they do not require formal assessments. A certificate is less rigorous, not time-limited, and flexible, and it generally promotes “comprehension or compliance by conveying rules, principles, procedures, and facts” as a training tool (Foshay & Hale, 2017, p.73). Micro-credentials are a combination of certification and certificates because they adhere to certification standards, promote comprehension, and are not time-limited, but micro-credentials also promote comprehension through learning outcomes that are performance-based. Performance-based learning 226

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

assesses competencies as well as learners’ skills, knowledge, and attitude which models competencies in real-world situations (Foshay & Hale, 2017). A micro-credential develops and recognizes job affiliated tasks that are recommended, and they require an assessment that is aligned with a learning objective or performance. Understanding the differences between certifications, certificates, and micro-credentials is important, but also having an understanding of the differences between Open Badges and micro-credentials is pivotal. Open Badges include standards for implementation and documentation of completing a learning experience similar to micro-credentials and has an image file with embedded information that can be shared across the web (Grant, 2014; Hurst, 2015; Leaser, 2016). However, Open Badges are generally supported by community conversations and open educational resources that allow users to exchange and share experiences at any time (Grant, 2014; Hurst, 2015). Open Badge are supported by Open Badge Infrastructure which was created by Mozilla, and it is an open source that allows anyone to develop open badges (Devedžić & Jovanović, 2015; Grant, 2014; Hurst, 2015; Wu, Whiteley, & Sass, 2015). In addition, Open Badges were not designed to serve as mini certifications because learners can earn badges from various organizations (Kerver & Riksen, 2016; Leaser, 2016).

Challenges of Implementing Micro-credentials Although it may seem simple to design and implement micro-credentials, the process has its challenges. One challenge is the implementation and application of the digital badges as badge issuers need to have badge consumers that have formal accreditation. Formal accreditation requires validity and reliability connected to the learning outcomes, activities that engage badge learners with the content, and assessment alignment (Acree, 2016; Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016). Badge issuers need to make sure they have experts in aligning these components as well as providing customized support to badge earners (Gamrat, et al., 2014). Also, badge issuers need to have the technical programming knowledge to make sure metadata is programmed properly (Hurst, 2015). After micro-credentials are programmed, badge issuers must consistently maintain the design quality and validity of the digital badges; they must also continually revise the digital badges to meet badge earners’ needs which is time-consuming. (Fong, Janzow, & Peck, 2016; Foshay & Hale, 2016). Another challenge with micro-credentials is the badge earners’ perception of credibility. Badge issuers can increase credibility by providing a clear structure of the badging to badge earners. Transparency of the following is needed to ensure credibility (Acree, 2016; Davis & Singh, 2015): • • • • •

know the identity of the badge issuer, know what the micro-credential measures, understand what they must do to earn the micro-credential, know how to submit all the necessary materials to earn the micro-credential, and receive feedback and know why they did or did not earn a micro-credential.

Badge earners also question the credibility of micro-credentials based on the design of the digital badges. Badge issuers need to make sure the design of the digital badge is credible and not simplistic or juvenile because badge earners view simplistic digital badges as less credible (Dyjur & Lindstrom, 2017). Digital badge design is important, but so is making sure the digital badges are accessible to badge earners upon completion of the micro-credential. Badge issuers need to make sure the digital badges are 227

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

not directly connected to the badge issuers’ organization (Dyjur & Lindstrom, 2017). For example, if a badge issuer is an HEI, the badges should not be tied to the HEI email because upon leaving the HEI the email address may not remain active for the badge earner. Badge issuers also need to make sure the “badging platform allows for some user flexibility and control, including downloading a file and printing a certificate, sharing through social media, adding them to professional networking sites, and activating or hiding individual badges” (Dyjur & Lindstrom, 2017, p. 391). Micro-credentials are an effective and efficient learning experience that connects skills and content knowledge to real-world applications. Micro-credentials offer digital badge earners flexible and costefficient learning. Although it may seem easy to design, develop, and implement micro-credentials that are credible and valid, badge issuers need to have a clear understanding of the challenges. If badge issuers and consumers can address those challenges to offer micro-credentialing at affordable prices, they have the opportunity to increase revenue and offer quality learning experiences globally.

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER Innovative Methods to Address Enrollment Challenge As a small private nonprofit university, one aspect of our faculty position is to make sure we have the preferred number of students enrolled in our programs to meet our load requirements. A challenge we faced with our Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s program was low enrollment resulting in less revenue for the university. We wanted to address this issue as we felt the program itself had substantial potential. Initially, the program targeted those working in the K-12 and higher education settings, but we felt that there was a larger need to help nonprofits and businesses create online training. After much discussion, we decided to consider an alternative route. Both of us had heard of micro-credentialing and wanted to explore its possibilities. In particular, we wanted to determine how a micro-credentialing approach might help us tweak components in our fully online master’s program and provide credentials to adult learners in the business, nonprofit, and higher education world. We reviewed all the learning objectives for our current Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s program to determine which ones have performance-based assessments, and we concluded that there were multiple learning objectives that would assist adult learners in properly evaluating their organizations’ eLearning needs to design, develop, and implement online training.

Proposal to Senior Leadership Program or curriculum changes often require approval from senior leadership within the university, and they require data and a research-based rationale detailing the reason for the change. Before we proposed the change to our leadership, we first conducted a literature review to make sure we clearly understood micro-credentials, and how to create them. The literature review also allowed us to determine if microcredentialing could generate revenue for the university. We used the literature review to build the case for micro-credentialing with our senior leadership. In addition to the literature review, we used two methods of data collection to help inform our decisions: (1) an online questionnaire emailed to contacts from university business and nonprofit partners and (2) a series of virtual interviews with program graduates and instructional designers. 228

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

Online Questionnaire The 12-item researcher-developed questionnaire contained five items addressing employee demographics, personal interests, and eight organization/industry-specific questions exploring the use of and interest in face-to-face and online training. We emailed the questionnaire link to 153 employees of local nonprofits and businesses culled from a university partnership list, as well as personal “tickler” lists from several faculty members, a convenience sample. Twenty-three emails bounced back, and we sent an email reminder two weeks after the initial invitation to participate as limited responses were aquired. The final response rate was very low (eight percent with 11 responses), a definite limitation to the study. Since this was serving as a needs assessment with results being used to inform program development, we decided the response rate would be acceptable despite not being what we desired. We informed respondents that responses would be used for program development needs only, thus maintaining their anonymity. Due to the small response rate, results are presented in percentages. Selected results follow. Twenty-seven percent of respondents had completed a bachelor’s degree, as compared to 64% with an earned master’s degree and nine percent with a doctorate degree. Thirty-six percent self-identified as upper management, 27% worked in human resources, and 18% were in middle management, with the remainder evenly split between junior management and directors. Respondents primarily worked in non-profit (54.5%), followed by business (27.3%) and government (18.2%). Almost all (91%) of these organizations provided some form of training for employees or customers. Twenty-seven percent of organization/industry respondents reported providing only face-to-face training with the overwhelming majority (74%) providing both online and face-to-face training. Seventy-four percent of respondents were highly involved in planning training for their organizations, and almost 55% were actual training providers. Over half (54.5%) provide training on a weekly basis with over a third (36%) providing training monthly or on-demand.

Virtual Interviews To explore the topic in more depth, we conducted four virtual interviews with a program graduate, higher education instructors who teach online, and an instructional designer. As with the questionnaire, we used a convenience sampling approach to identify interviewees, making sure we included folks working in business, higher education, and non-profit sectors. Most respondents were serving as instructional designers, with a few online faculty members included. We designed a semi-structured 13-question interview guide to help us more easily compare interviewee responses. The guide contained a variety of question types: four demographic questions, five open-ended questions, and four closed-ended questions with all questions exploring the interviewees’ view on micro-credentialing, job preparation, and instructional designer competencies. Prior to the interview, each interviewee received a description of the proposed micro-credential outline and the proposed competencies. During the interviews, we kept comprehensive notes, allowing us to perform a content analysis to identify several overarching themes. One major theme that arose from the responses was the need for increased skill readiness, with management competencies as essential. Additional themes focused on the need for a variety of additional skills, including LMS coding, audience analysis, assessment, and providing feedback. Interviewees also strongly urged us to continue offering a master’s degree in addition to micro-credentials as the degree is used to obtain a job, and micro-credentials are used to enhance job skills once hired. All interviewees 229

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

believed that the micro-credentials in online design would greatly benefit faculty in higher education who do not have formal degrees in instructional design or eLearning.

Discussion of Results Our findings suggest that micro-credentialing would serve well as an adjunct to a master’s degree program, not as a replacement for one. A master’s degree is still necessary to obtain employment, but micro-credentials could be used to enhance skills for those working in the field. We also discovered that those who are not instructional designers need training in creating effective online training. However, the findings also showed that micro-credentials could not stand alone for those looking for an online instructional design position. The findings also suggested that the micro-credentials would be beneficial for higher education professors and human resources officers in learning how to design effective online courses and training.

Next steps We then presented our literature review and findings to senior leadership to validate our request for the creation of micro-credentialing. In addition, we presented our proposed micro-credential offering based on the Master of Science in Online Teaching and Instructional Design (OTID) requirements. We titled it Instructional Design for Nonprofit and Business Training Micrograd and offered it as micro-credentials for nonprofit and business trainers. Our findings helped us support the idea that advanced training can help organizations succeed in developing the in-demand training skills needed in a digital world, and individuals enrolled in this micro-credential program will learn key concepts and practical skills to build a career in designing interactive online training. The key learning objectives of the micro-credentials that we presented to senior leadership were as follows: • • • • • • •

Assessing training needs through surveys, interviews with employees or consulting with managers or instructors. Designing and creating training manuals, online training modules, and course materials. Reviewing training materials from a variety of sources and choosing appropriate materials. Delivering training to employees using a variety of instructional methods. Assisting in the evaluation of training programs. Performing administrative tasks such as monitoring cost, scheduling classes, setting up systems and equipment, and coordinating enrollment. Using technology to enhance learning and engage learners.

We also proposed that participants in the Instructional Design for Nonprofit and Business Training Micrograd program can build on this credential by using it as an entry pathway into the Master of Science in Online Teaching and Instructional Design. We suggested offering open enrollment on a monthly basis for a monthly fee, which we believed better-allowed badge earners to control their finances and time. The offering would allow badge earners to complete the micro-credentials at their own pace. Thankfully, our leadership found value in the creation and implementation of micro-credentialing by supporting us in redesigning components of our OTID program into four micro-credential blocks. We were each given a course release in the spring to work on the designing of these blocks. 230

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

THE DESIGN PROCESS Designed Credentials to Support OITD Outcomes The ability to redesign portions of a program into micro-credentials required us to design a crosswalk or table that aligned the current program objectives with a redesign that supported micro-credentialing. We identified the program competencies and course competencies from four OTID courses that we believed should serve as the basis for the micro-credentials, keeping in mind the needs of training designers in the non-profit and business sectors. Implementing backward design, we determined the specific learning objectives that supported the course competencies as a basis for each micro-credential. We then constructed a template, informed by our literature review, that would guide us in designing our micro-credentials. We believed a template was necessary because our LMS, Canvas, provides a blank format for designing learning experiences, and we wanted badge earners to clearly understand the learning outcomes, how they support program goals, the process of gaining information to support the learning outcome, and the task they would need to complete to earn the micro-credential. Also, the template provided consistency among all are micro-credentials. Figure 1 is the basic template design we used to create each micro-credential. Table 1. Template created by Rottmann and Duggan for micro-credentials. Learning Objective: Program Goals: In this module, you will gain a……. Step 1: Step 2: Step 3: Tasks 1.

After we decided on the template, we determined that each of us had the expertise to support the different learning objectives which allowed us to easily allocate who designed what micro-credential. Our university provided us with a Sandbox course in Canvas, so we could work on the design. During the design process, we agreed that each “Step” and “Task” in the template would hyperlink to corresponding pages in Canvas to allow badge earners to access each component of the micro-credentials easily. We also agreed to continually communicate with each other regularly for instructional support and accountability.

Blocks, Modules, Stamps, and Badges After considering learning outcomes and the framework, we then began designing the actual microcredentialing blocks, keeping in mind the importance of scaffolding of knowledge and skills. We decided to offer four blocks of stacked content: Block 1: The Adult Learner, Block 2: Tech Trends, Block 3: Best Practices, and Block 4: Program Design. Once we had the four micro-credential topics selected, we began to design, keeping in the mind the following parameters:

231

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

• • • • • •

Micro-credentials are the acquisition of small units of learning, skills or competencies which have a distinct value in the workforce or for professional needs. Learners needed a stacked system of learning that allowed learners to build on their skill sets, requiring them to master each block of content before beginning the following block. Adult learners often already possess skills and need the option to demonstrate prior skills and learning achievement from work or life experience Tasks should be performance-based, preferably something that learners can use immediately in the workplace. Blocks and modules should model best practices of instructional design. These are not graduate-level courses. They are professional development training.

The last item mentioned was the one we had to keep foremost in our minds. These micro-credentials themselves did not have to meet graduate-level rigor, but they did have to be smooth flowing and entirely asynchronous, allowing learners to complete them at their own pace. The micro-credentials begin with a required Onboarding module that contains a video overview of the program and a screen capture video demonstrating movement through the training. This module had to later be revised to include a video explanation of how to obtain graduate-level credit for those who might decide to pursue a degree option later. Once the Onboarding module was successfully completed, the opening module for the first micro-credential block (The Adult Learner) opened. Each micro-credential block housed several modules, and each module supported a different learning outcome. Also, each module served as a prerequisite to the next module, with modules “opening” only upon successful completion of a score of 85% for the previous module. As learners completed each module, they were awarded a “stamp” as motivation, allowing them to earn four stamps in block one: The Adult Learner. Once they successfully completed the entire micro-credential block by earning at least an 85% on all items, learners earned a digital badge for the entire block. At that time, the next block opened, again, one module at a time with learners earning stamps along the way to their micro-credential badges. In the end, learners will have collected a total of 19 stamps and four digital badges, with each badge representing a micro-credential. Learners are able to share their stamps and badges electronically through LinkedIn and on their resumes as they were created with Badgr, an add-on to Canvas. Employers are able to scan stamps and badges to determine the skills and competencies the employee demonstrated. Learners are also able to print out a certificate of completion attesting to their having completed each micro-credential block with a score of at least 85%.

Peer Review of the Design Upon the design completion of our allocated micro-credentials, we reached out to our peers in the College of Education for review. The peer evaluation allowed us to establish reliability, confirm that our design was user-friendly, and determine that the competency-based tasks were valid. To accurately validate the appropriateness of the new design, we asked our peers to complete a survey concerning the design. Four of our colleagues agreed to participate in the trial run, and 100% of our colleagues had prior training in online course design. However, only 75% had ever taught online courses. All of our peers indicated that the flow and layout of the micro-credentials were easy-to-navigate, well-prepared, and included multiple types of media. They also expressed that the micro-credential design had academic rigor. One

232

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

colleague, however, suggested that the “assignments could go beyond application... students are creating and reflecting, but I do not see much evidence of analysis, synthesis, or evaluation.”

Challenges/Limitations As with any redesign, a variety of challenges have surfaced in implementing the micro-credentialing process, predominantly from areas outside of the designers’ control. Procedural issues surfaced first. We needed an online application process specific to this program that allowed Enrollment Management personnel to track these students, IT to generate an email account, and the Registrar to enroll them into our Canvas LMS. Another application procedural issue sprang from the flexibility we designed into the micro-credentialing program. Because the micro-credentials were designed for returning adults currently working in a similar area, we decided to open the micro-credentials to anyone who was interested, whatever their background. No transcripts, no letters of recommendation, only a brief online application would be required. This admissions procedure differed greatly from that of the other university programs, requiring a new approach. We also wanted to build in an option that allowed the flexibility for those who, once immersed in the micro-credentials, decided to apply to enter the graduate degree program in Online Teaching and Instructional Design to earn graduate-level credit for the work they had completed. This required us to design a bridge or an additional step for those learners to complete an applied supervised research project in each of the four blocks to receiving graduate-level credit. This bridge had to meet our regional accrediting agency’s requirements and graduate-level rigor, and these bridge students would have to also meet graduate-level admission requirements. Videos had to be created to explain this process as part of the on-boarding process of each block, with students being able to apply for grad school at any time, triggering the designers to create and supervise the bridge tasks once the student was admitted as a graduate student. A second challenge was software related. Admissions criteria for the micro-credentials differed greatly from that of the typical degree-seeking student. No transcripts were required to begin the microcredentials, and learners would not qualify for financial aid. Our current software was not set up for this option. The Admissions Office lacked the software necessary to automatically enroll learners during the “off-season” of enrollment. This software issue also impacted the Finance Office who needed the ability to bill students monthly instead of the more traditional beginning of each semester. Although there is a plug-in for our current software that would allow for these functions (at an additional cost to the University), we did not yet have that capability. Another challenge was workload related. The Admissions and the Registrar’s offices decided that one individual from each office would be tasked with admitting and enrolling learners each month. The designers, however, were required to check applications and inform an assigned graduate enrollment officer and a registrar’s office representative that all admission requirements were met. A related issue concerned faculty as we tried to determine how this approach would impact workload and how to assign faculty with the proper content knowledge to supervise and facilitate these micro-credentials. In addition to the challenge of learner admission, enrollment, billing, and workload, marketing the micro-credentials has also been challenging. The university has established methods of marketing to help “sell” degree programs to specific target audiences, including undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral students. However, marketing micro-credentials requires a different approach because it is not a degree program, it has no admissions requirements, it requires monthly payments, and it focuses on adult learning 233

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

to enhance workplace skills. The target audience of adult learners, which are generally graduate students, differs from the graduate population, and the normal marketing approaches required some adjustments. At this time, the designers and enrollment management personnel are marketing the program through email blasts, Facebook, and visits to local business and non-profit worksites. Benefits have also surfaced from designing this new approach. Interviews with program graduates and those working in instructional design afforded us an opportunity to reassess the current program and make curricular changes to the master’s degree while designing the micro-credentials. The tight design of the micro-credentials allowed the designers to really focus on the exact skills needed, helping us to strengthen our own instructional design. Support from the University provided release time to use for design work, allowing the designers to equitably split the design load. Having two of us to agree on a template then work independently allowed us to peer review, always a positive in instructional design. Our colleagues who reviewed our work have also been supportive, helping us to spread the word about micro-credentialing. Also, it was an initiative that senior leadership clearly supported. We simply could not have designed these blocks of micro-credentials without their support.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Micro-credentialing is a non-traditional educational practice that some academicians question. However, societal trends and needs are changing, and higher education institutions need to change to meet the needs of the current workforce. An area for future research should center on collecting data to determine how many badge earners bridge into master’s degree programs. Another future research opportunity is a further exploration concerning the future application of micro-credentials in higher education, particularly the opportunity to provide micro-credentials on a variety of topics. For example, a micro-credential in Gamification for Business and Education could focus on the basics of gamification in business and education through the lens of a computer game. This gamified learning area is a space that takes game mechanics, strategies, and theories, and applies them to developing a gamified solution to a business or education problem gamification. Another future research topic concerning micro-credential might focus on how to design microcredentials themselves, focusing on effective design for use in business and nonprofit organizations. A multimedia design and instruction micro-credential could explore multimedia design principles, and their use to create effective online design content. An introduction to project management micro-credential could explore project management, its relationship to other management disciplines, and the role of the project manager. Students will learn project management processes and the inputs and outputs of project management knowledge areas and will understand the relationships among project management processes and knowledge areas, to include communication skills and stakeholder analysis. The instructional design would not be the only area to provide micro-credentialing opportunities. A series of micro-credentials in fundraising could provide non-profits with affordable training in raising funds and grant writing for nonprofit organizations, capital campaigns, individual fundraising, and financial management for nonprofits. Professional development in virtually any profession could be micro-credentialed, but further research needs to be conducted to determine which topics are needed.

234

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

CONCLUSION Micro-credentialing provides adult learners the ability to develop skills and knowledge that directly relate to their workplace or interests without the constraints of traditional educational pathways. As the cost of a university education continues to soar, resulting in an ever-increasing debt, micro-credentials may well provide an alternative pathway to job success and professional development as well as increase revenue for HEI. The need for university degrees will not vanish, but micro-credentials can meet a specialized need in the workforce. Our decision to explore micro-credentials was initially to respond to the need to increase student enrollment within our Online Teaching and Instructional Design Master’s Program. However, the process of researching and creating micro-credentialing provided us with a new insight on how to better design our traditional courses. We have taken components of micro-credentialing, designing with a template, clear learning objectives, and performance-based assessments and included them into our traditional graduate courses. These inclusions to our traditional courses, may at some point, allow us to create micro-credentials in an easier and efficient way because micro-credentialing, we believe, is not going away, and we are preparing for our future learners/badge earners.

REFERENCES Acree, L. (2016). Seven lessons learned from implementing micro-credentials. Research Associate at The Friday Institute for Educational Innovation. http://www.nysed.gov/ common /nysed/files/principalproject-phase-2-seven-lessons-abo-implementing-microcredentials-lauren-acree.pdf Davis, K., & Singh, S. (2015). Digital badges in afterschool learning: Documenting the perspectives and experiences of students and educators. Computers & Education, 88, 72–83. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2015.04.011 Devedžić, V., & Jovanović, J. (2015). Developing open badges: A comprehensive approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(4), 603–620. doi:10.100711423-015-9388-3 Dyjur, P., & Lindstrom, G. (2017). Perceptions and uses of digital badges for professional learning development in higher education. TechTrends, 61(4), 386–392. doi:10.100711528-017-0168-2 Fong, J., Janzow, P., & Peck, K. (2016). Demographic shifts in educational demand and the rise of alternative credentials. https://upcea.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Demographic-Shifts-in-EducationalDemand-and-the-Rise-of-Alternative-Credentials.pdf Foshay, W. R., & Hale, J. (2017). Application of principles of performance-based assessment to corporate certifications. TechTrends, 61(1), 71–76. doi:10.100711528-016-0125-5 Gamrat, C., Zimmerman, H. T., Dudek, J., & Peck, K. (2014). Personalized workplace learning: An exploratory study on digital badging within a teacher professional development program. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(6), 1136–1148. doi:10.1111/bjet.12200 Gibson, D., Ostashewski, N., Flintoff, K., Grant, S., & Knight, E. (2015). Digital badges in education. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 403–410. doi:10.100710639-013-9291-7

235

 Micro-Credentials in Higher Education

Grant, S. (2014). What counts as learning: Open digital badges for new opportunities. In The Digital Media and Learning Research Hub report series on connected learning. Hurst, E. J. (2015). Digital badges: Beyond learning incentives. Journal of Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 12(3), 182–189. doi:10.1080/15424065.2015.1065661 Kerver, B., & Riksen, D. (2016). Whitepaper on open badges and micro-credentials. https://www.surf.nl/ binaries/content/assets/surf/en/knowledgebase/ 2016/whitepaper-on-open-badges-en-micro-credentials. pdf Leaser, D. (2016, May 6). Open badges vs. certifications: Is there a battle brewing in the IT credential market? [Blog post]. https://www.ibm.com/blogs/ibm-training/open-badges-vs-certifications-is-therea-battle-brewing-in-the-it-credential-market/ Office of Micro-Credentials. (n.d.). About micro-credentials. University at Buffalo website: https://www. buffalo.edu/micro-credentials/about.html Willcox, K., Sarma, S., & Lippel, P. (2016). Online education: A catalyst for higher education reform. MIT. Wu, M., Whiteley, D., & Sass, M. (2015). From girl scout to grown up: Emerging applications of digital badges in higher education. The Online Journal of Distance Education and E-Learning, 3(2), 48-52. Young, J. (2017, October 5). More colleges are offering microcredentials—and developing them the way businesses make new products [Blog post]. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/201710-05-more-colleges-are-offering-microcredentials-and-developing-them-the-way-businesses-makenew-products Zalaznick, M. (2017). Badging breakthroughs: Micro-credentials awarded for in-demand skills give employers deeper detail about a student’s abilities. Retrieved from https://www.universitybusiness.com/ article/badging-breakthroughs

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Badge Consumer: (Employers or higher education institutions) Who assess and verify the content of the digital badges’ credibility and determine if the badges hold academic credit for their institution. Badge Earner: (Student) Learners who obtain badges by demonstrating mastery of a skill(s) or competency through successful completion of assessments. Badge Issuer: (Higher education institutions or companies) Who create, define, revise, evaluate, authenticate, and issue the badges. Digital Badge: An online image created with metadata to validate the accomplishment of a specific skill or knowledge. Micro-Credentials: Online instructional learning design that is learning objective focused on specific skills that provide learners a self-paced, performance-based learning experience. Scaffolding: Designing a curriculum or learning pathway that moves students progressively towards a stronger understanding of content and independence in the learning process.

236

237

Chapter 12

Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games Khalifa Alshaya https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0164-1040 University of North Dakota, USA Pamela Beck University of North Dakota, USA

ABSTRACT This qualitative study explored the perceived challenges ELL teachers encounter when using and implementing digital games as educational tools. Six ELL teachers were interviewed, and a phenomenological lens was used to analyze the data. The synthesis of textural and structural meanings and essences as a last step of phenomenological data analysis lead to two major findings of ELL teachers’ experiences with digital games: logistical and pedagogical. The findings indicate that there is a lack of resources, support, time, and overwhelming choices that characterize the logistical challenges. On the other hand, ELL teachers teaching philosophy, curriculum, and training highlights the pedagogical challenge of incorporating digital games.

INTRODUCTION The use of technology in the classroom has grown more popular in recent years. Unlike in the past, where teachers provided instructions without much concern for technology, they are now expected to integrate technology in their teaching and learning as early as kindergarten. The increased use of technology in the classroom has resulted from overwhelming evidence that technology facilitates learning (Fichten, Jorgensen, Havel, King, Lussier, Asuncion, & Amsel, 2018; Kulik, 1994; Liao, 1992; Ryan, 1991; Tay, 2016). Accreditors recognize the role of technology in teacher preparation programs through standards, such as the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Standard 1.5:

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch012

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

Providers ensure that candidates model and apply technology standards as they design, implement and assess learning experiences to engage students and improve learning; and enrich professional practice. (CAEP, 2018) Language classes are among the beneficiaries of the use of technology in facilitating the learning process. In particular, digital games have a track record in improving the cognitive, motivational, emotional, and social development of learners (Gee, 2003; Granic, Lobel, & Engels, 2014; Griffiths, 2002; Primack et al., 2012). Apart from improving the learning of language skills by learners, technology has the potential to improve teachers’ teaching. English Language Learner (ELL) teachers can make learning interesting by incorporating technology in their practice (Ahmadi, 2018). If properly used, technology can help to improve teaching and learning in the classroom. Digital games are arguably among the most valuable components of ELL classes, as they increase confidence and motivation while lowering anxiety about learning English (Horowitz, 2019; Iaremenko, 2017; Reinders & Wattana, 2015; Vosburg, 2017). When students play a digital game, they remember faster, better, and with more understanding, because they are “using” the language, rather than “thinking” about whether they are saying words and phrases correctly. It has been suggested that digital games should occupy a central role in language teaching programs, as opposed to the peripheral role that they are often reserved. Digital games are fun and interactive, which makes them a learner-centered approach to language learning (Gozcu & Caganaga, 2016). For any teaching approach in ELL classes to be highly effective, teachers need to possess the required pedagogical and content skills. Teachers often lack the necessary technical knowledge, and in many cases, the personal desire to play a digital game, let alone incorporate it in their teaching (Caldwell, Osterweil, Urbano, Tan, & Eberhardt, 2017; Dickey, 2015; Gerber & Price, 2013; Mifsud, Vella & Camilleri, 2013; Sáez-López, Miller, Vázquez-Cano & Domínguez-Garrido, 2015). In most cases, digital games require a certain level of technical skills for a player to participate. Teachers must possess the necessary skills with the digital games if they are to provide effective instruction to students (Reinders, 2017). Additionally, when teachers are unfamiliar with digital games, they tend to lack the critically important support. When teachers have low digital literacy skills, it impedes their use of this approach. The National Educational Technology Plan (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology, 2017) emphasized the need to improve teachers’ digital literacy, recommending that teacher education programs “provide pre-service and in-service educators with professional learning experiences powered by technology to increase their digital literacy and enable them to create compelling learning activities that improve learning and teaching, assessment, and instructional practices.” (p. 40) While these teachers are interested in integrating digital games, they are not as enthusiastic as the learners due to the generational divide. In other cases, they are worried about how to implement digital games in the classroom due to the pedagogical and technical constraints involved (Alyaz & Sinem, 2016). This phenomenological study highlights the barriers facing ELL teachers that want to use digital games. The study highlighted challenges related to two main dimensions: logistical and pedagogical. The logistical dimension examined how the implementation of digital games could be impossible when an ELL teacher does not have the hardware, software, and/or school support. In addition, the study explored ELL teachers’ pedagogical beliefs about the role of digital games.

238

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

LITERATURE REVIEW Digital Games and Education Digital games have been around for a little over 40 years (Squire, 2003). The ‘net generation’ that describes the student population today, as mentioned by Annetta, (2008), live in media saturated environments. Digital games are designed not only to be played, but also “they are talked about, read about, fantasized about, cheated at, [and] altered…” (Annetta, 2008, p. 230). As a result, digital games are a cultural phenomenon that is the reality of many children in the United States and around the world. According to Kafai (2006), when talking about digital games as instructional tools, educators are divided into two camps - Instructionist and Constructionist Perspectives. The instructionist perspective refers to “thinking in terms of making instructional educational materials, turn naturally to the concept of designing instructional games” (Kafai, 2006, p. 37). Teachers who carry an instructionist prespective do not need digital games to teach what they otherwise can do on their own. On the other hand, constructionist perspective means that instead of embedding lessons into digital games, the goal is to provide opportunities for students to construct their own games, which leads to new construction of knowledge in the process (Kafai, 2006). Thus, a constructionist perspective frames the literature review.

Digital Games in the Classroom De Aguilera and Mendiz (2003) found that classroom learning in different disciplines turned into collaborative, interactive, scaffolded, and intellectually rich experiences when technology was introduced. The enhanced learning experience occurred because gaming supported and accelerated the students’ language development and content learning. Educators are interested in engaging students in high quality behaviors and experiences founded on the content learning processes. With the content learning tasks, the processes become collaborative, interactive, and intellectually rich, which encourages curiosity and critical thinking among learners. To this effect, students benefit from authentic disciplinary learning and language development. Furthermore, the classroom learning should create opportunities for students to write and talk, including collaborative conversations related to complex texts, academic concepts, and the way language can be meaningful for learning disciplinary language and contents. The use of English is emphasized to promote deep learning. Digital games used for instructional purposes have grown in popularity in recent years. Charsky and Mims (2008) demonstrated how integrating commercial, off-the-shelf (COTS) digital games in curriculum has numerous benefits. They start by defining games as “playful activities, with or without a computer, that have some essential characteristics” (Charsky & Mims, 2008, p. 38). These characteristics are competition, goals, game rules, challenging activities, choices, and fantasy elements. The efforts to create DGBL environments through the utilization of COTS digital games is becoming a tenable and valuable instructional strategy. Miller, Robertson, Hudson, and Shimi (2012) also studied the role of COTS game-based learning in the early years of a child’s education, such as the link between DGBL and early-years pedagogy. Similar to other researchers, Miller et al. (2012) reaffirmed the congruence between signature pedagogy and games in education. The new information technologies have thus transformed the learning processes, because students have benefited from the pedagogical skills. COTS digital games have become a critical tool in achieving higher-order and content-based learning outcomes. Real-world classrooms have made it difficult for learners to achieve educational outcomes 239

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

by promoting critical thinking and problem-solving strategies in public education. Van Eck (2009) examined the successful integration of digital games in classrooms and discussed the use of COTS digital games in modern classrooms where implementation requires the instructors and learners to understand the relevancy of digital games in the classroom settings.

Teacher Preparedness As with every aspect of teaching and learning, teachers’ training and professional development play a central role in shaping their pedagogy. For teachers to use digital games effectively and appropriately, teacher educators need to consider them as valid learning tools. If a teacher is not comfortable working with technology, digital games will not integrate seamlessly into instruction and students will sense a lack of continuity to the lessons (Wu, 2018). Conversely, when teachers regularly include technology in their instruction with a pedagogical approach that honors the use of such devices, the use of digital games will be appropriate and successful, in conjunction with other types of instruction (Chapelle, 2017). As shown in the Southgate et al., (2017) framework, teachers are at the center, and the existing sequence of lessons includes how that integration will be reflected on as a whole class, small group, and individual students. The role teachers play before, during, and after implementing a digital game is critical (Goldin & Katz, 2018). While it is important that the digital game aligns with the pedagogical practices and beliefs of the instructor, it is also critical that it be appropriate to the standards and curriculum being addressed in the classroom (Chapelle, 2017). Particularly in classes designed to support second language (L2) learners, this is a key element in determining the appropriateness of games to support instruction (Huizenga, Ten Dam, Voogt, & Admiraal, 2017). Considering the elements of the digital game and how they align with the classroom curriculum on its own is not enough; digital games should present a unique element that enhances the curriculum (Southgate et al., 2017). According to Darling-Hammond and Bransford (2007), teachers need to be willing to adapt to the rapidly changing world by consistently understanding and interpreting the needs of their students. Teachers must consider whether digital games affords learners the opportunity to create knowledge that complements and enhances the standard course materials in the classroom (Southgate et al., 2017). Technology has influenced teaching and learning in a drastic way. It has transformed the way teachers deliver instruction, leading to improved student performance and achievement (Fichten et al., 2018; Tay, 2016). Not all digital games, especially COTS digital games, should be used in every classroom or with every student, but when conditions are met, they can be a great addition to students’ learning. Even though most teachers feel somewhat prepared to utilize digital tools to enhance their teaching, they do not feel prepared to use digital games in the classroom, and in many cases, they have minimal professional development once they are practicing teachers (Chandler, 2013; Karadag, 2015; Millstone, 2012; Yilmaz Ince & Demirbilek, 2013). The literature review also revealed that it is important that teachers understand the relevance of digital games in the learning process; yet, challenges exist when introducing digital games into the classroom.

240

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

METHODOLOGY Study Design Phenomenology, the essence of a person’s lived experience, was chosen for a realistic feel of the world obtained in situations where experience cannot be expressed in numerical form, thus promoting insight, discovery, and interpretation (Creswell, 2011; Merriam, 1998). Husserl (1931) explains phenomenology by “set[ing] aside all previous habits of thought, see through and break down the mental barriers which these habits have set along the horizons of our thinking ... to learn to see what stands before our eyes” (p. 43). My intention during this research study was to seek the essence of ELL teachers’ perceptions and lived experiences towards digital games. At the core of phenomenology is to acquire a holistic view of the meanings (Creswell, 1998) of ELL teachers’ experience or essence (Moustakas, 1994). The ‘essence of something’ opens a window into the social phenomenon of ELL teachers’ perceptions of digital games in which my role is to seek the implicit structure and meaning of such experiences. The Framework to Guide Teachers in Using Serious Games in K-12 Classrooms outlines a protocol through five domains that include teacher’s pedagogy, the learner, assessment, technical context, and the curriculum. Therefore, this framework will be utilized as the parameter of this study (Southgate et al., 2017).

Participants Six K-12 ELL teachers from two school districts agreed to take part in this study all of which are females and Caucasian. All were from two towns that is divided by a state line making them two independent cities in the upper Midwest of the United States. Two participants were from the Urbanized Area of the west side of the city who both teach in the same middle school. The other four are from the Urban Cluster of the east side and are the entirety of ELL teachers in their district. The United States Census defines Urbanized Areas (UAs) of 50,000 or more people; and Urban Clusters (UCs) of at least 2,500 and less than 50,000 people (US Census Bureau). Their teaching experiences vary widely from being a first-year teacher to a 20-year veteran. Their educational backgrounds also vary, the majority having a master’s degree with the exception of one participant, Suzy. They each chose a pseudonym to ensure confidentiality.

Data Sources and Analysis For each participant, a series of two interviews was the main source of data. The first interview utilized a semi-structured interview guide, while the second interview was developed from the transcripts of the first interview to probe for more elaboration and clarification. Each interview was recorded using an iPhone 8 Plus Voice Memos app and transcribed using Otter.ai and proofed by the main researcher. Each interview was transcribed and was read repeatedly by intuitive and reflective introspection (Moustakas,1994). Open coding to follow putting categories with similar themes together with each being labeled according to the common characteristics of the units of meaning within the group. Data analysis included member checks and memoing.

241

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

Table 1. Teachers’ synopsis Name Suzy

Location Urban Cluster

Grade level

Education

K-2

Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education, 1992 Pre-Primary Licensure, 2006 English as a Second Language Licensure, 2011

Liz

Urban Cluster

9-12

Bachelor of Science in Education, 1983 Master of Science in Education, 1992 Literacy Endorsement, 1998 Administration Endorsement, 2014

Jordan

Urban Cluster

6-8

Bachelor of Arts in Spanish Education, 2015 Master of Science in TESOL (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages), 2018

Bella

Urban Cluster

3-5

Bachelor of Arts in German, 2014 Master of Education in English Language Learners, 2018

Ann

Urbanized Area

6-8

Bachelor in Elementary Education with a Math Major ELL Endorsement Master of Education in Reading

6-8

Bachelor of Arts in Elementary Education, 2001 With Education Technology minor Master’s in Special Education, 2012 K- 8th Teaching Certification ELL Endorsement

Kate

Urbanized Area

Findings As Collins and Halverson (2018) noted, “The history of American schooling was marked by an early institutional flexibility that has since coalesced into a system that is locked in place and is unable to adapt its core practices to new conditions” (p. 65); teachers and educational institutions are left reeling in response to rapidly changing technical and societal foundations. The synthesis of textural and structural meanings, as well as essences, as a last step of phenomenological data analysis (Moustakas, 1994), lead to two major findings of ELL teachers’ experiences with digital games, logistical and pedagogical.

LOGISTICAL CHALLENGES English Language Learning (ELL) teachers face many logistical challenges in their work. For the purposes of this study, those challenges included: equipment resources, support resources, time, and game selection.

Equipment Resources Teachers generally face a shortage of resources, from books to computers; this lack of resources is compounded in rural schools (Renth, Buckley & Puchner, 2015). All the ELL classrooms that I visited were severely under-resourced. Kate highlighted an extreme case of that shortage when she said, “I was on the move, meaning this is my first year with a classroom, my first two years here, I was on a cart. And I would go to empty classrooms every hour. So I would move.” Bella, who is a first-year teacher, did not have a computer for the first half of the school year. That shortage was not limited to technology; it

242

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

extended to books as well. Suzy shares the frustration of her students reading the same book, “…I have a hard time because sometimes they say, ‘we read this book already.’ So I wish sometimes just we would have our own books, because sometimes they are reading the same books that they read in classroom.” Liz, a veteran teacher who has some technology noticed a lack of resources as well, saying, “I’ve been where there’s a lot stronger technology in the classroom.” This drastically limits ELL teachers’ ability to expand the scope of their instruction even when the willingness and desire is there. Three out of the six ELL teachers I interviewed did not have one-to-one (e.g., Chromebooks or iPads) for their students. Furthermore, when a school had a shareable cart, it tends to be reserved for the mainstream classrooms or testing. “I don’t get the opportunity to check out the computers that often” Bella said, and she continued, saying “Yeah, or the schedule would be such that I would have it for 15 minutes of my 30 minute block with a class. So, it would take five minutes to get everybody set up another couple to put it away.” Although Suzy does not believe that the reservation process to be practically problematic for her class, she goes on saying, “I think they have 30 in each cart. So usually, the [mainstream] classroom takes out the whole cart. And there’s only 25 to 24 kids so I can take the other last six…because I can always get the tail end of the ones that aren’t being used in the cart.” Later in the interview, Suzy also mentioned how sharable carts could force you to use the least desirable technology as mainstream teachers get first pick “The Chromebooks are easier to access. I think the iPads are being used more often. Because sometimes I don’t know if the Chromebooks are easy to use, do you think?” This limitation can push the ELL teacher to revert back to what they feel comfortable doing, namely traditional teaching approaches. Access to technology can vary from district to district and even school building to school building, which can make it hard for teachers when they work at a school with less equipment than their previous school. And when a teacher learns how to use any given technology, say a SMART board for instance, they struggle when they move to another school that does not have that same device. Suzy explained, “… I don’t have a SMART board and I did at the other school… I mean, that I really missed. I miss having a SMART board. I should really, I should really be writing the grant for a SMART board here.” Even changing the type of operating system can be daunting, as Kate explained, “I was pretty proficient on the other computers. And now I have to do this Mac, and I’m like, ‘oh my gosh’.” The lack of consistency in the types of equipment different schools or even different classrooms use introduces a learning curve that can be seen as a burden. These under resourced classrooms restrict how and when ELL teachers use digital games.

Support Resources The lack of support staff and other ELL teachers to help and aid in those ELL departments makes digital games a luxury they cannot afford. Suzy, Jordan, and Bella are the only ELL staff in their schools. Even the schools that have more than one ELL teacher and paraprofessionals (such as Ann’s and Kate’s school) still feel it is not enough. The influx of ELL students in schools limits ELL teachers just covering the basics. The number of students for Liz doubled since she first started at her school 3 years ago, “I started with the Somali population and still have them. So that hasn’t changed. But it’s more than doubled. And when you’re talking to a school of 500 kids, that’s a lot. That’s a big difference from 22, I think it was, to 50.” Ann believed that extra support for targeted content classes for ELLs is desperately needed, by saying:

243

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

It would be nice to have more support, like high school has four EL teachers. So they’re able to have an EL science class or EL whatever. There’s just two of us here and it’s hard to branch into that. Because we have one period where you could do a co-teaching, well then why don’t you do eighth grade science? Why don’t you do sixth grade science? Why do you only do seventh grade, you know, it’s like, hard to branch out when you don’t have the extra staff for that. The majority of the ELL students come from a refugee background creating a unique and delicate situation which ELL teachers need to address. They require more resources especially for those that are not literate in their native language, have experienced traumatic events, or lack a strong home structure.

Time Time, or lack thereof, is a constant challenge for ELL teachers that includes two prongs: time with the students, and time to prepare, research, and implement digital games. On average, ELL teachers will work with students for 30-60 minute sessions a day, which leads them to question the viability of digital games. Ann explained her time with her students, “each class period’s probably 50 some minutes 52 minutes or so.” Moreover, the large number of ELL students makes digital games impractical to implement. For reference, Kate has 62 students, Suzy has 49 students, Liz has 50 students, Jordan has 36 students, and Bella has 42 students. Although not all of these students are seen every day, as they may receive indirect services when they reach higher levels in the program, they are still put on monitor status for ongoing support. Bella elaborated on what monitoring entails, “we basically just monitor what they’re doing in the classroom. If they’re slipping and falling really far behind in reading, writing, whatever it is, then I can start taking them for more direct services and smaller groups concentrating on what they’re struggling in.” The large number of students under each teacher’s portfolio, combined with the limited time they spend with each student, adds an overwhelming strain on an ELL teacher. The most common ELL instructions consist of four main models that are Pullout, Push-in, Bilingual Instruction, and Sheltered English Instruction (Sparks, 2016). Many of the ELL teachers in this study, if not all, utilize the Pullout method, which removes ELL students from their mainstream classroom for a designated period of time each day to receive separate instructional support through an ELL specialist. Therefore, some ELL teachers raised critical questions about the impact of pulling students out of classroom instruction and how that might negatively impact their education. Some teachers recognize the challenge of pulling out students for even that amount of time and question their long-term impact. Suzy described, “…some of them were missing math every day. I mean, is that smart? That’s not, they can’t be missing math.” Bella emphasized that the change of classrooms for the ELLs can be disruptive to the flow of their day: My absolute dream would just be able to have the students stay in their room with their classroom teacher. I feel it’s so disruptive to their day, and to just pull them from class. And it’s a different environment, and they see all their friends. And so they’re super silly. And it, it’s almost a distraction to leave as opposed to somebody coming in and sitting at their desk with them, or pulling them back to them reading table and working a little bit more in that aspect. Time to prepare, research, and implement digital games is the other main challenge. Suzy described her teaching last year as “surviving,” given how limited her schedule was, and said, “I was going from 244

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

one classroom to the next so fast that we never really…have the time. Last year…I was going from one school to the next and I think we were just surviving.” Bella put her current experience in more vivid terms by describing it, “like, I’m drowning every day.” Ann agreed that digital games should be included, yet had some reservations, “sometimes you don’t have time for everything. And sometimes it takes more time to police them on the computer…” ELL teachers in many instances are cultural brokers (McCarty, Cervantes & Stirtz, 2009). They are central in facilitating deep understanding and bridging cultural divides between several groups, whether it is between families and the school or teachers and students. That also adds time constraints to the ELL teacher, exemplified by Ann’s comments, “Yeah, they kind of forget we’re there to support them. You know, we’re supposed to help the students, help the families, help the teachers help and plus teach six periods a day or two separate, you know, which is a lot but it’d be nice to help them all more with their questions and concerns too.” This highlights both the time constraints faced by ELL teachers and the shortage of staff.

Game Selection The choice of the game to be used in an ELL class is determined by the effectiveness of language teaching and learning. Perhaps the major challenge facing teachers and educators is choosing a game that most effectively meets learning objectives. The structure of the narrative, multimedia, and interaction of games have an influence on how well students can use them for language learning, such as vocabulary acquisition. These elements interact with player factors, such as game literacy (being a gamer, playing frequency, and playing duration), to influence the help that these games provide to ELLs. Both young and adult language learners, like all other types of learners, have varying needs and not all games will meet their needs. Without clear guidance for ELL teachers on how to effectively evaluate, incorporate, and assess digital games, alongside the limited resources they have access to, teachers face numerous logistical challenges. The technological evolution dictates the wide acceptance and demand for interactive digital games in the classroom, as app stores (like Google Play) rate educational apps as the third most downloaded category of 2019 (Statista, 2019). The vast options of digital games literally provide educators hundreds of tools to choose from. This wide array of games may become overwhelming and must be mitigated carefully in order to remain relevant and applicable. Having the right selection of games, appropriate availability, and access to resources can greatly assist educators in formulating a thoughtful strategy around digital game implementation. Bella explained that sifting through the numerous choices of digital games can be time intensive, “I think a lot of it is trying to figure out what works and what doesn’t work that I can bring to the classroom, and then doing a lot more research into what can fill those gaps and provide better, not necessarily better instruction, but reinforce and practice…” Certainly, smart mobile devices may be a thorn in the side for some educators, yet smartphones and computer tablets have emerged as preferred modes for learning aids in recent years.The introduction of the bring-your-own-device (BYOD) phenomenon introduces several considerations for institutions regarding infrastructure (Burns-Sardone, 2014; Imazeki, 2014). The most popular mode of delivery of digital games is mobile devices like cellphones and tablets, alluding to the fact that BYOD devices are certainly important (Newzoo, 2019). However, schools might also prevent students from bringing their own cell phones which can contribute to the hardware gap some of those schools face, as Jordan mentioned, “But here, kids aren’t allowed cell phones. And I get it, you know, it’s at a level where they 245

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

don’t, they may or may not, you know, take the proper care.” Even if BYOD devices are successfully implemented into a ELL teacher’s instructional curriculum, complex issues such as privacy and digital literacy also need to be considered, alongside connectivity and data usage in future.

Pedagogical Challenges Centrally important is the pedagogical belief of ELL teachers in the role digital games occupy in teaching and learning. Furthermore, a recognition of the relationship between context and game play can create a bridge for educators to embrace a more pertinent role for digital games. Patricia Rogers (2003) asked a valid question about technology in education: “What is it about technology that makes some teachers run away in fear and others embrace every new instructional medium that comes along?” (p. 15). Thus, exploring those pedagogical principles will shed light on deeper beliefs about digital games in education. Selection and use of words are important, because words convey beliefs and values (Howe & Lisi, 2018). When interview participants were asked about how they define digital games, some struggled to put it in words. For example, Ann said very reluctantly, “Any kind of a game that uses technology?” Suzy viewed digital games as encompassing all games, “I think it’s any game. Like I said, it could be a group game using Kahoot and things.” Bella emphasized the interactive component of digital games as the defining factor, saying: Something on a device. Whether it’s a computer or an iPad, [or] their phone. It would have to be like interactive, it’s not like a quiz. So I wouldn’t necessarily say that Kahoot is a game. It would have to be something more where there’s more thought process going on. Or like you have to this wouldn’t be for English. But in terms of math, you’d have to solve the problem to get to the next point in your game, the next level or something as opposed to here’s four answers choose one.

Teaching Philosophy The utilization of digital games prompts questions about implementation and possible barriers, such as teacher buy-in and widespread educational acceptance. It should be noted that the implementation of digital games without institutional support may prove frustrating and even futile for more educators wishing to move forward in the twenty-first century. The generational gap between teachers and their students might be a culprit for some ELL teachers, but not all. Bella, who is the youngest teacher I interviewed, said, “I know when I interviewed for the position, the one thing I wasn’t confident about was my use of technology. I’m probably more old school in my language teaching than my age or experience would lead you to believe.” Jordan viewed that generational gap as something that will forever be inevitable unless technology is a passion, and she said: If I took the time to constantly be on social media constantly seeing…what’s out there, what new technologies coming out like my husband loves technology. And when he’s not busy with work, that’s what he’s doing. He’s snooping around and seeing what’s out there. Me on the other hand, I don’t like social media, I barely am on it at all. Teacher preparation programs, professional development, teaching experience, along with district and school guidelines influence these teaching philosophies. When Liz, who sees herself as a reading specialist, was asked why she does not use digital games, she said, “I’ve always really just focused on 246

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

reading, writing and vocabulary and putting those things together.” Her statement exemplified her opinion that digital games will not or cannot fulfill this goal. The further a student advances in an ELL program, the more nuanced teaching becomes. Beginners require more involvement from the ELL teacher as explained by Liz, “It’s hard to work with 16 level ones… because, you know, they need so much help.” Guided Reading Levels are used by educators to describe where children are at on the reading spectrum and what books are most appropriate for each step in the learning process. Suzy described reading level challenges that some ELL teachers face “… there’s one that was we’re reading at a benchmark A at the beginning of the year now, he is at a G, so then I have to try to find a group that would work.” This fast-paced progress renders some digital games useless in a short span especially when many ELL classrooms use targeted teaching to focus on specific underdeveloped or weak domains (i.e., listening, speaking, reading, and writing).

Curriculum Scholars are split on the level of guidance that should be given to teachers. Some researchers believe that prescribed curriculum is paramount, while others believe giving freedom to the teacher to create their own curriculum will foster autonomy, creativity, and innovation. Although many of the teachers I interviewed did not clearly distinguish between curriculum and standards, they expressed their frustration about not having a set of guidelines or curriculum to follow as a reason for not embracing digital games. Kate described this frustration by saying: And I don’t like the word curriculum, but we’re not really getting given a roadmap, like, hey, you have a new student coming in. Okay, let’s give them a screener and see where they’re at. Okay, so they’re at level two. Now, where do we go with that? We don’t have a formula for that. And so I’m always trying to find or, I feel like I’m always trying to find a way to put a formula to it… Others suggest that alignment between teaching materials in mainstream classrooms and ELL classrooms will yield better results. Jordan echoed that sentiment when she said, “Well, let’s just be real, [English as a Second Language] ESL is kind of a waste of a program. Only in the sense that we can’t build our own curriculum, even though I do every day, but I shouldn’t. What I should do is recycle of the curriculum that’s already been given to them, because that’s what they need help with.” Jordan envisioned a ‘recycled’ model, which puts ELL teachers in a supporting role to reinforce what students are already learning in their mainstream classroom. The disconnect between the two learning environments is counterintuitive. However, pulling content from each grade level can be challenging to implement, because many ELLs are clustered by their language proficiency level, not necessarily by their grade level. Jordan explained the importance of the learner domain (Southgate et al., 2017), “The way that it’s set up right now is just all mixed. And it’s really, really hard to pull in content from other grades. Because I have like, one of my classes, I have sixth, seventh and eighth graders all in one.” World-class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) is a consortium of states that create standards for ELLs. WIDA English proficiency standards are the de facto standards in 40 states in the United States. Bella told me about her method of dividing ELL students is also driven by a number of points, “They are pretty much divided into level based on how I pulled them. So it will be proficiency level mixed with their WIDA level mixed with their grade level… Mixed with when can I actually pull them from their

247

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

class. So sometimes they’re reading levels are a little bit further apart, but generally, they’re as close together as I can get them.” Jordan’s experience with Professional Learning Community (PLC) as a method for curriculum development in the past was extremely fruitful and she wishes that was the case for right now, saying, I wish I could do my PLC with them…that’s what we did. We had a beautiful program, and things worked wonderfully. We met once a week where all of us came together. We all problem solved, we talked about things. We brought up things we were currently doing that were working. It was once a week, and, oh my gosh, I loved it! Now, if we meet once every two months, people are kicking and screaming saying, I have this. I have that. It’s frustrating because I don’t even know what’s being taught in high school. I don’t know what I should prepare them for because I am all by myself. Only one ELL teacher viewed not having a curriculum as an asset. Ann embraced that lack of curriculum, as it offers her the flexibility to tailor her teaching in a more intricate way, while still recognizing the level of involvement required. Ann described, “Because we know where each one of our kids are at and where they’re reading at what they need next. It takes a lot more planning, and a lot more, you know, foresight into what they’re doing. But I’d rather do it that way then be stuck on a curriculum and go, you know, this chapter just doesn’t really make sense to these kids.”

Training For the most part, the overall goal should be to base game selection on sets of criteria validating said game’s attributes according to method, overall purpose, and obtainability. In addition, cost of use and licensing and distribution options are important, especially considering that students may want to use their own devices (BYOD) to participate actively within or outside of a class environment. Correspondingly, game selection is generally related to the teachers’ training and experience in tandem with them having the devices that support it. Ann illustrated that by stating: We got a lot of SMART boards, like two or three years prior to that. So I did take some trainings back then. But I didn’t retain it because I didn’t have my own. So I never practiced it. So it was just kind of learning how to use it. None of the ELL teachers I interviewed received training on how to use digital games in their teacher education programs. This lack of training can be explained by the year some of those ELL teachers graduated from their respective programs. Liz, who graduated in 1983, said, “You have to remember when I was a preservice teacher, there weren’t computers.” However, younger teachers like Bella, who completed her Bachelor of Arts in German in 2014 and Master of Education in English Language Learners in 2018, raise questions about whether teacher education programs could better prepare teachers. Bella said, “We did have a technology for teachers course it did not focus on games… So it’s not something that I have been immersed in.” Professional development is one way to bridge the gap in knowledge for teachers. Suzy did not believe her district provided adequate training in the area of digital games, saying, “We haven’t had a lot of training lately on specific digital games.” This lack of training affected Suzy’s level of comfort with technology more broadly and digital games more specifically, she stated, “I don’t feel comfortable...with 248

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

it all...that’s probably why I haven’t incorporated [digital games], because I’m just not very comfortable with it.” Conversely, Kate believes that in her school district (separate from Suzy’s district), there are plenty of opportunities for teachers to use digital games, yet the lack of will and desire for teachers to pursue might be the culprit. “I feel as though there’s adequate training for people that want it, or that look for it,” explained Kate. The motivational impact of digital technology is well documented, and highlights the potential for English language learning to be accessible to students outside traditional teaching boundaries. Motivational impact is even reported to be the top reason teachers use digital games in their classroom (Takeuchi & Vaala, 2014). Kate shared that same sentiment when she said, They really like to play [digital games] and then play it for hours. And so there’s something magical because to get them to sit in a classroom for hours is difficult. So they’re doing something, right, because they’re capturing that child’s attention for an extended time. Whereas us teachers who are on stage for seven periods a day, are trying to do that for just 45 minutes of their day. And that’s difficult to keep them focused, which is interesting when you think about ADHD, and keeping them on task. But you give them Fortnite and they could sit for hours. Thus, demonstrating the role of digital games in the lives of her students to be central in capturing their attention. The motivational factor of digital games was reflected across all ELL teachers as one if not the main reason to want to incorporate digital games.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Although digital games could be an effective component in English language learning, not all games are suitable or beneficial for use in language classrooms, especially when viewed from an Instructionist Perspective lens (Kafai, 2006). Certain games do not provide any educational benefit to the students which makes them inappropriate in learning environments. Some games may also not work for certain learners. According to Alyaz and Sinem, (2016) in-game elements are critical in determining the effectiveness of digital games in ELL classrooms. The results of this study demonstrated the difficulty ELL teachers face in incorporating digital games as part of their teaching and learning. Thus, a number of recommendations are intended to mitigate these challenges. First, providing the needed technological resources and making them easily accessible to ELL teachers will greatly increase the chance of incorporating digital games. In many instances, ELL teachers lack access to many devices that could enable them to use digital games in their classroom, such as computers and iPads. If providing such resources in all classrooms is not feasible, shareable carts can be utilized, and schools must enforce the equitable use of these carts among teachers. Second, providing the technological resources on its own will not shift instructional practices (Prince, 2017). ELL teachers need training and ongoing support to learn how digital games can be properly evaluated for appropriateness and purpose and then, effectively implemented. Many of the participants preferred teacher educators to model digital games before they implement it themselves, as a better way to retain the information. They also cited that their stereotypical view of digital games as entertainment tools or time fillers clouded how they might be used for educational purposes. Moreover, having enough

249

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

ELL specialists in any given school will reduce the workload, time constraints they face, and allow for a mixture of push-in and pullout instruction. Third, a more collaborative approach to curriculum development between ELL teachers across grade levels and content alignment with mainstream classrooms will equally benefit teachers and students. Collaborative curriculum development has shown to shift teachers’ content knowledge, content belief, and teaching practice, while fostering a meaningful and task-oriented approach (Drits-Esser & Stark, 2015; Honigsfeld & Dove, 2019). ELL Teachers will be able to share materials with each other as language learning is largely similar across grade levels. These materials can include digital games, as well as building on content taught in previous grades; thus, reducing their time screening students and preparing materials. The extra time can allow ELL teachers to research and implement digital games. Finally, teacher education programs have a duty to embed technology and digital games throughout their courses. ELL teachers’ pedagogical beliefs stem from their time as preservice teachers during which the role of digital games are formed (Turkay, Hoffman, Kinzer, Chantes, & Vicari, 2014). All participants unanimously said they never received any training on digital games as a pre-service teacher, and the one who did have a technology course took it as a standalone course. Gone are the days where a single course on the topic is enough. Teachers need to know how to incorporate technology in various subject matters, including language learning. According to the Entertainment Software Association (2019), 65% of American adults play video games, mainly using their smartphones. There is no expectation that this number will decrease; therefore, it is fair to assume that this number is set to increase in coming years. The motivational impact is even reported to be the top reason teachers use digital games in their classroom (Takeuchi & Vaala, 2014). As technology moves forward, so shall interest in its scholarly use. Future research should aim to address shortcomings within digital infrastructures in schools and educational institutions. Overcoming barriers for teachers who are reluctant or unable to embrace modern technological advances may also be of further interest, coupled with suggested methodologies and support structures for educators to overcome those barriers. Lastly, a detailed discussion of game-based pedagogy can assist in further developing some of the gaming points referenced here and create a roadmap for ELL teachers and students into an even richer digital learning experience.

REFERENCES Ahmadi, M. R. (2018). The use of technology in English language learning: A literature review. International Journal of Research in English Education, 3(2), 115–125. doi:10.29252/ijree.3.2.115 Alyaz, Y., & Sinem, Z. (2016). Digital game-based language learning in foreign language teacher education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 17(4), 130–146. doi:10.17718/tojde.44375 Annetta, L. A. (2008). Video games in education: Why they should be used and how they are being used. Theory into Practice, 47(3), 229–239. doi:10.1080/00405840802153940 Burns-Sardone, N. (2014). Making the case for BYOD instruction in teacher education. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 11(1), 192–200. doi:10.28945/1988

250

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

Caldwell, K. E. H., Osterweil, S., Urbano, C., Tan, P., & Eberhardt, R. (2017). “I Just Don’t Know Where to Begin”: Designing to Facilitate the Educational Use of Commercial, Off-the-Shelf Video Games. In Serious Games and Edutainment Applications (pp. 625–648). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-516455_27 Chandler, C. (2013). The Use of Game Dynamics to Enhance Curriculum and Instruction: What Teachers Can Learn from the Design of Video Games. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 6(2), 60–75. doi:10.3776/joci.2013.v6n2p60-75 Chapelle, C. A. (2017). 25 Evaluation of Technology and Language Learning. The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning, 378. Charsky, D., & Mims, C. (2008). Integrating commercial off-the-shelf video games into school curriculums. TechTrends, 53(5), 38–44. Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2018). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press. Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation. (2018). CAEP accreditation standards. Retrieved from http://caepnet.org/standards/standard-1 Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Sage. Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative. Prentice Hall. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2007). Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do. John Wiley & Sons. De Aguilera, M., & Mendiz, A. (2003). Video games and education. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 1–13. doi:10.1145/950566.950583 DeHaan, J., Reed, W. M., & Kuwanda, K. (2010). The effect of interactivity with a music video game on second language vocabulary recall. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 74–94. Dickey, M. D. (2015). K-12 teachers encounter digital games: A qualitative investigation of teachers’ perceptions of the potential of digital games for K-12 education. Interactive Learning Environments, 23(4), 485–495. doi:10.1080/10494820.2013.788036 Drits-Esser, D., & Stark, L. A. (2015). The Impact of Collaborative Curriculum Design on Teacher Professional Learning. The Electronic Journal of Science Education, 19(8), 1–27. Entertainment Software Association. (2019). Essential facts about the computer and video game industry. Author. Fichten, C., Jorgensen, M., Havel, A., King, L., Lussier, A., Asuncion, J., Budd, J., Nguyen, M. N., & Amsel, R. (2018). Information and Communication Technologies: Views of Canadian College Students and” Excellent” Professors. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 6(9), 1–12. doi:10.11114/jets. v6i9.3390

251

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 20–20. doi:10.1145/950566.950595 Gerber, H. R., & Price, D. P. (2013). Fighting baddies and collecting bananas: Teachers’ perceptions of games-based literacy learning. Educational Media International, 50(1), 51–62. doi:10.1080/09523 987.2013.777182 Girard, C., Ecalle, J., & Magnan, A. (2013). Serious games as new educational tools: How effective are they? A meta‐analysis of recent studies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(3), 207–219. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00489.x Goldin, C., & Katz, L. F. (2018). The race between education and technology. In Inequality in the 21st Century (pp. 49–54). Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429499821-10 Gozcu, E., & Caganaga, C. K. (2016). The importance of using games in EFL classrooms. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 11(3), 126–135. doi:10.18844/cjes.v11i3.625 Granic, I., Lobel, A., & Engels, R. C. (2014). The benefits of playing video games. The American Psychologist, 69(1), 66–78. doi:10.1037/a0034857 PMID:24295515 Griffiths, M. D. (2002). The educational benefits of videogames. Education for Health, 20(3), 47–51. Horowitz, K. S. (2019). Video Games and English as a Second Language: The Effect of Massive Multiplayer Online Video Games on the Willingness to Communicate and Communicative Anxiety of College Students in Puerto Rico. American Journal of Play, 11(3). Howe, W. A., & Lisi, P. L. (2018). Becoming a multicultural educator: Developing awareness, gaining skills, and taking action. Sage Publications. Huizenga, J. C., Ten Dam, G. T. M., Voogt, J. M., & Admiraal, W. F. (2017). Teacher perceptions of the value of game-based learning in secondary education. Computers & Education, 110, 105–115. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.008 Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology. George Allan & Unwin. Iaremenko, N. (2017). Enhancing English language learners’ motivation through online games. Information Technologies and Learning Tools, 59(3), 126–133. doi:10.33407/itlt.v59i3.1606 Imazeki, J. (2014). Bring-your-own-device: Turning cell phones into forces for good. The Journal of Economic Education, 45(3), 240–250. doi:10.1080/00220485.2014.917898 Kafai, Y. B. (2006). Playing and making games for learning: Instructionist and constructionist perspectives for game studies. Games and Culture, 1(1), 36–40. doi:10.1177/1555412005281767 Karadag, R. (2015). Pre-service Teachers’ Perceptions on Game Based Learning Scenarios in Primary Reading and Writing Instruction Courses. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 185–200. Kerr, A. (2006). The business and culture of digital games: Gamework and gameplay. Sage (Atlanta, Ga.).

252

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

Ketelhut, D. J., & Schifter, C. C. (2011). Teachers and game-based learning: Improving understanding of how to increase efficacy of adoption. Computers & Education, 56(2), 539–546. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2010.10.002 Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. Technology Assessment in Education and Training, 1, 9-34. Liao, Y. K. (1992). Effects of computer-assisted instruction on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 24(3), 367–380. McCarty, W., Cervantes, R., & Stirtz, G. (2009). Demographic Tipping Point: Cultural Brokering with English Language Learners as Service-Learning for Teacher Candidates and Educators. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, 1, 109–123. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and Expanded from “Case Study Research in Education.”. Jossey-Bass Publishers. Mifsud, C. L., Vella, R., & Camilleri, L. (2013). Attitudes towards and effects of the use of video games in classroom learning with specific reference to literacy attainment. Research in Education, 90(1), 32–52. doi:10.7227/RIE.90.1.3 Miller, D., Robertson, D., Hudson, A., & Shimi, J. (2012). Signature pedagogy in early year’s education: A role for COTS game-based learning. Computers in Schools, 29(1/2), 227–247. doi:10.1080/07 380569.2012.651423 Miller, L. M., Chang, C. I., Wang, S., Beier, M. E., & Klisch, Y. (2011). Learning and motivational impacts of a multimedia science game. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1425–1433. doi:10.1016/j. compedu.2011.01.016 Millstone, J. (2012). Teacher Attitudes about Digital Games in the Classroom. In The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Sage. doi:10.4135/9781412995658 Newzoo. (2019). Newzoo’s Global Mobile Market Report: Insights into the World’s 3.2 Billion Smartphone Users, the Devices They Use & the Mobile Games They Play. Retrieved November 1, 2019, from https://newzoo.com/insights/articles/newzoos-global-mobile-market-report-insights-into-the-worlds-32-billion-smartphone-users-the-devices-they-use-the-mobile-games-they-play/ Prensky, M. (2003). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 21–21. doi:10.1145/950566.950596 Primack, B. A., Carroll, M. V., McNamara, M., Klem, M. L., King, B., Rich, M., Chan, C. W., & Nayak, S. (2012). Role of video games in improving health-related outcomes: A systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 42(6), 630–638. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2012.02.023 PMID:22608382 Prince, J. (2017). English Language Learners in a Digital Classroom. The CATESOL Journal, 29(1), 51–73. Reinders, H. (2017). Digital Games in Language Learning and Teaching. In S. Thorne & S. May (Eds.), Language, Education and Technology (pp. 329–343). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02237-6_26

253

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

Reinders, H., & Wattana, S. (2015). Affect and willingness to communicate in digital gamebased learning. ReCALL: The Journal of EuroCALL, 27(1), 38–57. doi:10.1017/S0958344014000226 Reinhardt, J., & Sykes, J. M. (2014). Digital game and play activity in L2 teaching and learning. Language Learning & Technology, 18(2), 2–8. Ren, L.-l. (2016). A study of application of games in children English teaching – Taking children English class in education first training school for example. Sino-US English Teaching, 13(9), 704–709. Renth, B. A., Buckley, P., & Puchner, L. (2015). Academic Performance Gaps and Family Income in a Rural Elementary School: Perceptions of Low-Income Parents. Education Leadership Review of Doctoral Research, 2(1), 70–84. Rogers, P. L. (Ed.). (2003). Designing instruction for technology-enhanced learning. IGI Global. Ryan, A. W. (1991). Meta-analysis of achievement effects of microcomputer applications in elementary schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27(2), 161–184. doi:10.1177/0013161X91027002004 Sáez-López, J. M., Miller, J., Vázquez-Cano, E., & Domínguez-Garrido, M. C. (2015). Exploring application, attitudes and integration of video games: MinecraftEdu in middle school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 114–128. Sandford, R. (2006). Teaching with Games: COTS games in the classroom. The proceedings of JISC Innovating e-Learning. Southgate, E., Budd, J., & Smith, S. (2017). Press play for learning: A framework to guide serious computer game use in the classroom. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(7), 1–10. doi:10.14221/ ajte.2017v42n7.1 Sparks, S. (2016). Teaching English-language learners: What does the research tell us? Education Week, 36(36), 14–15. Squire, K. (2003). Video games in education. International Journal of Intelligent Simulations and Gaming. Statista, T. (2019). Total revenue of global mobile payment market from 2015 to 2019 (in billion US dollars). Recuperado de: www. statista. com/statistics/226530/mobile-payment-transaction-volume-forecast Takeuchi, L. M., & Vaala, S. (2014). Level up Learning: A National Survey on Teaching with Digital Games. Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. Tay, H. Y. (2016). Longitudinal study on impact of iPad use on teaching and learning. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1127308. doi:10.1080/2331186X.2015.1127308 Trybus, J. (2015). Game-Based Learning: What it is, Why it Works, and Where it’s Going? New Media Institute. Turkay, S., Hoffman, D., Kinzer, C. K., Chantes, P., & Vicari, C. (2014). Toward understanding the potential of games for learning: Learning theory, game design characteristics, and situating video games in classrooms. Computers in the Schools, 31(1-2), 2–22. doi:10.1080/07380569.2014.890879

254

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Technology. (2017). Future ready learning: Reimagining the role of technology in education. Retrieved from https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf Van Eck, R. (2006). Digital game-based learning: It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. EDUCAUSE Review, 41(2), 16. Van Eck, R. (2009). Chapter? A guide to integrating COTS games into your classroom. IGI Global. Van Eck, R. (2015). Digital Game-Based Learning: Still Restless, After All These Years. EducauseReview. Vosburg, D. (2017). The effects of group dynamics on language learning and use in an MMOG. CALICO Journal, 34(1), 58–74. doi:10.1558/cj.29524 Wu, T. T. (2018). Improving the effectiveness of English vocabulary review by integrating ARCS with mobile game‐based learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 315–323. doi:10.1111/ jcal.12244 Yilmaz Ince, E., & Demirbilek, M. (2013). Secondary and high school teachers’ perceptions regarding computer games with educational features in Turkey. Journal of Information Technology Education, 9, 235–247.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Commercial Off-the-Shelf Games (COTS): Are video games that can be purchased and used by anybody, mainly for recreational purposes. These differ from games for learning (G4L) or better known as serious games, which are designed specifically to serve an educational purpose. For the scope of this research, COTS games are games that are used with a dedicated game console (i.e. Xbox and PlayStation) or PC. Digital Game-Based Learning (DGBL): Refers to a pedagogical method or approach that integrates digital games as educational tools (Prensky, 2003; Van Eck, 2006, 2015). The concept is not new but an evolution from game-based learning, which promoted learning principles into digital game environments. Digital Games: Refer to computer, console, mobile, and any other games that a person will interact with digitally (Kerr, 2006). English Language Learners (ELLs), English Learners (ELs), or English as a Second Language (ESL): Refers to non-native English speakers who are learning the English language but who are in the process of developing their English proficiency. Game-Based Learning: A pedagogical approach that applies gaming principles into teaching and learning which is also referred to as gamification (Trybus, 2015). Game-Enhanced Learning: Refers to the application of commercial or off-shelf (COTS) digital games that are not purposefully designed for educational purposes. It capitalizes on the games’ authenticity to create engagement and coherence for learners (Reinhardt & Sykes, 2014). Video Games: A platform-specific term that falls under the broad umbrella of digital games and their primary purposes is so-called ‘entertainment’ (Girard, Ecalle, & Magnan, 2013).

255

 Perceived Challenges and Opportunities of Digital Games

World-Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA): Is a consortium of states that creates standards for ELLs. WIDA English proficiency standards are the de facto standards in 40 states in the United States.

256

257

Chapter 13

Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya Anne Rotich University of Virginia, USA

ABSTRACT Living in the 21 century has necessitated changes in pedagogical practices to fulfill the educational needs of learners. It is for this reason that earlier scholars such as Paulo Freire took issue with traditional education that promotes passivity in learners and pedagogical practices that are intended to fill or deposit knowledge rather than encourage critical thinking. This chapter, therefore, explores how Kenya’s curriculum is moving towards critical citizenship education with the implementation of a new revised curriculum. Also discussed is how citizenship education looked like before the newly revised curriculum, and what changes have been established in the new curriculum geared towards citizenship education. Finally, this chapter provides suggestions and pedagogical strategies for teachers that have potential of contributing to successfully enacting critical citizenship education in Kenya.

INTRODUCTION Since Kenya’s independence in 1963, there was an increasing discussion on rethinking the notions of democratic and citizenship education. These discussions centered around what democratic and citizenship education should look like in history classrooms, what Africanizing a curriculum looks like, and what national interests can contribute to the development good citizens (Bogonko, 1992, Eshiwani, 1993, Merryfield & Tlou, 1995). While this chapter focusses on discussions on notions of citizenship education, it also inspired by my own personal experiences growing up in Kenya and going through an education system where we learners were less engaged in the classroom and in our communities. As Freire (2002) noted about traditional education, teachers in Kenyan classrooms applauded passive learners who would receive and store knowledge and then produce it in examinations. Therefore, when I later become an elementary social studies teacher, in an era of polarized and contentious local and national debates during multiparty politics in Kenya, I became interested in finding ways to actively engage my students both in the classroom and in the communities. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch013

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

In a recent research I did in Kenya, my interest was in understanding how teachers utilize controversial issues as a path through which to develop involved and active learners. I had often seen in classrooms how issues that cause controversies and sometime heated arguments were being silenced and avoided in the classrooms and in the curriculum. I remember during the heated multiparty politics in the early 1990s in Kenya, when a teacher said that she could not teach about the different opposition political parties and their different perspectives because she does not want to get into trouble with the government. Therefore, she had to go along with the single story advanced by the government, whose political party had maintained power since Kenya’s independence. Or another teacher who could not teach about abortion because it was a taboo topic. Such views led to questions about why teachers do what they do and what epistemologies or lived experiences guide their action and pedagogical choices. Thus, I discuss how controversial issues teaching seems to be a pedagogical practice that allows for multiple perspectives in teaching (Oulton, Dillon & Grace 2004). Controversial issues teaching is a basis through which students can critically think about issues and then analyze and evaluate those issues that emerge in their local and global communities (Noddings & Brooks, 2017). In discussing experiences in Kenyan schools, this information will be drawn from research done in high school history classrooms and an analysis of the newly revised curriculum that was enacted in 2019. Kenya a country in Eastern Africa, has undergone various education reforms since its independence in 1963 in order to fill the needs of the people and the country. The main goal after Kenya’s independence was to Africanize the curriculum to include skills that benefit the Kenyan people. The goals of education in Kenya underwent various revisions. In examining citizenship and democratic education goals, Kenya’s goals of education have subtly focused generally on promoting ‘citizenship education.’ For example, one of the goals states that education should be to encourage nationalism, patriotism and national unity (KIE 2002). However, this goal did not provide guidelines nor training as to how teachers can focus their pedagogy on citizenship skills. Neither did the curriculum, offer topics and guidance on citizenship training. Thus in 2019 there was another revision to this goal in education which paid attention to “foster nationalism, patriotism and promote national unity” and added a goal for learners to acquire a “sense of nationhood and patriotism” (KICD 2019, p 12). This goal was more elaborate and particularly mentioned and included citizenship to be at the core of its vision for the Kenyan education curriculum. It continues to state that education should develop “engaged, empowered and ethical citizens,” through citizenship education that fosters active democratic engagement, patriotism human rights and responsibilities” (p.2). Therefore, this discussion will examine how citizenship education has been enacted in Kenya and what possibilities are available for the future given the newly revised goals of education.

CRITICAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION: KENYA The Education Context Kenya’s education has transformed tremendously over the years. While education did not begin with the inauguration of mission schools, Kenyans had their own indigenous education systems of education. Education in precolonial times was passed from generation to generation at times through apprenticeship where children of potters, weavers, herbalists learnt the skill from their parents. This system was organized in a way that teachers who were mostly adults taught younger ones through experiential activities. This kind of education was the fabric of the indigenous societies in Kenya (Sheffield, 1973). 258

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

Later during colonialism, the first Christian missionaries arrived in Kenya and built mission schools (Bogonko, 1991; Ngaroga, 1996). One of the goals for these schools was to teach Christianity and gain converts for their newly formed churches. But later the focus for education changed to training Africans for vocational work to fill the needs of the colonial government (Schilling 1972). After independence in 1963, the Kenyan education system underwent multiple reorganizations and reforms. The purpose for education for the new regime was to Africanize the curriculum, a strategy that was applied in many other African countries to develop students who have skills to support the new governments (Sheffield 1971; Merryfield and Tlou, 1995). Unfortunately, research has shown that the Kenyan curriculum in general and the history curriculum in particular, still needs to “shift from an overwhelmingly Western content” to a curriculum that centers on the needs and experiences of their own people (Waliaula, 2011, p.392). Also, another goal for the new government was to foster national unity and participation, which are core aspects of citizenship and civics education, needed to build the new state. In an effort to foster national unity, it was necessary to develop reforms that not only develop effective citizens but also active citizens of local and global communities, who value citizenship skills like unity, social justice, and democracy especially in a diverse and multi-ethnic society. With these reforms came new challenges such as shortage of trained teachers, lack of resources, thus a need for more reforms. Besides these challenges, the curriculum reforms still put emphasis on citizenship education and democratic education as an important goal for education especially in the history curriculum (Bogonko,1992; Sifuna, 2000; Oduor, 2011). However even after many years of reforms, recent research indicates that teachers’ pedagogical practices in enacting citizenship skills do not match best practices in citizenship education; teachers continue to practice the traditional modes of teaching and learning that do not promote skills in citizenship and democratic education; teachers are not prepared to teach citizenship and democratic education; and more so, there is a lack of teaching and learning resources to enact best pedagogical practices (Waliaula, 2011).

Critical Citizenship Education Citizenship education emerged from John Dewey’s (1916) ideas on experiential learning. Dewey encouraged active learning and knowledge gained through experience. Dewey in explaining democracy, stated that it is “a conjoint communicated experience” (p. 87). Here Dewey seems to connote that education for democracy should be a community experience where learners learn from the different perspectives and ultimately broadens their one-sided perspective of themselves to an understanding and appreciation of other perspectives. This experience allows for a collective sense of community. It is similar to what Paulo Freire (2000) describes as a practice of teaching and learning that recognizes the learners experience and incorporates learners experience into education. Freire has criticized the traditional education that deposits information in the minds of students who remain passive learners and listeners and whose own self and community experience is not considered. Freire promoted learning practices that see the learner as an active participant in their own learning. This meant that teachers should produce a learning environment where students can create, their own knowledge, recognize each other as a source of knowledge and are free to question issues and critically analyze matters. Other scholars who have added to Dewey’s and Freire’s ideas, define experiential learning to include both “reflective observation,” “active experimentation,” and “concrete experience” where the information is learned and relearned and is transformed and applied to the learners environment (Kolb 2015, p.32). It can also be the ability for students to “engage in a critique of society, the world, and ourselves (students and teachers)” (Wolk, 259

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

2003). This is what is referenced by scholars as critical pedagogy where learners, “personal experience becomes a valuable resource that gives students the opportunity to relate their own narratives” and teachers “equip students with analytical skills to be self-reflective about the knowledge and values they confront in the classrooms” (Giroux 2011, p.157). Critical pedagogy also advances values that, “critique resistance, struggle, and emancipation” which promotes and upholds epistemologies that are derived from the margins (Denzin, et.al., 2008, p.8). Denzin et.al., add that critical pedagogy should be localized to encourage and promote indigenous and non-indigenous pedagogies as well as offer tools to confront challenges in the community and resist imperialistic tendencies as it engages concerns of the marginalized. Some of the elements of critical pedagogy include reflecting on the students’ culture or experience and a critical look at one’s society, both local and global (Oduor, 2011), challenge forms of knowledge and power structures (McLaren, 1995) and active participation in democracy initiatives (Giroux, 2001). Therefore, critical pedagogical frameworks are the means within which to interrogate, question, disrupt hegemonic power structures. It is a framework that can be incorporated within marginalized discourses for the purposes of liberating discourses and populations at the margins. Similarly, in the same lens, critical citizenship education seeks to educate students about social justices issues and concerns; encourages students to appreciate, understand and work with other people in the local society and in the world; disrupts Western imperial agendas that work against concerns of marginalized peoples; and encourages critical thinking skills and multiple perspectives when examining local and global cultures and peoples (Freire, 2000; Gaudelli, 2003; Giroux, 2003; Merryfield, 1998; Subedi, 2006). The main purpose of incorporating critical pedagogy in classrooms is because of its power to transform pedagogy and develop active democratic citizens. Not only does critical pedagogy transform pedagogy, it also transforms teachers’ epistemologies since teachers themselves have to critically think about their practice at all times as well as its complexities in order to ensure student success in democratic citizenship training. One of the approaches promoted by critical pedagogy is the need for education to question the belief systems, dominant structures of power, knowledge itself and authority and to “act upon what it means to live in substantive democracy, to recognize anti-democratic forms of power and fight deeply rooted injustices in society and [the] world” (Giroux, 2004, p.35). This means that teachers and students need to question official knowledge in an attempt to understand the underlying meanings of that information. Giroux notes that allowing critical inquiry would be the only way to address and “counter global capitalism” and to “depoliticize and disempower” the mainstream discourses and forms of domination (p.35). To elaborate, critical pedagogy in the classroom context should involve “classroom conditions that provide the knowledge, skills, and culture of questioning necessary for students to engage in critical dialogue with the past, question authority and its effects, struggle with ongoing relations of power, and prepare themselves for what it means to be critical, active and engaged citizens” (Giroux, 2010, p. 711). Therefore, it can be said that critical pedagogy is concerned with the quest for social justice, troubling of imperial ideologies and the empowering of learners to be active participants and citizens of their society and the world.

260

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

Teaching Controversial Issues Teaching controversial issues has been critical to teaching critical thinking (Noddings & Brooks, 2017). Drawing from Dewey (1915) and Freire (2000) ideas on learner-centered teaching for democratic education, it has been necessary to include controversial issues teaching. This allows for discussion of issues experienced in and by the community, the learners, and which allows for critical dialogues and active engagement for learners. Research in the social studies curriculum sees controversial issues teaching as a way to encourage education for citizenship and democracy (Engle and Ochoa, 1988; Hess 2010). Such a pedagogy then, calls for active learning for students to experience education as Dewey states. Controversial issues pedagogy involves discussions of topics that results in multiple opinions and perspectives but with no conclusive agreement. These can include political issues, religious issues, cultural issues and so on. Noddings & Brooks (2017) state that the aim of controversial teaching issues is to “prepare students for active life in a participatory democracy” where controversial issues are part and parcel of life (p.2). Given these arguments there is no question as to the significance of controversial issues teaching. However, critical to this discussion is how teachers who grew up and trained to be teachers in a country that did not encourage open and critical discussions, teach about controversial issues. Also, of importance is understanding how these teachers’ own epistemologies, lived experiences and mainstream political ideology influence how they navigate through controversial issues and citizenship or civics education. In the qualitative study I conducted in Kenya in 2011, I interviewed three high school history teachers, observed their classrooms and examined resources they use in teaching. I utilized a qualitative study because I wanted to get in-depth information about the teaching of local and global controversial issues. Some of the questions asked were: (a) How do teachers teach controversial issues? (b) What controversial issues do they teach? (c) How does their teaching support critical citizenship education? Teachers perceptions about controversial issues teaching was wanting. At the onset, I realized that the idea of controversial issues teaching was new and needed explanation. After, observing the teachers approach to some of the issues such as abortion, elections, ethnicity, HIV/Aids it was apparent that they had no training on best practices on teaching these sensitive topics to support critical citizenship education. It was also apparent that when a topic was too sensitive, they avoided its discussion. Hess (2005) explains reasons for teachers’ uneasiness with controversial topics that include; denial, whereby teachers deny a controversial issue to be controversial; privilege, where teachers teach their own perspective; avoidance, where teachers avoid certain issues; and balance, an approach that engages different perspectives on an issue. In the case of Kenyan teachers, most of the time, denial and avoidance were the main reason for not engaging controversial issues. The main reason for such pedagogical choices and practice by the teachers was the “teachers’ epistemology” (Waliaula, 2011). Besides, avoiding controversial issues, teachers also engaged in traditional methods of teaching where they became knowledge providers and students became receivers of that knowledge. If these teachers chose to teach any controversial topics, they taught from their own perspective and worldviews or from the agreed or acceptable mainstream ideology. Data showed that teacher participants favored teaching controversial issues that had one agreed opinion in their community. An example was the issue of abortion. This topic was taught as a non-issue,

261

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

and therefore did not warrant a critical engagement. One teacher said given her own religious beliefs, that abortion was wrong, and this belief may have been a shared and accepted belief in the society. Another example was when teachers taught about the topic of the Kenyan constitution. At that moment teachers were not prepared to teach about the topic because it was a time when Kenya was undergoing the constitutional reforms in 2010. Some teachers preferred to teach mainstream ideas about the constitution yet there were many controversial issues in the constitution that needed critical analysis and dialogue. During a class observation a teacher taught about the constitution by providing students with content knowledge and details about the constitution and its related elements. In this instance, the learners missed an opportunity to participate in critical discussions of controversial issues in the constitution. They missed an opportunity to discuss issues like election violence, and violence instigated by politicians, human rights issues violation and ethnicity, that were sensitive issues in the constitution (Gay, 2009). These issues needed classroom dialogues and discussions for students to analyze, criticize and make informed decisions as learners. Another issue mentioned during my classroom observation, was on the teaching of the topic on HIV/Aids. This topic was avoided because it was considered a taboo topic in the society. One teacher mentioned that she received materials and brochures from the ministry of education which she gave to the students to learn on their own about HIV/Aids, its spread, prevention and care. Other reasons for avoiding the topic included the stigma in mentioning terms associated with HIV/Aids discussions such as sex and sex education topics. In the society such avoidance has led to the use of colloquial terms associated with HIV/Aids that reduce the stigma about the disease, and that leads to misconceptions and the spread of the disease (Odhiambo, 2017). Another explanation for avoidance of sexuality education in general is that “it is not taught as part of the compulsory but non-examinable Life Skills Curriculum (which teachers often skip to focus on core examinable subjects)” (Keogh, et.al., 2018). Thus, there is need for evaluating teaching practices and goals for controversial issues teaching in order for successful pedagogical and training outcomes in citizenship education. In summary, this research on the teaching of controversial issues showed that best practices regarding controversial issues pedagogy was not followed in history classrooms in Kenya. Social studies scholars reiterate that controversial issues teaching for democratic education has to involve critical thinking (Freire 2000; Giroux 2004), “dialogues across differences,” deliberations and problem solving, (Parker 2004 p.452) and integrating multiple perspectives among other teaching approaches (Merryfield and Wilson, 2005). Lack of best practices is sometimes heavily influenced by teacher’s own worldviews, social and cultural experiences, or their environment (Pajares, 1992). As discussed earlier, teachers’ epistemology guided their teaching especially in decisions whether to avoid a topic or provide a one-sided perspective. Teachers ideas and attitudes towards certain topics will heavily impact their decisions in teaching or avoiding a certain topic (Byford et.al. 2009; Hess 2010). In this research, teachers’ intrinsic and extrinsic views guided their pedagogy in the absence of a curriculum that did not provide clear guidelines as regards their teaching pedagogy. Even though the curriculum at the moment is set to provide information about citizenship education, it was not enough to ensure best practices in critical citizenship skills or in controversial issues teaching. Thus, the teacher is left to make decisions for their own classrooms. A textual analysis of high school history textbooks showed no evidence in encouraging critical analysis of issues. In examining citizenship education in particular, the texts analyzed revealed that citizenship as a topic is present and it included subtopics like rights of a citizens, responsibilities of a citizen and elements of good citizenship. However, this content was knowledge for knowledge sakes and lacked practical skills in engaging 262

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

citizenship practices that can help learners solve issues in their societies. Rotich (2017) discusses some of the recommendations for supporting Kenyan teachers in implementing critical pedagogy. It is however important to discuss how the newly implemented 2019 curriculum promotes citizenship education and how teachers are prepared to enact the curriculum goals as and its relation to critical pedagogy.

Citizenship Education and the New Curriculum in Kenya The recent curriculum reforms in Kenya have been developed with the aim of meeting the needs of learners living in the 21 century. Its implementation began at the pre-primary level and continues to roll out in stages. Since there is no high school history curriculum available, this analysis is informed by the education and curriculum goals. I examine a social studies curriculum for fifth grade and how it relates to critical citizenship education. In examining this new curriculum goals, the Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD 2017), describes citizenship as skills that “equip learners with information that enables them to “participate responsibly in communities and wider society as informed and responsible citizens who appreciate diversity and relate positively with others” and also develop skills in critical thinking, inquiry, and problem solving skills (p. 79-80). These skills are critical in the development of informed citizens and advances citizenship training. In the case of the citizenship curriculum, it can be said that it is designed and intended to develop habits, behaviors and useful attitudes and skills to promote citizenship education, however its enactment is what needs to be seen (Giroux 2004; Denzin et, al. 2008; Dewey, 1916). With this new curriculum, there seems to be an emphasis on aspects of patriotism, citizenship and the development of responsible citizens, as well as included aspects of equity and inclusion, peace education, quality education and teacher training. In an effort to contribute to citizenship education, it is important that the social studies curriculum is geared towards creating an environment that students are comfortable in airing their views, opportunities for teachers to train in critical citizenship pedagogy and controversial issues teaching. Kenya has revised its goals for the curriculum and education to ensure that it meets the needs of learners living in this era (KICD, 2019a). Some of the changes have included not only the topic on citizenship education but details as to what it entails. For instance, in the new curriculum, more emphasis has been put on learners who demonstrates “active local and global citizenship for harmonious existence” (KICD 2017, p 60). This means that these students will be trained not only to fully participate in their local communities but also globally. The new curriculum in Kenya’s is also focusing on an education system and curriculum that is competency based unlike the previous system that was examination based, allowing room for teachers to include critical pedagogy. The new curriculum adds that school should “facilitate learners to pursue their own interests and fulfil their potential” (KICD 2019b, p 60). Previously because of an exam-oriented curriculum, teachers had no room to engage individual students interests nor in discussions, since they had to focus on completing the syllabus and in drilling students to pass the examinations (Waliaula, 2011). The KICD (2019b) curriculum adds that citizenship education should include “learners use of critical thinking, creativity, problem solving, citizenship, collaboration and digital literacy skills to make connections in new and innovative ways as they progress through the social sciences pathway” (pg. 65) and has to include “community service learning to cover aspects of citizenship” (pg. 79). If implemented in the classrooms, such skills will successfully contribute to developing informed and engaged citizens. Therefore, utilizing critical thinking through use of controversial issues pedagogy will be a pathway towards helping students engage issues in their society, solve problems in a peaceful democratic way. 263

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

Controversial issues discussion aims at producing competent, reflective and moral citizens ready to contribute to the development of the community and the country. These skills are in line with the new curriculum of education in Kenya of empowering leaners with knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that enable them to become responsible, ethical and patriotic citizens. Other practical ideas as described in the new social studies curriculum that is currently implemented on the topic of citizenship include practical experiential activities such as use of learning strategies like the role playing of the voting process, educating members of the community about voting steps and creating awareness about human rights in the society (KICD, 2020). Missing in this curriculum are details on how teachers are expected to fulfil these goals and how their pedagogy should look like. Also missing is teacher training opportunities. This leaves the teachers with the problem of trying to figure out how to implement and enact citizenship education goals. Therefore, there is need for research to evaluate how the teachers have implemented these goals in the curriculum, what training teachers received and further research on student outcomes in citizenship training. However, just like many other countries, education does not adequately prepare their students for civic participation thus “denying the youth experience in citizenship and democratic development” (Kwawashima-Ginsberg & Junco, 2018 pp.323-29). Kenyan education system just like in other countries, will still continue to face problems in implementing these citizenship focused aspects in the curriculum. However, there is need for continued research and reevaluation of the implementation of the new curriculum. What is necessary for success will be continuous monitoring of the implementation, continuous support for the teachers by the curriculum developers and leaders by providing resources and training. There is also need for continuous monitoring of the challenges and tackling them immediately and then making necessary revisions to ensure success. At the same time there is need for teachers to be supported in their teaching endeavors. In Kenya, teachers stated that they did not have training and skills to effectively teach controversial issues, neither did they have the resources to do so in an environment that pushed for imparting content for passing examinations and not quality teaching for citizenship building (Waliaula 2011). Waliaula continues to show that some teachers had to pay for their own training to improve their pedagogical skills. I remember, myself as a teacher in the Kenyan schools, I had to seek further education training in best practices because I did not feel confident in empowering my students to become successful learners besides imparting knowledge to pass examinations. Even though the new curriculum intends to “enhance pedagogical approaches that support creativity, innovation, critical thinking inclusivity and sustainable development” teachers need tools and training to be innovative and guidance in using modern pedagogical approaches such as controversial issue pedagogy (KICD p.10). Moreover, teachers need some general teaching guidelines to assist them in implementing the new curriculum. There is also need to create a system of continuously measuring and providing feedback and improving pedagogical strategies as well as gauge progress as needed. Teachers need tools to enact citizenship education such as ways to connect the students with the society or ways to utilize critical thinking through controversial issues teaching. Teachers also need personal and professional support to train their intrinsic views and inert ideologies for the purposes of having an open mind and a balanced perspective to teach controversial issues from a balanced perspective. In-service training and workshops will be best opportunities for teachers to learn and share best practices. Unfortunately, the newly curriculum does not stipulate or elaborate details on what kind of support teachers will receive.

264

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

CONCLUSION This study gave me an understanding of how things are in the present educational curriculum and problems that still persist. However, despite challenges in teaching citizenship education, the new curriculum provides new details that hopefully will contribute towards critical citizenship education. Utilizing controversial issues pedagogy can be a critical tool for teachers to create spaces in their classrooms for controversial issues conversations. It will also be an opportunity for teachers to interrogate their own biases, prejudices, epistemologies and be open to “deal honestly” with their views and beliefs (Bell, et.al, 2003, p. 464) and also be ready to “open their minds to alternative experiences to build up their belief systems” (Rotich, 2017, p.85). Now is the time to provide students with necessary tools to participate in their societies, a time to explicitly discuss ways to engage the community and move towards active democratic involvement and participation or active citizenship. While noting the achievements in the new curriculum for schools in Kenya, there continues to be a gap between the curriculum and pedagogy. Particularly important is how the pedagogy goes beyond imparting curriculum knowledge for knowledge sakes and moves towards critical pedagogical experiences in the classroom. For the success of the newly revised curriculum in Kenya, further research needs to look into the following; the enactment of the new curriculum in the classrooms in Kenya; the successes and challenges of its implementation; student outcomes and teacher successes in implementing the new curriculum. More specifically some of the questions to be asked in evaluating the new curriculum are, how have teachers been prepared to develop successful and active citizens? What pedagogical tools do the teachers utilize to produce successful democratic citizens? How are learners connected to their societies and what kinds of engagement are they involved in, both in practice in their classrooms and also in their societies? What are examples of success stories after the implementation of the new curriculum? Researching and analyzing these critical questions will provide and create spaces for improvements and will ensure a move towards success in critical citizenship education in Kenya.

REFERENCES Bogonko, S. (1992). A history of modern education in Kenya:1895-1991. London: Evans Brothers Limited. Byford, J., Lennon, S., & Russell, W. (2009). Teaching controversial issues in the social studies: A research study of high school teachers. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(4), 165–170. doi:10.3200/TCHS.82.4.165-170 Denzin, K. N., Lincoln, S. Y., & Smith, T. L. (2008). Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies. SAGE. doi:10.4135/9781483385686 Dewey, J. (1915). The school and society. Chicago University Press. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. Macmillan. Engle, S. H., & Ochoa, A. N. (1988). The citizen we need in a democracy. Teachers College Press. Eshiwani, G. S. (1993). Education in Kenya since independence. EAP. Freire, P. (1970/2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continumn.

265

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

Giroux, H. (2010). In defense of public school teachers in a time of crisis. Policy Futures in Education, 8(6), 709–714. doi:10.2304/pfie.2010.8.6.709 Giroux, H. A. (2011). On critical pedagogy. The Continuum International Publishing. Giroux, H. A., & Giroux, S. S. (2008). Challenging neoliberalism’s new world order: The promise of critical pedagogy. In N.K. Denzin, Y.S. Lincoln & L.T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 181-190). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Hess, D. (2004). Controversies about controversial issues in democratic education. PS, Political Science & Politics, 37(02), 257–261. doi:10.1017/S1049096504004196 Hess, D. (2005). How do teachers’ political views influence teaching about controversial issues? Social Education, 69(1), 47–48. Hess, D. (2010). Teaching student teachers to examine how their political views inform their teaching. In A. Segall, C. H. Cherryholmes, & E. E. Heilman (Eds.), Social studies and diversity education: What we do and why we do it. Routledge. Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD). (2017). Basic education curriculum framework. https://kicd.ac.ke/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/CURRICULUMFRAMEWORK.pdf Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD). (2019a). Curriculum policy. https://kicd.ac.ke/ curriculum-reform/national-curriculum-policy/ Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD). (2020). Social studies. https://kicd.ac.ke/wp-content/ uploads/2020/03/GRADE-5-DESIGNS-dec-2019.pdf Kenya Institute of Curriculum Development (KICD). (2019b). Basic education curriculum framework. https://kicd.ac.ke/curriculum-reform/basic-education-curriculum-framework/ Kenya Institute of Education (KIE). (2002). Secondary education syllabus (Rev. ed., Vol. 5). Kenya Literature Bureau. Keogh, S.C., Stillman, M., Awusabo-Asare, K., Sidze, E., Monzon, A., Motta, A. & Leong, E. (2018). Challenges to implementing national comprehensive sexuality education Curricula in low-and middleincome countries: Case studies of Ghana, Kenya, Peru and Guatemala. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0200513 Kolb, D. (2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson Education, Inc. Kwawashima-Ginsberg, K., & Junco, R. (2018). Teaching controversial issues in a time of polarization. Social Education, 82(6), 323–329. McLaren, P. (2003). Critical theory and educational practice. In A. Darder, M. Baltodana, & D. R. Torres (Eds.), Critical Pedagogy Reader. Routledge Falmer. Merryfield, M., & Tlou, J. (1995). The process of Africanizing the social studies. Social Studies, 86(6), 260–269. doi:10.1080/00377996.1995.9958406 Ngaroga, J. M. (1996). Education for primary teachers: PTE revision series. EAEP.

266

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

Noddings, N., & Brooks, L. (2017). Teaching controversial issues: The case for critical thinking and moral commitment. Teachers College Press. Odhiambo, E. (2017). Auma’s long run. Lerner Publishing Group. Ouilton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26(4), 411–423. doi:10.1080/0950069032000072746 Rotich, A. (2017). Teachers’ epistemologies and the teaching of controversial issues in Kenya. In M. Gitau, P. Mutisya, C. Wiezorek & C. Kamau (Eds.), Kenyan education system: Are we preparing students to meet current global needs and challenges. Book Baby. Schilling, D. G. (1972). British policy for African education in Kenya, 1895-1939 [PhD Thesis]. University of Wisconsin. Sheffield, J. (1971). Education in the republic of Kenya. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office. Sheffield, J. R. (1973). Education in Kenya: A historical study. Teachers College Press. Sifuna, D. N. (2000). Education for democracy and human rights. Africa Development. Afrique et Developpement, 25(1&2), 213–239. Waliaula, A. (2011). Teaching local and global controversial issues in the social studies education: A comparative study of Kenyan and US high schools [Doctoral Dissertation]. The Ohio State University. https://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1306952318 Wolk, S. (2003). Teaching for critical literacy in social studies. Social Studies, 94(3), 101–106. doi:10.1080/00377990309600190

ADDITIONAL READING Abowitz, K. K., & Harnish, J. (2006). Contemporary discourses of citizenship. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 653–690. doi:10.3102/00346543076004653 Abu-Hamdan, T. T., & Khader, F. R. (2014, October). Social studies teachers’ perceptions on teaching contemporary controversial issues. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 4(10), 73–83. Asimeng-Boahene, L. (2007). Creating strategies to deal withproblems of teaching controversial issues in social studies education in African schools. International Education, 18(3), 231–242. Badri, S. A. (2016). Teaching controversial issues in the classroom. Citizenship Education Research Journal, 5(1), 73–83. Banks, J. (2001). Citizenship education and diversity: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(1), 5–16. doi:10.1177/0022487101052001002 Banks, J. (2004). Democratic citizenship education in multicultural societies. In J. Banks, (Ed), Diversity and Citizenship Education: Global Perspectives. San Franscisco: Jossey-Bass.

267

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

Bell, L. A., Washington, S., Weistein, G., & Love, B. (2003). Knowing ourselves as instructors. In A. Darder, M. Baltodano, & R. D. Torres (Eds.), The critical pedagogy reader (pp. 464–478). Routledge Farmer. Bogonko, S. (1992). A history of modern education in Kenya:1895-1991. Evans Brothers Ltd. Cameron, J. (1970). The development of education in East Africa. Teachers College Press. Chikoko, V., Gilmour, D., Harber, C., & Serf, J. (2011). Teaching controversial issues and teacher education in England and South Africa. Journal of Education for Teaching, 37(1), 5–19. doi:10.1080/026 07476.2011.538268 Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative Methods on Teaching: Handbook on Research on Teaching. Macmillan. Eshiwani, G. S. (1993). Education in Kenya Since Independence. EAP. Graseck, S. (2009). Teaching with controversy. Educational Leadership, 67(1), 45–49. Hess, D. (2008). Controversial issues and democratic discourse. In L. S. Levistik & C. A. Tyson (Eds.), Handbook of Research in Social Studies Education (pp. 124–136). Routledge. Hess, D., & Avery, P. (2008). The discussion of controversial issues as a form and goal of democratic education. J. Arthur., I. Davies & C. Hahn (Eds.). International Handbook on Education for Citizenship and Democracy (pp. 506-518). London: Sage. Hess, D., & Posselt, J. (2002). How High School Students Experience and Learn from Discussion of Controversial Public Issues. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17(4), 283–315. Hung, Y. (2019). Exploration of teachers’ practical knowledge for teaching controversial public issues in elementary school classrooms. In the Journal of Social Studies Research, doi:10.1016/j.jssr.2020.04.001 Kubow, P. (2007). Teachers construction of democracy: Intersections of western and indigenous knowledge in South Africa and Kenya. Comparative Education Review, 51(3), 307–328. doi:10.1086/518479 Kymlicka, W. (1999). Education for citizenship. Education and Morality. Routledge. National Council of Social Studies. (2010, September) The themes of social studies. https://www.socialstudies.org/standards/strands Parker, W. (2001). Educating democratic citizens: Abroad view. Theory into Practice, 40(1), 6–13. doi:10.120715430421tip4001_2 Republic of Kenya. (1964). Kenya education commission report. Part I. Government Printer. Republic of Kenya. (1965). Kenya education commission report. Part II. Government Printer.

268

 Towards Critical Citizenship Education in Kenya

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Citizenship Education: An education that prepares individuals to become good responsible citizens who have knowledge and skills to participate fully in democratic societies. Controversial Issues: Issues evoke different feelings, opinions and views based on peoples’ beliefs and values. Critical Pedagogy: Teaching approach that helps students’ questions, and challenge ideas and power structures. Critical Thinking: This involves high order intellectual skills where one approaches issues through analyzing and evaluating facts, and then synthesizing the issue and applying thought or argument to the matter in order to come up with a solution or conclusion. Democratic Education: This is education where learners are central to the learning process and are not receivers of knowledge but active participants in creating the knowledge and share in solving problems in their communities. It is education that is closely linked to citizenship education where learners are trained to be active and engaged citizens. Teachers Epistemology: Teacher beliefs, worldviews and thinking that inform their perspective or knowledge about an issue. Traditional Education: This is a teacher-centered education where students are recipients of knowledge provided by the teacher.

269

270

Chapter 14

Back to My Roots:

Utilizing Hair to Build StudentLed Learning in the Classroom Patricia O’Brien-Richardson https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0149-5354 Rutgers University, USA

ABSTRACT This chapter explores the use of hair, a common yet complex object, as an entry point to student-led practice. As students bring their personal, past, and present experiences into the classroom in a safe, supported space on a topic everyone can relate to, so they are able to engage in complex, opposing viewpoints. Students are supported by the educator who serves as a facilitator, and various outside guests from diverse backgrounds established in their careers via Zoom, a technological, virtual space who also share their experiences with hair in their career environment. In this setting, students are led by their own hair stories, collaboratively discuss and debate viewpoints, and are supported by professionals in their own workspaces. Combined, this multi-level layer of culturally based learning is both student-led, technologically supported, and provides opportunities to achieve both hard and soft skills, all through the lens of a single, unifying artifact, hair.

INTRODUCTION While educators spend their summers exploring topics of interest to their students, pouring time over remaking their syllabi and making efforts to include subjects and skill sets they believe their students should master by the end of the upcoming year, innovative educators are doing the complete opposite. Twenty-first century educators know they are not the “keepers of knowledge” in the classroom. They recognize how learning occurs, and by whom; the true experts in the room, the students themselves. Student-led learning begins with the student at the center, is led by the students’ own intrinsic exploration, and is paved by their inquiry and experiences.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch014

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Back to My Roots

Students today live in a diverse, rapidly changing world where their success in college and career demands more knowledge, skill, and experience than they can achieve in a classroom setting from one “expert in the room”. There must be several, connection-making experts, collaboratively working to problem solve with various, often opposing viewpoints, building respect and empathy in an environment reflective of the world we live in today. At a time where science, technology, engineering, and mathematics are central to the education platform and increasingly complex, students are seeing less and less of themselves, their history, their culture, and their unique experiences in the classroom. Yet, the demand for emotional intelligence, social networking, and collaborative skills, that are often built upon these personal, historical, and cultural experiences are ever increasing creating a paradigm shift in classroom pedagogy. The traditional, homogenous teacher-led instruction is becoming a more diverse, learner-centered practice. How can students achieve technical skill sets, empathetic character traits, and personal work habits in our current world of education? This chapter explores the use of hair, a common yet complex object, as an entry point to student-led practice. As students bring their whole self into the classroom in a safe, supported space they are able to engage in complex, often opposing worldviews. In the student-led classroom, the educator serves as a facilitator alongside outside guests from diverse backgrounds who also share their experiences with hair in the workplace via Zoom, a virtual communications platform. In this setting, students share their own hair stories which like most personal narratives, accompany vulnerability, openness, and trust. This chapter explores how hair was used in higher education classes as a starting point for discussions and debate on often complex and opposing topics, and as a unifying platform to unpack perspectives on worldviews. Using the site of two diverse university classrooms, we explored a framework for culturally-based student-led learning to build 21st century skills as students engage in global themes of social justice, culture, technology, and politics through the lens of hair. By the end of this chapter, educators will be able to: 1. Understand how culture informs and improves classroom communities 2. Apply cultural artifacts, such as hair, to classroom curriculum in order to build student-led learning, unity, and inclusion among students 3. Create a safe, democratic, equalized classroom space, where students focus more on what they have in common than what sets them apart

BACKGROUND We live in an age where toxic, offensive, hate-speech is spewed from everyday people to leaders of nations, and where widespread racism, gender-based crimes, and xenophobia are ubiquitous. Violence against demographic groups are on the rise. The most recent data on violence against various groups reflect this sentiment. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, 60% of bias-motivated incidents were based on race, ethnicity, and ancestry bias, with 47% motivated by anti-Black or African-American bias, and 20% from anti-White bias. Latinos continued to experience an increase of racially motivated incidents which has increased to 48% over the past five years. Sixty percent of sexual orientation bias were classified as anti-gay (male), and 25% were prompted by anti-lesbian, bisexual, or transgender bias (Treisman, 2019; U.S. Department of Justice, 2018).

271

 Back to My Roots

Cultural violence, a term defined by Johan Galtung as “violence against those aspects of culture, the symbolic sphere of our existence exemplified by religion and ideology, language, art, etc.…”, communicate a subtle yet consistent message that all is not right in the world. Houses of worship, schools, malls, and movie theaters are now targets of violence (Galtung, 1990; Saramo, 2017) upsetting the ease we once had in common places and spaces. Likewise, structural violence, indirect social violence built into a social or institutional structure, legitimize violence and social injustice, often evoking a sense of societal division, fear, and distrust (Bajaj, 2016; Galtung, 1990). It is highly unlikely for these dynamics of power, privilege, and exclusion in the larger society to not have an effect on our students and the ways in which we address their academic needs (Ochoa & Pineda, 2008). This divisive, social “noise” has become part of our day-to-day lives spilling over into our classrooms, our students’ lives, and our teaching. Given this multi-level, multi-layer of disunity, polarization, direct and indirect violence on diverse demographics, there is an increased need for educators and school personnel to create unity, inclusion, and peace in the classroom. Educators know exposure to violence, whether direct or indirect, reduce academic progress and performance (Cooper, 2017; Ding, Han, & Yang, 2018; Katsiyannis, Whitford, & Ennis, 2018). They realize disunity and division in the classroom undermine the motivation and achievement of students, and they understand that a sense of belonging is essential for learning (Walton & Cohen, 2007). Key education leaders across the country view the inclusion of culture as a major entry point of unity and learning (Emdin, 2017; Hammond, 2014; Hollie, 2017). They realize the importance and necessity of providing a safe, supported space is fundamental to 21st century achievement in the classroom. Smart educators are informed and aware of the world, its influence, and distraction. They know the outside has already come in and are asking themselves essential questions such as: • • •

What makes a classroom a community? How can we build a classroom of belonging? What does a unified classroom look like?

Hair: The Great Equalizer Despite living, working, playing, and studying in a world divided by racial bias, religious hatred, and gender-based violence, hair is a common denominator. Whether black, white, trans, sis, Muslim, or Jewish, one area of shared relatability is hair. Hair is the beginning for many of us. It takes us back to our roots, literally. Anyone of any race, age, gender, sexual orientation, or ethnicity can bring their own hair story into the classroom and lead their own exploration from there. Although there are differences physically, biologically, and texturally, all hair grows out of the root the same way (Bowen & O’Brien-Richardson, 2017; Johnson & Bankhead, 2014). Regardless of these differences, as many as 100,000 individual follicles can be found on the average scalp (Strehlow, 2013). It is the shape of the follicle that determines the texture and size of each hair strand. As such, hair texture can range anywhere from pin-straight to extremely curly based on the biological shape of the follicle. It is the similarity of hair, a commonality that every human being can relate to, that allows to be able to build an inoculated safe space for student-led learning.

272

 Back to My Roots

Hair I Am: Bringing Hair into the Classroom as a Tool of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy Using hair to build student-learning in the classroom represents an education theory referred to as culturally responsive pedagogy, a pedagogy that empowers students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and politically by using cultural and historical references to convey knowledge, impart skills, and to change attitudes (Hollie, 2017). Multiple names has been given to culturally responsive pedagogy such as cultural-based learning, culturally responsive teaching, and most recently, culturally-sustaining pedagogy, which all form a continuum of culture in the classroom (Gay, 2001; Paris, 2012). Using culture in the classroom in this way has been positively related to the socio-emotional well-being, motivation and higher education outcomes of students. At the same time, it instills respect for diverse populations, creates safe, inclusive spaces for enriching debates and discussions, and is the perfect setting to build upon 21st century skills. Hair is more than just hair. On the contrary, it holds significant meaning and is representative of many levels of one’s identity. Hairstyles and rituals surrounding hair care, culture, and adornment of hair convey powerful messages about a person’s beliefs, race, ethnicity, identity, lifestyles, and commitments (O’Brien-Richardson, 2019b). Inferences and judgements about a person’s morality, sexual orientation, political persuasion, religious sentiments and, in some cultures, socio-economic status can sometimes be surmised by seeing or wearing a particular hairstyle (Pergament, 1999). The journey of exploring this diversity, and empowering students with each other’s cultures began with assembling views of hair from various groups and identities. In developing the curriculum, readings, texts, and subsequent lessons, special efforts were made to maintain the pluralistic, global theme of hair. Topics for our class included: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Sociology of hair Early European history and culture of hair Early Asian history and culture of hair Hair and head coverings and Muslim women Hair and Islamic culture Men’s facial hair in Islam Hair in the NFL Barber shop culture Beauty shop culture Men’s grooming businesses Hair discrimination in school policies and the workplace Micro-aggressions of hair Hair, political use, and governmental force Hair tools and technology Tonsuring in India and the global trade of hair

Students were encouraged to share their own cultural hair experiences and include them in their class research projects and presentations. Their topics included: •

Iconic hairstyles of American pop culture eras 273

 Back to My Roots

• • • • • • • • • •

Slave hair The hair analyses of presidential candidates Hair and identity The hair analyses of musicians (color and style compared to genre of music) Hair and Islamophobia Hair and religion The symbolism of hair in Ecuador, Dominican Republic, and Cuba Three generations of barbers African hair in the New World Hair and sexual identity

By using hair as a cultural artifact, students were able to communicate and collaborate on a relatable topic (Ladson-Billings, 1995; Paris, 2012; Paris & Alim, 2014), critically think about hair in various contexts, and be creative in their debates and discussions, all 21st century skills known as the “Four C’s (National Education Association, 2018). Likewise, they were also able to increase their emotional intelligence skills such as empathy, social skills, and self-awareness. Hair was an excellent tool to develop resilience towards cultural fear because students were able to respect and understand each other’s history, struggles, and experiences.

Cultivating Unity Through Hair Narratives Hair narratives, referred to as hair stories or storytelling, provided opportunities for students to vulnerably write about their own personal hair story and earliest memory of their hair. For some, this was thought provoking and gave insight into their family’s culture and traditions, such as the use of hair in religious rituals or as a symbol for their spiritual beliefs. For others, it was vivid such as stories of their first hair-cuts. Still for others, it was cathartic, such as the cutting of one’s hair due to hair loss at an early age or being refused to attend school because of their hairstyle, a form of discrimination known as hair discrimination or hair harassment (O’Brien-Richardson, 2019b). Through this student-led participation structure, all students were engaged including students who were reluctant to participate or seemed disconnected during teacher-led instruction (Schultz & Coleman-King, 2012). Lesson direction and motivation was completely student-led. Using hair narratives deconstructed power dynamics that sometimes exist in classrooms by topic or frequent participation of the same few students. Using hair narratives in the classroom stimulated engagement and cultivated unity among the students which in turn equalized the classroom space. The takeaway was: everyone is important, every opinion matters, I belong, I matter, my perspectives are unique and respected. Students chose to share their hair stories openly in collaborative circles. During this practice, trust was built, respect was fostered, and inclusion was happening. Entirely without the teacher, students curiously asked questions about each other’s values, learned about family rituals, and deepened the reflective practice of narration. Most importantly, students were actively participating in 21st century academic learning in a safe, supported space. These critical concepts: culture based pedagogy, student-led vs. teacher-led learning, and safe spaces, are key elements of today’s modern classroom, a clear departure and academic shift from the history of student learning.

274

 Back to My Roots

A BRIEF HISTORY OF STUDENT LEARNING “An educator in a system of oppression is either a revolutionary or an oppressor” (Bennett, 1972). At the turn of the 20th century in the early 1900’s, the thought of education for all was revolutionary. The idea of everyone having education, regardless of race or gender represented freedom (Spring, 2016). Education during that time focused on religion, family, and morality. It was literacy-centric, learning to read was of key importance for the purposes of agriculture, the economic engine of that time. Later, during the Industrial Revolution workers required vocational training. Education then consisted of improving and advancing one’s family and way of life. Despite this, neither educational equity nor the nature of academic instruction were of any importance. There was little expectation for students to own their right to an education much less attend school. Instead the emphasis of a child labor force, supported by the priorities of family growth, was the mindset that prevailed. Later during the mid-50’s through the 90’s, traditional methods of teaching consisted of teachers directing students to learn via memorization and recitation techniques. Assessments typically resembled teachers listening to students’ vocabulary and oral exams. Customs and standards, including classroom behavior, were determined by the teachers’ communication of the knowledge often through talk and chalk, and who enforced class behavior. The teacher was the main source of innovation. Students were not expected to grow, think, or know anything beyond their teacher. Students sat in classroom chairs in neatly structured rows, quietly reading outdated textbooks containing biased, racist themes and dared not question the text nor the teacher. By contrast, the 21st century flipped the switch on education, literally, illuminating the mind, body, and soul of students and teachers alike. Twenty-first century learning marked an awakening of educational models, one that focused on individual student’s needs rather than seeing the class homogenously. It was and still is activity based, with an emphasis on questioning, explaining, demonstrating, and collaborating techniques. It embraces technology, uses skill-based methods, and allows students to manifest their own progress and take the lead. As such it is appropriately referred to as student-led learning.

ELEMENTS OF THE STUDENT- LED CLASSROOM Student-led Learning While traditional student learning emphasized molding and shaping children to fit into an educational process, today’s 21st century classrooms allows for students to forge their own path. In student-led classrooms, students take intellectual risks, problem solve, think critically, and engage in teamworking activities (Applied Educational Systems, 2020; Keane, Keane, & Blicblau, 2016; Mass, 2018). They master content by producing, synthesizing, and evaluating information from various subjects and sources as opposed to the teacher as their only source of knowledge. Student-led learning occurs in safe spaces beside educators who facilitate learning in diverse settings. There is a respect for diverse cultures, identities, gender, religion, ancestry, history, and language. The curriculum is grounded in critical thinking and differentiated forms of instruction designed to suit the student’s needs. This essential understanding and respect is underscored by a development of emotional intelligence, anti-bias texts, and mindfulness and wellness practices, which help prepare students for our pluralistic, diverse, multicultural world. (Derman-Sparks, 2009; O’Brien-Richardson, 2019a). 275

 Back to My Roots

Teacher-led vs. Student-led Classrooms Differences between a teacher-led and a student-led classroom are easily observable: In the teacher-led classroom: • • • •

Teachers are responsible for the learning, they are the keepers and key sources of knowledge Students are quiet and controlled Learning is designed around a teacher’s needs Failure is perceived as bad In contrast, in the student-led classroom:

• • • •

Students advocate for their own learning needs Class may look busy, chaotic, and noisy; however, learning is happening, oftentimes collaboratively Classroom is designed around the student’s needs School is where students learn, as such learning is a natural byproduct of failure

Teachers’ Roles In student-led classrooms teachers are facilitators, mentors, coaches, and inspire students to find passion in the subjects they are learning. Their work involves eliciting student’s interests, while simultaneously nurturing a community of learners. This calls for teachers to be flexible, adjust to this new identity, and think outside of the box regarding instruction (Keiler, 2018). By utilizing non-traditional, student-led, safe spaces, teachers can focus on building 21st century skills that will produce tomorrow’s leaders and change agents.

Safe Spaces Student-led classrooms reflect a space where innovative ideas are respected, equity is the goal, and 21st century skills are achieved in safe, supported environments (Holley & Steiner, 2005). The term “safe space” in education discourse has been used to describe an environment which encourages participation in the honest sharing of ideas where students can freely express their feelings and curiosity particularly towards challenging topics such as oppression, race, cultural competence, gender, sexuality, bias, and power dynamics. A safe space fills a need for insulation from the chaos of the world and creates unity in an increasingly stressful, violent, bias-motivated world (Rom, 1998).

Zoom in the Room Despite living at a time where technology allows individuals to be more connected than ever, studies show that we are actually lonelier than ever (López, Hartmann, & Apaolaza, 2019). Technology has the allure of connectedness, but many find it to be an illusion. Oddly enough the convenience of communication impedes the authenticity of sincere communication. However, connecting with a purpose, as in education, business, mentoring, or self-study, has been shown to improve social relationships and academic outcomes (Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Lundin, Bergviken Rensfeldt, Hillman, Lantz-Andersson, 276

 Back to My Roots

& Peterson, 2018). In these settings, there is already a co-existing shared space that encourages gathering, community, and interaction, in particular, the classroom. This may be one reason why Zoom, a video communications and audio conferencing platform is the frequent choice for schools, businesses, health facilities, and organizations around the world (Scanga, Deen, Smith, & Wright, 2018; Shah et al., 2019; Sutterlin, 2018). Its user-friendly chat, webinar, and shared screen services is easy to learn and utilize. Although it has a free package with limited video conferencing, many institutions, as in the case with the two discussed in this chapter, have chosen to purchase plans for their educators and students. Using Zoom in the classroom allows for another level of learning to the student-led, culturally-based curriculum of exploring the ways in which hair has meaning in various global contexts. Topics of racism, sexual identity, micro-agressions, hair discrimination, and the like can be challenging for some educators. Further, bringing in expert outside guests may require funding and time to plan. For example, identifying and securing speakers, allowing time for them to prepare for travel, as well as their presentation, and ensuring they are skilled and engaging can be problematic. However, using Zoom, guests who have had experiences in these areas can be “zoomed” into the class easily, conveniently, and without necessary travel funding. Additionally, involving students every step of the way from the development of weekly topics and the selection of guests, to the questions for the guests, ensured the objectives and processes remained student-led. These steps included: 1. The students using social media, online networks, and their own social capital to identify guests who had hair experiences as it related to weekly topics (students found that in virtual spaces professionals often share their content for free and are willing to share their expertise with others, particularly students) 2. Creating a google form for potential guests to fill in the key areas of their experiences to see if they would be a good fit, then making a final selection 3. Sharing weekly topics with potential guests and mutually agreeing upon the appropriate topics that would best suit the class 4. Creating a schedule for guests, confirming dates and times, and being available to answer any questions before the date 5. Creating or obtaining a Zoom account, and teaching the guests how to create and use Zoom. Practice was needed for a few of the guests to ensure a working connection particularly if guests were in countries or spaces where internet connection was limited (guests were asked to sign on a few minutes before in order to reduce time spent connecting and to make use of the entire class time) Guests included: • • •

A Director of Engineering at a New York City top financial firm who shared his experiences practicing Sikhism, which often requires the wearing of turban head coverings, in corporate America An Assistant Professor at the University of Ras Al Khaimah in the United Arab Emirates who discussed Muslim women, the hijab, micro-aggression and urban spaces A former Super Bowl Champion (XXXVII) who conversed on rules for hair in the NFL, and the increase of men wearing locs as a hairstyle on the field

277

 Back to My Roots

• • • • •

South African Producer and Director Yolanda Keabetswe Mogatusi who conversed on her short film, Hair that Moves, on natural hair and the natural hair movement in South Africa, and the intra-conflicts regarding hair among women and girls in the South African community A young woman who had experienced hair loss due to alopecia early in life A beard-wearing Muslim PhD Research Assistant who had experienced hair harassment being retained and questioned at the airport when returning from vacation with friends An entrepreneur who started his career owning several barber shops and turned a few into cafes A Dominican hair stylist who discussed the history of hair in the Dominican Republic and Dominican hair salon culture in New York City during the 80’s and 90’s

NVIVO version 12, a qualitative analysis software package was utilized in analyzing the student’s responses to both using Zoom to explore hair experiences of class guests, and to explore the use of hair narratives as a cultural artifact. In their own words, students expressed their reflections on using Zoom in the classroom as they viewed hair as a lens to embrace diversity, inclusion, and develop belonging in the student-led classroom: Table 1. Student responses to using Zoom to explore hair experiences of class guests Theme

Student Responses The use of technology in the classroom, Zoom, was interesting. It added an additional layer to the class experience.

Great tool for the classroom

Zoom allowed students the opportunity to become familiar with a new technology and how it could be used to facilitate a class. Zoom was a great tool to use in the classroom and it should continue to be used. Really fun and new technology! I agree with having face to screen (LOL) contact with people because I believe it made their experience hit home that much deeper. Had the chance to speak with people from all over the world in different time zone, useful, will use in future. It was nice being able to interact with people around the world and hearing their hair stories.

Making connections with people around the world

I like using Zoom in the classroom. It allows us to have all these different speakers. Zoom was nice just because I think it’s great to connect with different people from all over the world on their time. It’s convenient The guest speakers were great, and I loved how you tapped into your resources for us. I really enjoyed using this technology because we talked to people across the world. (Really Good App!!)

SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Culture-based pedagogy embraces student-led learning because it begins and ends with the student’s needs at the center (Gay, 2001). Educators may choose to utilize this educational theory of teaching using commonly known artifacts all students share. In this example, hair was used, however, any common, relatable cultural experience could potentially be used.

278

 Back to My Roots

Table 2. Student responses to utilizing hair narratives as a cultural artifact Theme

Student Responses The presenters were able to relate it back to social justice, and allowed us to better synthesize connections between hair and social justice.

Understanding of the world around them (social justice, politics, technology)

Writing about and sharing our hair stories were crucial to understanding how to narrate hair in a political/ technological/ social justice lens. Hair is more of a political issue than I would’ve imagined. I will be able to look at social justice in a new and important way. Was very insightful- I didn’t expect hair to be this interconnected with politics and social justice. I also did not know that hair affects men as much as women I learned I am not the only one with struggles due to my hair, and color of my skin. I learned my hair is beautiful, just like me! It helps one to be enlightened more.

Understanding, appreciation, and engagement in the struggle of others

It made me think about how my hair has shaped my social interactions and to analyze the connections and causes. Hair stories- Significant way to start the course. It gets students involved and engaged in the class. I learned so much of the hair struggles from different people and how that relates to other parts of their lives- informative + interesting. At times you find out more than what you already know. The Hair Stories in the beginning was a great way to know and also open people up to their roots. Exploring my own hair story was the most revealing project I have done about myself. No other project made me delve into my childhood and culture and I learned so much about how I think and how society’s pressure made me think a certain way about my hair. I learned a lot, and I am able to share my thoughts with my family!

Understanding of self

I enjoyed that assignment. I never had a class that gave a written assignment that was about me. I was able to sit and reflect on my experiences. I thought the hair story was a good intro for the class because my hair story would probably have different content after learning about the importance of hair. I really learned a lot about my natural hair and the chemicals used in most natural hair care products

Student-led classrooms encompasses the students taking the lead, teachers in the role of facilitators, with the optional use of co-facilitators via a video communication platform. In this safe, supported space, students are free to be vulnerable with classmates on challenging issues of bias, micro-agressions, racism, and structural violence they may be experiencing or have experienced directly or indirectly. This openness breeds openness as well as critical emotional intelligence skills. In this way, educators are able to inoculate students from the toxic, divisive, social violence of the world, common detractors and obstacles to learning, and set the stage for true 21st century learning students need to succeed and thrive.

279

 Back to My Roots

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Because culture-based learning has been related to student emotional well-being, educators should consider using hair as a cultural relatable artifact to explore student emotional well-being needs such as mindfulness and techniques to reduce anxiety due to trauma students experience. The future of our students will be filled with collaborations with people all over the world, with different identities, ethnicities, cultures, and worldviews. Non-traditional educational practices will be the norm. Using hair to build unity in the classroom and with others globally should be considered a useful strategy to forge these relationships. As our world continues to become more pluralistic, the call for students to be inclusive, appreciative, respectful, and understanding of their peers is now. The call for classroom spaces to be safe places to foster belonging, inclusion, equity, and a democratic distribution of knowledge is now. Students are ready to go there, as educators, we should be ready as well. A close read of innovative texts, pedagogies, and best practices from leading educational thought leaders across the globe will reveal a future for our students that is technologically driven, data-centered, global, diverse, and collaborative. Student choice will drive this learning as they utilize devices, programs, and techniques based on their own preferences. Students will become more and more involved in their learning and in forming their own curriculum. Because careers of the future lean towards a freelance, work-from-anywhere, team-centered economy, students will most likely work alongside team members they have never physically met, from various backgrounds, in global centers around the world. They will need to develop an understanding and appreciation for various cultures, explore commonalities, make diverse connections, and become members of inclusive communities. All of these elements can be found in the culturally-based, student-led classroom, particularly using the commonality of hair.

CONCLUSION Nelson Mandela once said, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”. Whether you teach in Anytown, USA, or a tiny village in a remote area, or on top of a luxury building overlooking a spectacular skyline, as educators, we must view the work we do as impactful and world-changing. This will involve stepping out of the way and allowing students to lead as we facilitate, guide, mentor, and coach them towards rigorous, challenging, new heights. Analyzing the use of hair to build student-led learning in the classroom revealed several relevant and practical insights which educators at any level can implement in their classrooms. They are: Culture, Commonality, Connection, and Community.

1. Culture Culture is the lens in which we see the world. Historically, the institution of school is a place where students gain knowledge about history, writing, math, sciences, often devoid of their culture, ethnicity, language, values, and worldview. By centering culture in the classroom, and most importantly, a cultural artifact that all students have in common, hair, students are able to bring themselves into the conversation, creating a validated, democratic, equitable space. Culture brings people in and opens up the space by

280

 Back to My Roots

validating everyone’s experience. It creates empathy, understanding, and acceptance, allowing students to walk in each other’s shoes.

2. Commonality The road of the 21st century is paved with skills designed to prepare our students for the future. However, to go forward, we must first go back, back to our roots, our beginnings, a point we all have in common which is why hair is a perfect place to start. As educators, we must move out of the way and allow students to forge their own path, together. As they learn from each other and about each other, gathering and collaborating on common, cultural, relatable parts of their lives, they are able to engage in complex, opposing viewpoints while developing the character building and socio-emotional skills their future requires.

3. Connection When students come together over topics that are challenging, require vulnerability, or are hard to discuss, the walls of division and distrust slowly fall. Although they may be from diverse backgrounds, through technological advances, such as Zoom, they are able to extend their social network, building connections in and outside of the classroom. As they connect through personal, often vulnerable points of view, such as hair narratives, they are steered away from the dominant linear mode of classroom communication and instead, are able to move towards collaborative engagement which creates a more democratic space.

4. Community Led by these narratives, and supported by the classroom teacher in the role of facilitator, as well as global guests, students are safe to share, grow, and learn, often from each other in this inclusive, safe space. Anyone of any race, age, gender, sexual orientation, or ethnicity can bring their personal hair story into the classroom and lead their own exploration from there. A sense of belonging and inclusion is priceless. Most importantly, it provides a much needed respite from the toxic, offensive, biased, often fearful world we have become used to living in.

REFERENCES Applied Educational Systems (Producer). (2020). Ultimate Guide to Teaching 21st Century Skills in Secondary Schools. Author. Bajaj, M., Ghaffar-Kucher, A., & Desai, K. (2016). Brown bodies and xenophobic bullying in U.S. schools: Critical analysis and strategies for action. Harvard Educational Review, 86(4), 481–505. doi:10.17763/1943-5045-86.4.481 Bennett, L. (1972). The Challenge of Blackness. Paper presented at the Institute of the Black World, Atlanta, GA.

281

 Back to My Roots

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day: International Society for Technology in Education. Bowen, F., & O’Brien-Richardson, P. (2017). Cultural hair practices, physical activity, and obesity among urban African-American girls. Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners, 29(12), 754–762. doi:10.1002/2327-6924.12513 PMID:28945016 Cooper, A. (2017). The Longitudinal Effects of Violence Exposure on Delinquency and Academic Outcomes for African-American Youth. Academic Press. Derman-Sparks, L., & Edwards, J. O. (2009). Anti-Bias Education for Young Children and Ourselves (2nd ed.). The National Association for the Education of Young Children. Ding, K., Han, S., & Yang, J. (2018). PW 0952 Violence experience and safety concerns among us female college students. BMJ Publishing Group Ltd. Emdin, C. (2017). For White Folks Who Teach in the Hood… and the Rest of Y’all Too: Reality Pedagogy and Urban Education (Race, Education, and Democracy). Beacon Press. Galtung, J. (1990). Cultural Violence. Journal of Peace Research, 27(3), 291–305. doi:10.1177/0022343390027003005 Gay, G. (2001). Preparing for Culturally Responsive Teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106–116. doi:10.1177/0022487102053002003 Hammond, Z. (2014). Culturally Responsive Teaching and the Brain: Promoting Authentic Engagement and Rigor Among Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Students. CA Corwin. Holley, L. C., & Steiner, S. (2005). Safe space: Student perspectives on classroom environment. Journal of Social Work Education, 41(1), 49–64. www.jstor.org/stable/23044032. doi:10.5175/JSWE.2005.200300343 Hollie, S. (2017). Culturally and Linguistically Responsive Teaching and Learning - Classroom Practices for Student Success, Grades K-12 (2nd ed.). Shell Education. Johnson, T., & Bankhead, T. (2014). Hair It Is: Examining the experiences of black women with natural hair. JSS, 2(1), 86–100. doi:10.4236/jss.2014.21010 Katsiyannis, A., Whitford, D. K., & Ennis, R. P. (2018). Historical Examination of United States Intentional Mass School Shootings in the 20 th and 21 st Centuries: Implications for Students, Schools, and Society. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27(8), 2562–2573. doi:10.100710826-018-1096-2 Keane, T., Keane, W. F., & Blicblau, A. S. (2016). Beyond traditional literacy: Learning and transformative practices using ICT. Education and Information Technologies, 21(4), 769–781. doi:10.100710639014-9353-5 Keiler, L. S. (2018). Teachers’ roles and identities in student-centered classrooms. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 34. doi:10.118640594-018-0131-6 PMID:30631724 Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedogogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159-165. Retrieved from https://nationalequityproject.files.wordpress. com/2012/03/ladson-billings_1995.pdf

282

 Back to My Roots

López, C., Hartmann, P., & Apaolaza, V. (2019). Gratifications on Social Networking Sites: The Role of Secondary School Students’ Individual Differences in Loneliness. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(1), 58–82. doi:10.1177/0735633117743917 Lundin, M., Bergviken Rensfeldt, A., Hillman, T., Lantz-Andersson, A., & Peterson, L. (2018). Higher education dominance and siloed knowledge: A systematic review of flipped classroom research. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 20. doi:10.118641239-018-0101-6 Mass, T., Jochim, A., & Gross, B. (2018). Mind the Gap: Will All Students Benefit from 21st Century Learning. Retrieved from University of Washington. www.crpe.org National Education Association. (2018). Preparing 21st Century Students for a Global Society: An Educator’s Guide to the “Four C’s”. Retrieved from http://www.nea.org/tools/52217.htm O’Brien-Richardson, P. (2019a). 4 Self-Care Strategies to Support Students: Why Well-Being Matters in the Classroom. Harvard Business Publishing Education. Retrieved from https://hbsp.harvard.edu/ inspiring-minds/4-self-care-strategies-to-support-students?fbclid=IwAR3_7QlohVeMuxHTQcVlq1aa Hly6er3d2S-lWNU3cZLo5xSRNc22EHWv_XY O’Brien-Richardson, P. (2019b). Hair Harassment in Urban Schools and How It Shapes the Physical Activity of Black Adolescent Girls. The Urban Review, 51(3), 523–534. Advance online publication. doi:10.100711256-019-00500-x Ochoa, G. L., & Pineda, D. (2008). Deconstructing Power, Privilege, and Silence in the Classroom. Radical History Review, 2008(102), 45–62. doi:10.1215/01636545-2008-012 Paris, D. (2012). Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy:A Needed Change in Stance, Terminology, and Practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. doi:10.3102/0013189X12441244 Paris, D., & Alim, H. S. (2014). What Are We Seeking to Sustain Through Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy? A Loving Critique Forward. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 85–100. doi:10.17763/ haer.84.1.982l873k2ht16m77 Pergament, D. (1999). It’s not just hair: Historical and cultural considerations for an emerging technology. Chicago-Kent Law Review, 75, 41. Rom, R. B. (1998). ‘Safe spaces’: Reflections on an educational metaphor. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 30(4), 397–408. doi:10.1080/002202798183549 Saramo, S. (2017). The Meta-voilence of Trumpism. European Journal of American Studies, 12(2). doi:10.4000/ejas.12129 Scanga, L. H., Deen, M. K. Y., Smith, S. R., & Wright, K. (2018). Zoom around the World: Using Videoconferencing Technology for International Trainings. Journal of Extension, 56(2), n2. Schultz, K., & Coleman-King, C. (2012). Becoming Visible: Shifting Teacher Practice to Actively Engage New Immigrant Students in Urban Classrooms. The Urban Review, 44(4), 487–509. doi:10.100711256012-0204-7

283

 Back to My Roots

Shah, R., Chakrabarti, S., Sharma, A., Grover, S., Sachdeva, D., & Avasthi, A. (2019). Participating from homes and offices: Proof-of-concept study of multi-point videoconferencing to deliver group parent training intervention for attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 41, 20–22. doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2019.03.006 PMID:30877843 Spring, J. (2016). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the education of dominated cultures in the United States. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315652368 Strehlow, A. (2013). Genetic Traits. Understanding genetics. Retrieved from https://genetics.thetech. org/ask/ask107 Sutterlin, J. (2018). Learning is Social with Zoom Video Conferencing in your Classroom. eLearn, 2018(12), Article 5. doi:10.1145/3302261.3236697 Treisman, R. (2019). FBI Reports Dip in Hate Crimes, But Rise in Violence. Criminal Justic Collaborative. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2019/11/12/778542614/fbi-reports-dip-in-hate-crimes-butrise-in-violence U.S. Department of Justice. (2018). 2018 Hate Crime Statistics. Retrieved from https://www.justice. gov/hatecrimes/hate-crime-statistics Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2007). A question of belonging: Race, social fit, and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 82–96. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.82 PMID:17201544

ADDITIONAL READING Awokoya, J. (2012). Identity Constructions and Negotiations Among 1.5- and Second-Generation Nigerians: The Impact of Family, School, and Peer Contexts. Harvard Educational Review, 82(2), 255–281. doi:10.17763/haer.82.2.9v77p329367116vj Bassey, M. O. (2017). Just What Carter G. Woodson Ordered: Culturally Responsive Education and Teaching. Journal of Education and Human Development, 6(4), 1–6. doi:10.15640/jehd.v6n4a1 Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day: International society for technology in education. Byrd, A., & Tharps, L. (2014). Hair Story: Untangling the Roots of Black Hair in America. St. Martin’s Griffin. Civitillo, S., Juang, L. P., Badra, M., & Schachner, M. K. (2019). The interplay between culturally responsive teaching, cultural diversity beliefs, and self-reflection: A multiple case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 341–351. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.11.002 Coffey, H. (2012). Culturally Relevant Teaching. Learn NC. Retrieved from http://www.learnnc.org/lp/ pages/4474 Cremin, H., & Bevington, T. (2017). Positive Peace in Schools: Tackling conflict and creating a culture of peace in the classroom. Taylor & Francis. doi:10.4324/9781315304236

284

 Back to My Roots

Durant, N. H., Joseph, R. P., Cherrington, A., Cuffee, Y., Knight, B., Lewis, D. Jr, & Allison, J. J. (2014). Recommendations for a culturally relevant Internet-based tool to promote physical activity among overweight young African American women, Alabama, 2010-2011. Preventing Chronic Disease, 11, 130169. doi:10.5888/pcd11.130169 PMID:24433625 Grunspan, D. Z., Kline, M. A., & Brownell, S. E. (2018). The lecture machine: A cultural evolutionary model of pedagogy in higher education. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(3), es6. doi:10.1187/cbe.1712-0287 PMID:29953324 Hammond, Z. (2018). Culturally Responsive Teaching Puts Rigor at the Center: Q&A with Zaretta Hammond. Learning Professional, 39(5), 40–43. Harris, K. A. (2017). Investigating the relationship between emotional intelligence and cultural intelligence to attitudes towards team-based learning in undergraduate pre-health profession students. Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Fighting for Our Lives:Preparing Teachers to Teach African American Students. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 206–214. doi:10.1177/0022487100051003008 Ladson-Billings, G. (2008). Yes, but how do we do it?”: Practicing culturally relevant pedagogy. City kids, city schools: More reports from the front row, 162-177. Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally Relevant Pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a. the Remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74–84. doi:10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751 Nykela, H. J. (2017). Fusing Culturally Responsive Teaching, Place Conscious Education, and ProblemBased Learning With Mobile Technologies: Sparking Change. In Empowering Learners With Mobile Open-Access Learning Initiatives (pp. 288–306). IGI Global. Opie, T. R., Livingston, B., Greenberg, D. N., & Murphy, W. M. (2019). Building gender inclusivity: Disentangling the influence of classroom demography on classroom participation. Higher Education, 77(1), 37–58. doi:10.100710734-018-0245-2 Oyedemi, T. (2016). Beauty as violence: ‘beautiful’ hair and the cultural violence of identity erasure. Social Identities, 22(5), 537–553. doi:10.1080/13504630.2016.1157465 Richards, B. N., & Camuso, L. (2015). Cultural Capital in the Classroom: The Significance of Debriefing as a Pedagogical Tool in Simulation-based Learning. International Journal on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 27(1), 94–103. https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1069&context=socanth-faculty-publications Schuelka, M. J., Johnstone, C. J., Thomas, G., & Artiles, A. J. (2019). The SAGE Handbook of Inclusion and Diversity in Education. SAGE Publications. doi:10.4135/9781526470430 Shealey, M. W., & Callins, T. (2007). Creating Culturally Responsive Literacy Programs in Inclusive Classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic, 42(4), 195–197. doi:10.1177/10534512070420040101 Sreckovic, M. A., Schultz, T. R., Kenney, C. K., & Able, H. (2018). Building Community in the Inclusive Classroom Setting the Stage for Success. YC Young Children, 73(3), 75–81. doi:10.2307/26788987

285

 Back to My Roots

Valdiviezo, L. A., & O’Donnell, J. L. “To Educate for Them in Different Ways”: Defining Inclusion in Popular and Intercultural Education in Argentina and Peru. In C. J. Schuelka, C. J. Johnstone, G. Thomas, & A. J. Artiles (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Inclusion and Diversity in Education (p. 652). SAGE. doi:10.4135/9781526470430.n38 Warren, C. A. (2014). Towards a Pedagogy for the Application of Empathy in Culturally Diverse Classrooms. The Urban Review, 46(3), 395–419. doi:10.100711256-013-0262-5 Warren, C. A. (2018). Empathy, teacher dispositions, and preparation for culturally responsive pedagogy. Journal of Teacher Education, 69(2), 169–183. doi:10.1177/0022487117712487 Whitaker Manya, C., & Valtierra Kristina, M. (2018). The dispositions for culturally responsive pedagogy scale. Journal for Multicultural Education, 12(1), 10–24. doi:10.1108/JME-11-2016-0060

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 21st Century Learning: Focuses on individual student’s needs rather than seeing the class homogenously. It is activity based, with an emphasis on questioning, explaining, demonstration, and collaboration techniques. It embraces technology, uses skill-based methods, and allows students to manifest their own progress. 21st Century Skills: Refers to language that is formally complex and typically used in academic context that typically takes longer to acquire and is essential in facilitating academic achievement. Culturally Based Learning and Culturally Responsive Pedagogy: Learning which views the inclusion of culture as a major entry point of unity and learning. Good Noise: Classroom “noise” which may sound noisy and chaotic, but is composed of intellectually stimulating and enriching debates and discussions. Hair Narratives: Also referred to as hair stories or storytelling told orally, or via reflective journaling. Safe Spaces: An environment which encourages participation in the honest sharing of ideas, where students can freely express their feelings particularly towards challenging topics such as oppression, race, cultural competence, race, bias, and power dynamics. This is the period during which new learners of English are unwilling or unable to communicate orally using the English language. Social Noise: Refers to the toxic, divisive, social violence of the world which spill over into our classrooms sending a message to our students that all is not right, and act as agents of detractors and obstacles to learning. Student-Led Learning: Learning with the student at the center, led by their own intrinsic exploration, and is paved by student inquiry and experiences. Teacher-Led Instruction: Traditional method of teaching consisting of the teacher directing students to learn through memorization and recitation techniques. Assessments typically resembled teachers listening to students’ vocabulary, and an oral exam. Customs and standards are determined by the teachers’ communication of the knowledge often through talk and chalk who enforces class behavior. Zoom: A computer technology company which provides videotelephony and online chat services through a cloud-based peer-to-peer software platform and is used for teleconferencing, telecommuting, distance education, and social relations.

286

287

Chapter 15

Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities in Higher Education Barbara B. Howard Appalachian State University, USA Natalia Ilyashenko Novgorod State University, Russia

ABSTRACT This approach to cross-cultural experiences for students in higher education offers greater accessibility to global experiences by engaging students and faculty in virtual international teams. Built on a partnership agreement between two universities, Appalachian State University in the United States and Novgorod State University in Russia, the ideas developed into a graduate certificate program of study currently composed of four online courses. Each course requires engagement of the students in virtual international teams to solve simulated problems. In this chapter, the authors explore the initial lessons learned in such collaboration from both student and faculty perspectives as well as providing specific course information and student outcomes. They also offer future plans for expanding the project to include other universities in other countries. This model of globalization in higher education challenges the traditional courses, study abroad programs, and student exchanges often found in higher education.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch015

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

INTRODUCTION In this chapter, we will present our solution to the issue of providing a broadly accessible approach to globalization that will allow maximum student engagement with peers from other cultures and disciplines over a sustained period of time. By co-teaching with faculty from partner institutions around the world, we bring students and faculty together in virtual international teams, which are structured in such a way to immerse students in cross-cultural experiences. Working in international virtual teams, the faculty develop learning objectives and activities carefully crafted to reflect multiple cultural perspectives and pedagogies. Using available technology, these experiences are more accessible to a greater range of students, thus challenging the traditional approaches to globalization, which range from coursework on campuses, limited to those instructors and students enrolled in the institution, to study abroad programs and student exchanges that require extensive travel and expense. The advantages and disadvantages of these traditional approaches are explored through the literature in this chapter, with our recommendations and solutions offered. A complete description of the four courses completes our solutions section. Additionally, we will offer future plans for expansion of course offerings with a growing number of partnership universities with suggested courses.

BACKGROUND This project has been under development since 2014, as a result of a partnership agreement formally established in 2013 between Appalachian State University in the United States and Novgorod State University in the Russian Federation. This partnership agreement formed a foundation for cooperation among university administrators and faculty to support various collaborative efforts such as student and faculty exchanges and study abroad programs. As faculty, we sought to expand it even further to include collaborative course design. Delegations from each university visited the other campus as the partnership developed. As Peterson and Helms (2013) advised, we found that strong institutional support for this level of collaboration among faculty members was crucial to our success. Both institutions supported our efforts to build this proposed program with funding to allow travel as well as use of university supported technological platforms such as Moodle, Zoom, OpenQwaq, Google, and faculty effort. Without such support, the project would not have been possible. However, the commitment and passion of the faculty involved, as in many such projects, provided the true cornerstone of the project. Developing a vision that could be shared with colleagues, administrators, and students was key to meeting our challenge. Our vision was to present a way to effectively extend cross-cultural literacy to a wide range of students in an effort to build bridges across the boundaries and political landscapes that divide so many. Based on our discussions and investigations into the state of globalization on our campuses, our faculty team examined major hurdles to overcoming some of the limitations in globalizing institutions of higher education. The first and foremost tended to be accessibility. Both universities continue to struggle with reaching the non-traditional rural student who may not be able to travel to our campuses for more traditional programs due to a variety of reasons, including disabilities. With innovative technologies, we hope to bridge the opportunity gaps that, unfortunately, can be perpetuated through simple structural barriers. We also wanted to expand access to globalization. For far too many students completing degrees on our respective campuses, it is possible to have little, if any, cross-cultural learning experiences. If they do not interact with exchange students, participate in a study abroad program or take a global course as 288

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

an elective, they may miss any chance to build cross-cultural skills during their programs of study. Yet, the majority of twenty-first century businesses and professions require some form of international work or work exchange. There had to be a model for instructors to infuse globalization into coursework for a way to add to a student’s chosen field of study beyond electives. We searched for a way to offer alternatives to the expense and other limitations of study abroad programs and student exchanges. One goal was to offer such opportunities to a wider range of students from various fields – not just education or business – but any field in which students wished to engage professionally in an international platform. While we did not expect to be able to serve every student on each of our campuses, we hoped to offer a model for collaborative teaching and learning that could influence pedagogy in a wider range of disciplines. We began by developing a series of courses that could augment various programs of study. The faculty teams as well as the courses were multi-disciplinary. We actively sought colleagues from other disciplines to provide this broader perspective to content and pedagogy. Our shared vision broadened to include building a model for all disciplines to infuse cross-cultural interactions into any course by applying project-based learning through international virtual teams with international faculty and students. Higher education institutions serve a global society that pushes against provincial boundaries to embrace the diverse and intricate relationships existing in business, culture, education, agriculture, technology, and other fields. As with many other countries, in Russia and the United States, our college and university students no longer come from similar backgrounds with the high level of socio-economic status that affords them access to amenities such as study abroad programs or the expectation that this becomes part of their college career. As we work to expand accessibility to our programs, we actively seek non-traditional students who bring rich diversity of backgrounds, including those who represent the first generation of their families to attend a four-year university. Others may be middle aged or older adults who are returning to complete degrees or graduate school while working full-time. We also kept in mind the scope of the program we wished to develop. Did we want a full degree program or as an added dimension to other degree programs? We opted to limit the number of courses and offer it to a wider range of degrees so that this Graduate Certificate, offered in the United States, would enhance whatever other graduate degrees were being pursued or had been attained by students. Students could also take these courses as electives in other graduate degree programs. This project, then, sought to increase the range of diversity and accessibility by meeting the needs of any student who simply wished to increase their cross-cultural competence to be prepared to step into the international job market, regardless of field. In Russia, as in many other countries, a Graduate Certificate may not have as much meaning as it does in the United States. At Appalachian State, as in other American institutions of higher education, a Graduate Certificate can offer a valuable addition to a graduate degree by extending learning and focus within a particular field. No such option currently exists in Russia. This presented a conundrum for us as we worked to develop this program of study. Did we really need to follow the same organizational procedures and policies? Students were only going to be enrolled in their “home” university thus eliminating the need for dual enrollment. We addressed this challenge by recognizing that students would follow the program of study approved by each university. The focus of our courses would remain the collaboration in which our students would engage.

289

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER Issues, Controversies, and Problems with Traditional Means of Globalization The need to expand the world view of students in higher education has long been a stated goal of many universities around the world (Wang, Peyvandi, & Moghaddam, 2011; Xiao, 2018). In 2011, 55% of American institutions of higher education reported that internationalization was in the top five priorities of their strategic plans with specific global learning outcomes, up by 10% in the five years between 2005 - 2010 (Peterson & Helms, 2013). In some disciplines, such as public relations, knowledge of globalization and cross-cultural skills are essential to the degree (Hatzios & Larscy, 2008). Without a doubt, there has existed a wide-spread recognition of the value of internationalization and cross-cultural experiences among a variety of degree programs in higher education for decades (Hser, 2005; Rosenbusch, 2014). Among American institutions, most report that they are pleased with the progress of their internationalization efforts and view increased enrollment in study abroad programs, language courses, and global studies programs as a positive energizing force on their campuses (Meier & Smith, 2016; Peterson & Helms, 2013; Wang, Peyvandi, & Moghaddam, 2011). However, that said, there is the need to support the faculty who must recruit and teach the students in these programs. Many state universities are woefully underfunded for the level of resources necessary to build a faculty who can fully develop effective international experiences. Partnerships and support by university administrators for faculty actively engaging in this level of work is crucial to meeting the demands of strategic plans and priorities with ambitious learning outcome measures (Barkin, 2016; Peterson & Helms, 2013). For decades, the traditional approach to internationalization of curriculum centered on study abroad programs and student/faculty exchange programs between universities. These approaches offer excellent experiences for students and faculty members to become immersed in the daily nuances of a culture by absorbing daily life as well as engaging in a deeper examination of a particular aspect of study. For most study abroad programs, groups of students, usually in the same degree program, enroll in a course that involves travel to one or more countries under the guidance of one or more knowledgeable faculty members. The study abroad program fits into a program of study, with a set syllabus, course readings, and required activities. The better designed programs offer life-changing outcomes that advance the student in the chosen field of study. For example, many may consist of two to three weeks of in-country visits with specific goals and outcomes identified and approved by the university. Without a doubt, such experiences are necessary to broaden awareness of social responsibilities beyond one’s own community, thus developing participants into more cross-culturally competent citizens (Barkin, 2016; DuVivier & Patitu, 2017). We did not seek to replace these programs, as we continue to engage in such study abroad experiences with students outside and in addition to work within this project. However, that said, a major drawback in terms of accessibility exists for a majority of students. It can cost several thousand dollars beyond tuition for a student to engage in a study abroad, depending on the destination, length of study, etc. Students with certain types of health issues or disabilities may also find it difficult, if not impossible, to participate. Working adults or non-traditional college students may find it difficult to leave homes, jobs, and families for the length of time required. Students struggling with college loans, other debts, and work obligations may also find it difficult to embark on an international study abroad. The size of the group may be extremely limited due to factors as varied as local ground

290

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

transportation to lodging thus further limiting accessibility (Garver & Divine, 2007; Wang, Peyvandi, & Moghaddam, 2011). With student exchanges, expense may also be an issue. Most student exchanges, even with scholarships, require long-term absence from families, home and work necessary to pay for other university expenses. In some cases, non-traditional students may have family and job responsibilities that prohibit participation in student exchanges just as in short-term study abroad programs. Host universities in certain countries are finding it harder and harder to accept international students thus creating yet another barrier. Issues with visas, immigration laws, etc., often limit the number and ethnicity of exchange students. This, like study abroad programs, are not a wide-scale option that may be offered to a diverse university campus population. In a 2009 study by Salisbury, Umbach, Paulsen, and Pascarella, as reported by ASHE Higher Education Report (2012), socio-economic status based primarily on parental income tended to be the major predictor of student engagement in study abroad programs. Higher income students tended to expect travel abroad as part of the college experience, while lower income students did not. Among these students, Salisbury et al., (2009), found that white females in the liberal arts fields far outnumbered males or students of color of any gender. Sadly, these statistics have not shifted dramatically in the past decade. Students with disabilities and those of low wealth tend not to engage in study abroad programs, thus missing a key experience offered for internationalization on many university campuses (ASHE Higher Education Report, 2012). The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 brought home another challenge for students and faculty traveling abroad. Most American universities cancelled proposed study abroad programs for Spring and Summer 2020 and called home those who were already abroad. While it is hoped that such an event will not become a norm of our global society, it highlights the dangers associated with a world that is increasingly mobile and inter-connected, thus allowing the spread of disease worldwide at an alarming rate. In higher education, this pandemic has forced all of us, even those teaching more traditional face to face campus classes, to turn to technological platforms. Following this isolation and forced online instruction, institutions of higher education may seek other ways to connect with students around the world not just around their campuses. This may very well open the door to even greater experimentation with new ways to globalize classrooms such as the one proposed here. Another traditional approach to internationalization of college and university programs involves the development of undergraduate and graduate degrees in global studies. On campuses across the country, degree programs emerged with an emphasis on students pursuing a series of courses that expose them through lecture, readings, presentations, guest speakers, and other academic experiences to languages, governance, and cultures of diverse countries. Short-term study abroad programs may be required, offered or simply strongly recommended as part of the program of study. These programs, while extremely valuable in promoting a foundation for students who wish to develop cross-cultural competency, are also limited in their reach to broader campus populations. As with any other field, choosing to major as an undergraduate in these programs or pursuing an entire graduate degree naturally means that one cannot choose other fields or programs of study that will prepare them for work in fields such as business, education, and technology. An additional limiting factor is found in the nature of delivery of these programs, especially in the absence of required study abroad courses. Engagement in these programs often limit the student to studying only with the professors and students found on their own campuses. This may produce the effect of studying gold fish in a bowl rather than engaging with the fish in their natural habitat. Knowledge of 291

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

the other cultures thus becomes more secondary in nature, reducing the transformative power of social interaction to form primary learning. Such experiences developed from the type of top-down university development of curriculum and pedagogy supported by long histories of higher education may result in what van den Akker (2018) refers to as a dangerous slip into colonization of international studies by presenting a one-sided view of one culture and only studying other cultures from afar. Colonization results in actually propagating the damaging perspectives of those who study cultures from outside or removed from the culture to the point that internationalization of courses does little to support crosscultural relationships (Gyamera & Burke, 2018).

SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS We did not wish to simply develop a pedagogy that would promote the ideals or interests of one culture and impose that on the other. We kept in mind that we did not wish to perpetuate what Mizrahia, Kaufman, and Huss (2017) described as asymmetric learning, caused by elitism or ethnocentricity among those from more developed nations, such as the United States. We were mindful to include in our learning activities opportunities to discuss and apply knowledge regarding a broad range of cultures. We did not wish to develop a curriculum that would follow the path of either study abroad or global studies at home. We did not seek to maintain the status quo by imposing our own paradigms of curriculum or pedagogy on our international partners and their students. In the true spirit of moving international education into a more equitable and just direction, we first established a working relationship among all the collaborating professors to build the necessary bridges for faculty, who could then invite their students to cross the boundaries of culture with them. This was the first effort to “disrupt the instrumental framing of education” advocated by van den Akker (2018, p. 29) as necessary for higher education to respond creatively to the current issues of internationalization at our institutions. With these considerations in mind, we began the task of creating a series of courses that would connect not only our faculty, but our students, our universities, and our cultures. We examined the issues swirling around international education, and we sought to address those. Further, we embraced the implications of developing global experiences for a wider and more diverse range of students while expanding our own worldview as faculty. The result was a series of courses designed to be co-taught by international faculty and attended by an international group of students. We found it necessary to become immersed in the nuances of our own cultures before taking students on that journey. The original team of faculty members represented Appalachian State, COMSTAT University in Pakistan, and Novgorod State. The team began working virtually to establish the initial idea, then came together in face to face meetings in the United States, followed by another meeting in Russia, to work out the vision and ensuing goals of this program. While integral to providing a truly global perspective to our project, our colleagues in Pakistan, who began the journey with us, were unable to continue in the collaboration past the initial meeting in the United States due to interruptions in technologies and political unrest in and around their university. They attended meetings virtually with the Russian and American professors during the Russian site visit, but this soon proved to be too difficult to sustain. At the time, lack of reliable internet access prevented further participation. Travel and even online meetings became unsustainable. While much of their valuable input has been factored into what eventually is being offered to students, at this time, they are, unfortunately, not able to be a full partner. Ironically, this

292

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

brought home to us a limitation of this approach as well. Stable internet, university and technological support had to be available to each faculty member and their students. Initial meetings began on the campus of Appalachian State in the United States in a room covered with chart paper quickly filled with multi-colored ink representing wide arrays of ideas. From this, the program’s vision and outline emerged. Ideas were offered, discussed, and then adopted, tweaked or dismissed. It quickly became clear that old syllabi and even older pedagogies would not work for this group. There was not much interest in simply recycling old courses to make them fit. Some faculty decided that innovation was too hard, and graciously stepped aside rather than abandon methods that had worked with their students for decades. Other faculty became energized by the notion that new ideas were welcomed. As van den Akker (2018) advocates, educators “need to rethink their theoretical frames and their educational practices to engage equitably with the challenges and opportunities that emerge in the globalizing world of today” (p. 25). Our faculty team modeled this notion by considering ways to meld our combined skills and knowledge of globalization and higher education pedagogy to fashion a new vision. We quickly discovered that before we asked our students to develop an understanding of cross-cultural competence, we had to do so ourselves (Palloff & Pratt, 2005). We had to understand our own cultures and apply that understanding to working with each other. For example, it became apparent from our initial face to face meetings in which team members represented the United States, Pakistan and Russia. In our case, even consciously setting aside stereotypes, we had to recognize the impact of culture on the ways our team interacted and established group dynamics. For example, we found that our Pakistani colleagues had to be asked three times before offering an opinion. The Russians tended to be much more formal and frank, feeling perfectly comfortable expressing disagreement or support for an idea immediately in a direct manner. The Americans first offered solutions rather than suggestions and had to be frequently reigned in to listen to other ideas. The idea of collaboration had to be consistently redefined until the group dynamics became more productive. In the end, this experience of working in our own international virtual teams provided the structure we sought for our students. We knew it would not be possible to bring students together in face to face meetings, as this would defeat the purpose of using technology to increase accessibility. So, we had to develop scenarios online that would mimic the building of group dynamics. We chose to intentionally immerse our students in discovering the nuances of cross-cultural collaboration by working together on solutions for “real world” issues, which would require them to also set aside stereotypes while appreciating cultural differences. We searched for a method that would guide us in transforming our students’ perspectives just as ours had been challenged. Since one of our major goals was to change the way students and faculty think about cross-cultural teaching and learning, the principles of adult learning grounded in transformative learning theory emerged as a foundation for our proposed shared philosophy of pedagogy (Christie, Carey, Robertson, & Grainger, 2015; Hodge, 2014; Hoggan, 2014; Mezirow, 1978; Patterson & Munoz, 2015; Taylor, 1997). In the latter half of the twentieth century, Jack Mezirow (1978) offered a theory for adult learning that addressed how adults change the way they think about a constantly evolving world and society. Each individual holds paradigms or frames of reference for viewing their individual circumstances within the larger world. Such paradigms influence beliefs, values, and actions (Taylor, 2008). Often, a shift in the paradigm may be caused by a painful or significant life-changing event, such as the loss of a loved one, a change in employment, or a major move to another culture. The media through which such shifts occur may also be as varied as interactions with others to experiences that result in deep introspection. Later, Mezirow would be challenged by those who believed his theories were too narrow and restricted

293

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

to change within an individual rather than leading to change within the broader society (Hodge, 2014; Hoggan, 2014). The point is that adults tend to frame their points of reference rather more solidly than young children following years of experiences that reinforce such frameworks so that it is much more difficult to introduce a new paradigm. Until challenged, the adult learner will tend to refer back to comfortable stereotypes and views. Even when faced with new learning or ideas, the adult can remain comfortable within their frame of reference by assimilating the new ideas thus increasing knowledge without changing perspectives. This frequently happens when new information is explained or dismissed by adults holding firmly to their existing paradigms or frames of reference (Taylor, 2008). Disruptive experiences provide the catalyst for transformative learning in which the adult must re-evaluate existing paradigms and beliefs because the level of discomfort has risen to the point that the existing paradigm no longer explains the circumstances or new social patterns (Patterson & Munoz, 2015). It is only when that frame of reference fails to explain or assimilate these disruptive experiences that the adult must accept a new paradigm, thus shifting views, beliefs and actions. Take, for example, the “life changing” experience of moving to another country, especially one that is very different in custom, language and social norms. Many of us may experience this superficially when traveling briefly on vacation to another continent, but our paradigms are not sufficiently shaken for a long enough time or significantly enough to cause change. We may be uncomfortable in the face of one or two gaffes even to the point of having a mild culture shock when something we find perfectly normal is not accepted in our host culture. It may be as simple as what to order for breakfast and how to handle the silverware when eating it! However, since our experience is so temporary, it is not disruptive enough to significantly alter our future thinking. We return home to continue eating our preferred breakfast and handling our silverware the way we were taught as children and accepted in our home culture. Each course had to provide learning experiences to challenge student existing paradigms while offering a new lens through social interaction and deep individual reflection. By working closely on projects for an extended time with those from another culture, students would realize that their stereotypes formed by secondary sources such as the media would no longer suffice. Their cultural paradigms would have to shift and so, their thinking about other cultures would necessarily transform. We identified the common collaborative elements of the course and then wrote the appropriate syllabus around those core elements. Based on the principles of transformative learning, it became necessary to develop experiences that would disrupt the students’ current sense of how teaching and learning might take place. Christie, Carey, Robertson, and Grainger (2015) explored this level of pedagogy by reaching beyond Mezirow’s work to examine that of Jurgen Habermas. According to Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action (1984 and 1986) as discussed by Christie et al., (2015), there are two distinct types of action, each motivated by a different type of reason. Strategic or Instrumental Action uses “unilateral, non-inclusive means to achieve its aims when the end is considered important enough” (Christie et al., 2015, p. 10). The second is Communicative Action, which “uses understanding and agreement, via a process of rational and fair discourse, to achieve a mutually acceptable end” (Christie et al., 2015, p. 10). In an examination of Mezirow’s 1976 Theory of Transformative Learning, Taylor’s (1997) review of empirical studies based on this theory, and Habermas’ theory, Christie et al., (2015) cautioned that Mezirow did not go far enough in explaining how this shift in paradigm occurs in adults. It is necessary to consider the need for intense social interaction as well as the need to consider Gardner’s seven intelligences model. Based on this body of work concerning how adults learn, the emphasis on the need for

294

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

social discourse as well as deep reflection on experiences became embedded in our thinking of how we might set up learning activities that would challenge world view by transforming adult thinking. A major goal and driving motivation for the development of this program was to promote crosscultural communication at a heightened level through interaction among peers from two very different cultures. By building bridges between the students in our universities and countries, we hoped to bring about “vibrant rhythms of culturally diverse and socially complex perspectives” (Rice & Hausrath, 2014, p. 20) necessary to foster true cultural literacy. Our plan was to allow our students to work together on a common goal that would literally transcend their personal biases and prior stereotypes of the other culture. In this area, we knew we faced particularly strong challenges, given the political relationships between our two countries, fueled by popular media, the entertainment industries, and, later, suspicions surrounding the US 2016 presidential election. We had to provide the opportunity for our students to actually work together and engage at a level that would open up a new world view for them in more than a superficial way so that not only was there a shift in the basic premises of thought, but also in beliefs, actions, consciousness, and altered ways of being engaged in the world (Hoggan, 2016). To do this, we crafted learning experiences for our students grounded in solid resources as well as access to each other in a way that would shepherd them into a common goal requiring working together as a team. It would not be enough to simply expose them to various readings, class discussions, presentations, and asynchronous electronic exchanges. We had to build in an opportunity for each student to bring their world view to the table within a group that might hold very strong and opposing views. Immersing students in shared readings, self-assessments and other learning activities provided a starting point. We had to push students to apply this learning to a practical team project that would demand cooperation and require them to at least understand opposing views. Adding in deep individual reflections on a personal level would enhance this transformation of thinking (Glancy & Isenberg, 2013). In this way, we hoped to support cross-cultural learning. To develop opportunities for our students to learn to work online collaboratively, we, as professors, had to develop the skills required of our students. The online environment we sought to develop depended on collaboration, which would foster critical thinking skills, co-creation of knowledge, deep reflection on learning, and transformative learning (Palloff & Pratt, 2005). Given location, it was not a question of relying on face to face pedagogies but rather immersing ourselves and our students into becoming a community of learners. Maximum opportunities for shared experiences supported communication through online forums; email exchanges; google docs; and synchronous meetings in programs such as Zoom and Skype. As professors and co-developers of these courses, we had to become a community of learners to set up such a community for our students. First, to achieve this, we had to address certain obvious barriers to working internationally using technology. Accessibility to the various technological platforms was not as universal as we would have liked. While Moodle, an open source platform, was the preferred course management system, at the time, the course management system at Appalachian State was protected and available only to registered students and faculty. The Russian students would not register for our courses as Appalachian, which would have been extremely expensive for them. Rather, the whole idea was for students to remain in their home universities. The Russian Moodle site was easily accessible to the American students, although password protected. This became our course management system, where we uploaded all asynchronous work such as videos, forums, required readings, self-assessment cultural quizzes, etc. It also allowed us to have announcements and communication with the entire class, not just our own students.

295

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Another obvious challenge was the time zone difference. Our students lived in time zones that differed by seven hours. Naturally, this was a particular challenge to the online synchronous meetings we so desired. To overcome this, we scheduled meetings once a month on Saturdays at 0800 (Eastern Standard Time) and 1500 (Moscow Standard Time). Still, this schedule was not ideal. During the course of the semester, student groups arranged other times to meet that suited their group members. These meetings, outside of formal synchronous class sessions, were part of the expectations for the course. These were important in building the level of communication and shared work necessary in virtual international teams. We began holding our synchronous meetings in a 3D virtual world, OpenQwaq, but switched later to Zoom web conferencing. Technology needed to support both asynchronous and synchronous coursework, as explained below. Not all students spoke the same language. This may be typical of any given international endeavor. With our students, we were fortunate to be able to include Russian students who were studying English to become translators for tourists and businesses. These students were invaluable in assisting communications in groups in which we had non-English speaking Russians. We attempted to find American students studying Russian who could also serve as translators, but we were unsuccessful in recruiting any to join these first classes. We continue to direct recruitment efforts to include foreign language students. It is ideal to have both Russian and English translators. We also encourage rudimentary language learning in each class as part of the cross-cultural experience. Many students reported successful use of apps like Google Translate to assist communications. As mentioned earlier, we worked for different universities with different policies, procedures and schedules. Each university required different formats and content for syllabi. We co-developed course objectives with student learning outcomes, core learning activities, and the culminating project, all of which remained the same for both syllabi. However, format, inclusion of set academic policies of the university and other slight differences meant that this course had two syllabi to guide the students from each university. This did not seem to present any confusion. The common learning activities, project requirements, and shared goals were common in each syllabus and course requirements. At the discretion of the instructor, additional materials, readings and assignments could be added for their students as grading for the course was independent. As a team, we found it helpful to grade the shared group projects together. Given that the dates of the semester also differed, we worked to address this as well and found that this was one difference that actually worked to our advantage with our students. The Appalachian State semesters typically began and ended three or so weeks before those of Novgorod State. This allows lead time to each course for the Appalachian professors who could use that time to orient the students to the course, while providing additional meetings and pre-requisite reading. The Novgorod professors use the end of the semester, after Appalachian students completed their semester, to debrief and build upon their learning from the course. This allows some flexibility to professors to adjust the course to fit the needs of their students. The major components of shared experiences culminating in the development of a set group project, however, is not jeopardized by these schedule differences as collaborative activities are scheduled for those overlapping weeks in the middle of each semester. What finally emerged from this vision was a general understanding that we would begin by codeveloping four courses that reflect the basic underpinnings of a student’s desire to be prepared to grasp what it might mean to work internationally. We identified the following four areas: (a) cross-cultural communication, (b) international issues in technology, (c) leadership of international virtual teams, and (d) international issues in sustainability. Once these areas were agreed upon, we set about identifying 296

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

the experts in these areas from among our colleagues to begin the arduous task of working together to build courses that would meet the needs of students in very different cultures.

Recommendations The following section contains complete descriptions of the courses developed and offered in the Graduate Certificate for International Leadership. The first course, Cross-Cultural Communication, was taught as a pilot in Fall 2016. The team believed that this might well form the basis of a program designed to launch students into international leadership. The twenty-five students ranged from undergraduate and graduate students in communication/language and agriculture in Russia to graduate level MBA and EdD students in the US. The diversity of student background, field of study, age, and level of degree is an intentional approach to the realistic simulations and projects designed to transform thinking about our changing global society. By teaching this course as a pilot, we were able to determine if our vision could be realized, dependent as it was on collaboration of students as well as faculty. The following experiences then informed the continued development of the remaining three courses. For faculty collaboration, we used a regularly scheduled weekly meeting in Skype and later Zoom to discuss student projects, progress and make any necessary revisions to the course based on a series of formative assessments. The asynchronous part of the course was housed on the Moodle site hosted by Novgorod State as part of their distance learning program. Students had access to required reading materials; self-assessments designed to test current biases and prior knowledge; activities to expand their current cross -cultural awareness and literacy; relevant videos; and forums to post reactions and ideas. In addition to the Moodle site, in this first semester, we used a 3D virtual world, (OpenQwaq), supported by Appalachian State, to hold synchronous meetings and to display artifacts created by the teams, keeping in mind the challenges posed by language and time zone differences. Just as with the Russian Moodle site, all students had OpenQwaq accounts with avatars that could be customized by the student. Many posted headshot pictures on the avatar, which greatly added to the sense of “social presence” in the 3D virtual world and enhanced the ability to collaborate on projects using guidelines previously developed and tested with graduate students (Howard, Tashner & Sanders, 2014; Howard, Sanders & McClannon, 2010). Student teams used this platform to hold synchronous meetings to work on their projects at other times that were mutually convenient. At the conclusion of the class, the teams presented their completed projects in OpenQwaq in a conference format. While most of the students enjoyed the novelty of working in a 3D virtual world, complete with virtual furniture, conference rooms, and all the accoutrements of a face to face learning space, we found that OpenQwaq was not sustainable as support from the developers dwindled. It was not able to support multiple open documents, essential to our projects. Students often lost connection or sound, making it frustrating to meet. For these reasons, OpenQwaq, while central to our early efforts, was abandoned for a more stable meeting space. We recommend a more stable and universally accessible web platform for synchronous meetings. We now use Zoom for all meetings among both students and faculty teams. Part of the faculty collaboration is the continuous seeking out of innovative technological platforms. Below are the complete descriptions of the courses that have been developed to this point. These are our recommendations to the issues of providing intense, sustained international experiences.

297

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Cross Cultural Communication Course Learning Objectives. The following student learning objectives applied to both Russian and American students and were stated in each syllabus. These objectives were first developed in collaboration with all faculty on the international team. At the conclusion of this course, students will be able to: • • • • • • • •

Define the impact of culture on international relationships. Create Culture Maps that encourage understanding regarding how culture affects the behavior of international partners. Develop a strategy for successful interaction with partners from around the world. Provide the basic skills necessary for an individual to project professionalism and confidence. Understand the complicated situations that arise when communicating with other cultures. Overcome ethnocentrism and stereotyping. Demonstrate tolerance in relation to representatives of other cultures. Establish a network of internationally educated leaders. Explore cross-cultural communication application to leadership theory/models.

Course Requirements. The following resources were carefully chosen by the faculty team to support learning of all students with care taken to make sure of accessibility to both Russian and American students: Gesteland, Richard R. (2013). Cross-cultural business behavior: A guide for global management (5th Ed). Copenhagen Business School Press. Meyer, E., (2014). The Culture Map: Breaking though the invisible boundaries of global business. New York: Public Affairs. Reliable internet access, a computer that meets the recommended computer requirements and multimedia equipment (microphone, speakers) to properly engage in cross-cultural communication. Team Project. The following project is the central focus of the course. All asynchronous activities and synchronous meetings supported the student’s ability to participate in and complete this project as a group. Students choose their group based on the third country they wanted to use for the simulation. We limit the number of students per group to three to five. Each group member must be proficient in English or have access to a translator. To address this need, we assigned a student translator to each group that had a non-English speaking member. The following are the instructions provided to all students: • •

298

Students will undertake this project within the small groups for which they choose. Each group will be represented by at least one American, one Russian student, and one interpreter, if needed. Students may sign up for their group based on the country they wish to engage in the simulation. Students will choose a specific country, representing a culture different from either American or Russian, to complete a simulation around the development of an international collaboration. The group may assume that the potential collaborators they will be approaching will be open to collaboration.

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

• •

•

Each student group will decide on a product or service for collaboration. This product or service should be selected by the group as something that might be of high interest to the potential collaborator. Each student group will design and present a plan to invite another culture to collaborate, which will include the following components: ◦◦ A description of the culture to be approached, demonstrating knowledge of cultural mapping. ◦◦ A series of sample communications designed to do the following: ▪▪ Introduction to potential collaborators ▪▪ Follow up communications ▪▪ Presentation to collaborators – online or face to face ▪▪ Agreement of collaboration between group and potential collaborators Each student group will set up a presentation of artifacts (sample communications, presentation to potential collaborators, and any other documents, pictures, etc.) of their plan of collaboration.

At the conclusion of this project, each student submitted a personal reflection on the skills, knowledge and insight gained through working on the project. Projects were shared with the entire group during an online presentation.

Technology for International Collaboration Course This course was developed by professors in instructional technology who had expertise in online learning and technological systems. A professor in the Medical School of Novgorod State shared a strong background and interest in technological systems and participated in the team. Learning Objectives. The following student learning outcomes were developed for this course by the instructors: • • • • • • • • • •

Explore and evaluate technologies for use in appropriate situations. Explore communications technologies. Explore collaboration tools for building global virtual teams. Create and analyze surveys/polls/questionnaires/anonymous electronic essay. Research technological communication and collaboration differences between cultures. Use communication and collaboration tools for cross-cultural communications. Use video technologies for global communications. Create collaborative presentations between global partners. Manage global projects using technology tools. Research emerging technologies for global leaders.

Required Resources. The following resources were made available to both the American and Russian students: Brewer, P.E. (2015). International virtual teams: Engineering global success. San Francisco, CA: Wiley & Sons. Jang, S. (2017). Cultural brokerage and creative performance in multicultural teams. Organization Science 28(6), 993-1009. 299

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Berry, G.R. (2012). Enhancing effectiveness on virtual teams: Understanding why traditional team skills are insufficient. Journal of Business Communication, 48, 186-206. Leonard, B. (2011). Managing virtual teams. HR Magazine, 56, 39-42. Uber Crosse, C. (2002). Managing communication within virtual intercultural teams. Business Communication Quarterly, 65, 22-38. Projects. The following projects require students to work in small groups, following readings and online discussions: 1) Translation in communicating. Explore the use of translation in communication and collaboration with peers. Pairs of students from each culture share a survey about themselves and your expertise (related to the theme of the semester) in their own language which the other translates (using online translators) to the original. Also shares photos from products in their own culture that might be difficult to translate, the other uses mobile “live” translation from the photos to decipher the meaning. Explore the use of Skype Translate, for synchronous communication. 2) Application of Collaborative Tools. Develop a project proposal using a variety of online communication tools within a suite (e.g., Google Drive) to incorporate forms, text documents, media, slides, survey, and spreadsheet data. Groups cooperate on presentation design, each records all slides in individual language to create a cross-cultural presentation in multiple languages. Record the presentation and explore video conferencing solutions. Determine a communication need in your content area that might require video conferencing technologies to facilitate effective communication. What technology would you use, why? ▪▪ Project management - order, create tasks, timeline, milestones, responsibilities, dependencies, produce a Gantt chart ▪▪ Culminating activity - reflecting on the tools used, the collaboration, what was missing? 3) Tools and categories (what tool to use for what type of communication/category…). Develop a database (Moodle Glossary) of categories of international business and industry needs and each student explores at least one current tool that satisfies each category. Develop activities to learn the uses of tools in each category. Ex: Communications, Collaborations, Problem-solving, Innovations/Creativity, Survey/Questionnaire. 4) Create a collaborative communication space. Using an integration of technologies including LMS/ CMS systems, collaboration tools, etc. (e.g., setup a free Moodle site system at moodlecloud.com and incorporate video conferencing tools and Google Docs to build a collaborative learning space for your specific area/need). Begin this project with a project management system, with milestones and tasks.

Leadership for International Teams Course This course was developed by a team of faculty whose areas of expertise included educational as well as business and international leadership. Learning Objectives. The following student learning objectives were designed by the faculty team for this course: 300

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

• • • • • •

Examine leadership theories in general as influenced by culture and globalization. Determine the needs of a global society for the use of virtual teaming. Develop a plan for initiating and completing an international project using virtual teams. Select viable technological platforms for virtual teaming. Determine leadership styles most conducive to leading virtual teams. Establish guidelines based on research for initiating a virtual project to be completed by an international virtual team.

These learning objectives are supported by the required readings, asynchronous learning activities, such as a leadership inventory, and discussions utilizing cultural mapping. The idea is to build upon prior knowledge learned in the Cross-Cultural Communication and Technology courses, which would precede this course and the course on Sustainability. Required Resources. The faculty team chose the following textbook: Lane, H.W., & Maznevski, M.L. (2017). International management behavior: Global and sustainable leadership (8th Ed.). New York: Wiley Publications. As in all other courses, it was important to choose books that were easily accessible to students in both countries. Project. The following project required students to apply the theories, knowledge and skills gained through online discussions, forum postings, and asynchronous learning activities. Students chose their group based on the focus of the team. This allowed students in similar fields of study to join a group that would benefit from their discipline level knowledge. Working in teams of 4 – 5 (maximum of 3 members from the same university), each team simulated the role of a management team for a startup company aligned with sustainable practices in a third country (not USA or Russia). This simulated company must rely on both onsite work teams as well as virtual teams composed of American, Russian, and members from the third country. The student management team must establish the parameters of this company and the organizational structure of these teams with specific guidelines for operations.

International Leadership for Sustainability Course The fourth and final course was developed by faculty at Appalachian State and Novgorod State who had strong backgrounds and expertise in the issues of global sustainability. These professors framed their course around principles of responsible sustainability as expressed by the following quotes, which appeared in both syllabi: “Individually, we are one drop. Together we are an ocean.” - Ryunosuke Satoro “Sustainability is reached by seeking win win relationships where life and Earth’s systems are not marginalized.” - LJ “И волки сыты, и овцы целы.” The wolves are full and sheep intact. – Russian Proverb

301

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

The critical need in our global society to not only raise awareness but learn how to generate solutions for issues of sustainability generated the inclusion of this course. We also chose to make it the final course or coupled with the Leadership course as we believed it also builds upon the learning fostered by the Cross-Cultural and Technology courses. Learning Outcomes. The following student learning outcomes were developed for this course by the faculty: • • • • •

Develop critical thinking skills and apply them to issues of sustainability. Develop critical thinking skills and apply them to issues of leadership. Develop critical thinking skills and apply them to issues of change agency. Demonstrate knowledge of organizational and community sustainability leadership efforts. Demonstrate adequate understanding of the environmental and social consequences of personal sustainability related decision making. Identify specific practices that can be used to motivate themselves and others to develop new behaviors and practices. Identify critical elements of leadership; identify their individual leadership strengths and weaknesses; practice new leadership skills. Develop a greater appreciation of both the complex challenges we face in moving toward a more sustainable world but also of the possibility of crafting creative and effective responses to those challenges. Identify, contact, and volunteer with groups doing sustainable work in the community and to reflect on the experience.

• • • •

Course Objectives. For this course, faculty developed the following objectives: • •

To examine the role of personal choice in affecting change toward a sustainable future. To increase awareness and understanding regarding the systemic challenges to sustainable practices. To develop a learning environment that provides students the ability to acquire values and feelings of concern for sustainability. To provide leadership skills training for identifying and solving problems objectively. To inspire interest and desire to become an effective agent of change for good. To examine the interface among environmental, economic and ethical/social responsibilities. To enable novel solutions to complex problems.

• • • • •

Required Resources. The following text and readings chosen were accessible to both Russian American students: Schein, S. (2015). A new psychology for sustainability leadership: The hidden power of ecological worldviews. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing. The following articles were assigned for all students:

302

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Hargreaves A., Fink D. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership. Educational Leadership, 61, 8–13. Heizmann, H. and Liu, H. (2018). Becoming green, becoming leaders: Identity narratives in sustainability leadership development. Management Learning, 49(1), pp. 40–58. Projects. As with the other courses, this course demanded that students work together by creating small learning community group cohorts between students at Appalachian State and students at Novgorod State University using technology such as Zoom, Skype, etc. The learning community groups reflect together on identified readings to collaboratively identify and implement community engagement leadership service projects in their local communities. The teams would then work together to establish such an international project that might result in a collaboration between their communities. When engaging in course or program development, it is important to consider the student voice and the resulting learning outcomes. As a result of participation in these courses, student teams produced a variety of projects that exceeded our initial expectations. Student teams tended to meet much more often than we expected once they began their projects. There was also a tendency to share a wider range of social media such as FaceBook and Vido as well as WhatsApp and Google. We encouraged students to share technologies with which they were familiar. Many students reported establishing “FaceBook friendships” that allowed them to continue to stay in touch after the course ended. In the Cross-Cultural Communications class, for example, students were required to choose a third culture to pose a collaborative project that would be of interest to that third country. The project required development of cultural maps, communications (from the first initial approach to the final agreement), a description of the collaboration (business or cultural) and how it might influence each culture. The following is a student reflection on one such project: My group project was on the culture of Sweden. I was amazed at how alike the Swedish culture and American cultures are. Many of the indicators on the comparison culture map had America and Sweden closer together than the Swedish and Russian cultures. One of the parts of Swedish culture that I did not realize was that the Swedes are one of the most egalitarian societies in the world. They are extremely sensitive to each other’s feelings when being critical and positions of authority are seen more as facilitators rather than bosses. In addressing the insights gained from the experience, the following is representative of the types of insights shared by both Russian and American students: I have learned about my own culture and how the United States is perceived across the world. The eight indicators from the culture map informed my understanding of parts of my culture that I had never thought about before. An example would be the difference in communication between my culture and others. Americans are explicit communicators and will say what they mean, but in other cultures I may have to read the subtle context clues to truly understand what is being said. At the conclusion of each class, students provide personal reflections on their learning. Many comments confirmed that there was a shift in the students’ beliefs about other cultures as well as their own. Through the sustained interactions among the students as they worked on the virtual international teams to create solutions to the simulated problems we posed, students indicated that many of their prior ste303

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

reotypes were shattered. Recognizing that most of these stereotypes were influenced by popular films and media, both Russian and American students had expected their counterparts to be rigid and cold. Below is a representative statement from an American student: Being born in the Cold War Era, I have grown up with images of Russians as being stoic and longsuffering people who are willing to take risks because of enduring the effects of a Communist regime. Since I have a bubbly personality and am naturally cautious, I wondered how we would work together. Aleksandr was warm and friendly from the start. He was always careful to check with me before going too far in one direction on our work and was expecting that I would give him the same courtesy. This was such a pleasant surprise! In a similar vein, a Russian student expressed his surprise at finding Americans to be open to collaboration and not at all “scary.” He stated, “I expected all the Americans to be wearing black, like they do in the movies, and carrying guns. This was not the case.” As far as the level of learning and impact of the course on student perspectives, one American student shared the following: I am in an educational leadership program, Kate is in a linguistics/translator program, and Dmitry is in an agriculture program. The course was able to bring us together to gain a better understanding of how to interact on the global stage with different cultures. One of my favorite pieces of the class was the class discussion boards, because it required us to come up with solutions to real world situations. Along this same line, an American student shared the following insights gained from these courses: I have learned about my own culture and how the United States is perceived across the world. The eight indicators from the culture map informed my understanding of parts of my culture that I had never thought about before. An example would be the difference in communication between my culture and others. Americans are explicit communicators and will say what they mean, but in other cultures I may have to read the subtle context clues to truly understand what is being said. A Russian student echoed this level of learning and insight into their own culture as well as others in the following statement: I did not realize that Americans could be so easy to work with on difficult projects. We came to agreement by understanding each other’s cultural differences. Russians are very formal, but we are friendly. Americans like to be friendly as well. I had not realized this. These insights, while not the totality of what we had hoped to achieve, were a start to creating the bridge among students that might develop into a wider assimilation of culture leading to stronger global understandings. The key for this project is that this level of insight did not depend on travel and extensive study abroad for a few students. These courses accommodate up to forty students, and, possibly more. We limit the number of enrollments at this point to be able to provide the capacity for instructional feedback and facilitation of groups. Online classes have the ability to reach across borders, but this level of interaction still requires the building of relationships among smaller numbers. 304

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

In addition to comments about the changing impressions of students as they worked with their international partners, we also sought valuable feedback from the students regarding how the courses are run and what challenges they faced that could be avoided in the future. Among these suggestions, we found the following themes: • • • • •

Difficulty with stable internet connections that interrupted communications. Lapse in timely feedback from professors on submitted work and posted assignments in the Moodle site. Language difficulties, even with translators. Lack of participation by some student team members (both American and Russian.) Some individual students struggling to establish positive group relationships due to power struggles or inability to understand cultural norms presented by peers.

It is difficult to address the technological issues as infrastructure in remote areas is a well-recognized deficiency in both Russia and the United States, as in other countries. We were able to establish better communication among professors to ensure that feedback was more timely. We also worked to establish more learning activities to allow students to develop skills for collaborating online in teams.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Following the establishment of these initial courses, we plan to expand our collaboration to include other university partners with whom our universities have agreements. As an international team, we are now engaging in future development of coursework with faculty at the University of Free State in South Africa. This course will examine international issues of human rights, and may be offered to students as an alternative or in addition to the courses already developed. As we extend our partnerships, we visualize a hub of courses that can be taught by qualified professors willing to engage in the deep level of collaboration required in international virtual teaming. We are intentionally challenging the way that global studies and international education are offered at our universities. Through intense collaboration at the faculty level, we are sharing pedagogies, ideas, resources, and technologies. Professors are not teaching these courses in isolation. Rather, the courses are developed and taught in partnership. This relies on the use of technologies such as Zoom and Google to allow online collaboration. It also relies on professors who understand and embrace cultural differences to bring about learning experiences for students who will make a difference in their work and world once they leave our university settings. Our goal in this project is to continue to expand our borders for our students and colleagues. We invite other international partners to join us in this journey as we open the world for our students who do not have the means or opportunity to physically explore other cultures, but who have the desire to work virtually in international teams. We are open to furthering our own collaborations as faculty in this area. Additional courses under development include International Issues in Human Rights. This course is being developed jointly by professors at Appalachian State in the United States and the University of Free State, South Africa. Other courses may be considered if faculty teams can be determined and there is a strong interest for such a course on the campuses.

305

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Due to the nature of these courses, they must be offered 100% online. We are continuing to seek out innovative technological solutions that will enable us to provide even greater accessibility for our students. As infrastructure around the world becomes more and more developed, we are hopeful that the students who engage in this level of coursework and international teaming will represent an even greater diversity of culture and perspective to addressing the “real world” problems that face us all.

CONCLUSION We began the journey of creating these courses and the program with the idea that we could bridge the widening gap between our two cultures – American and Russian. We sought to cross borders to provide global experiences to our students who may not be able to travel, for whatever reason, but who desired a deeper global experience. This project began as a desire to offer something more lasting and sustained than the typical study abroad program. It was further designed as an alternative to the one-way study of other cultures typical in so many global study courses, in which all the students generally represent the same culture and attend the same university. It is an alternative to the long-range student exchange program, with its limited number of students. This program is designed to offer a new style of pedagogy in which international faculty actually form their own virtual team to expand the cross-cultural knowledge and skills of students. Through such teams, sustained engagement provides deep appreciation and knowledge of other cultures while teaching students how to hone their cultural literacy. We visualize this project as a model for pedagogy to be adopted by other universities. It is far more than a guest speaker or a two- or three-session class discussion or project. This requires a deeper commitment on the part of faculty as well as students to deeply engage in sustained collaboration. As we developed the pedagogy and goals of our courses, our vision expanded beyond these first courses to develop and implement a model for collaborative teaching with international faculty that could expand to other universities and disciplines. We did not visualize these courses as being finite in nature in that only these courses would be offered only to our students. Rather, our vision is that the very nature of the courses, the level of the collaboration, and the engagement of students might impact a general sense among universities as to how to expand their globalization offerings. In other words, we hoped that the project might prove to be a pilot for how other universities and faculties in various international settings might use this model to increase student cross-cultural experiences and learning.

REFERENCES ASHE Higher Education Report. (2012). Special Report: Study Abroad in a New Global Century. Wiley. Doi:10.1002/aehe.20004 Barkin, G. (2016, Summer). Undergraduate Research on Short-Term, Faculty-Led Study Abroad. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 36(4), 26–32. doi:10.18833/curq/36/4/2 Christie, M., Carey, M., Robertson, A., & Grainger, P. (2015). Putting Transformative learning theory into practice. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 55(1), 9–30.

306

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

DuVivier, R., & Patitu, C. (2017). Effects of study abroad on graduate studentdispositions, knowledge and skills. The College Student Affairs Journal, 35(2), 15–28. doi:10.1353/csj.2017.0010 Garver, M. S., & Divine, R. L. (2007). Conjoint analysis of study abroad preferences: Key attributes, segments and implications for increasing student participation. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 17(2), 189–215. doi:10.1080/08841240801912427 Glancy, F. H., & Isenberg, S. K. (2013). A conceptual learner-centered e-learning framework. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 13(3/4), 22–35. Gyamera, G. O., & Burke, P. J. (2018). Neoliberalism and curriculum in higher education: A postcolonial analyses. Teaching in Higher Education, 23(4), 450–467. doi:10.1080/13562517.2017.1414782 Hatzios, A., & Larscy, R.W. (2008). Perceptions of utility and importance of international public relations education among educators and practitioners. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator, 241 – 258. Hodge, S. (2014). Transformative learning as an “inter-practive” phenomenon. Adult Education Quarterly, 64(2), 165–181. doi:10.1177/0741713613520405 Hoggan, C. D. (2014). Transformative learning as a metatheory: Definition, criteria, and typology. Adult Education Quarterly, 66(1), 57–75. doi:10.1177/0741713615611216 Howard, B. B., Sanders, R. L., & McClannon, T. W. (2010). Constructing Transformative Learning Communities in 3D Immersive Learning Environments. In Transformative Learning and Online Education: Aesthetics, Dimensions and Concepts (pp. 34–47). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-61520-985-9.ch003 Howard, B. B., Tashner, J. H., & Sanders, R. L. (2014). Breaking Down Silos: Exploring the Effects of Graduate Cross-Program Collaboration Within a 3D Immersive World. In Riding the Hype Cycle: The Resurgence of Virtual Worlds. Inter-disciplinary Press. Hser, M.P. (2005, Fall). Campus internationalization: A study of American universities’ internationalization efforts. International Education, 35 – 48. Meier, H. H., & Smith, D. D. (2016). Achieving globalization of AACSB accounting programs with faculty led study abroad education. Accounting Education, 25(1), 35–56. doi:10.1080/09639284.2015.1118391 Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult Education, 28(2), 100–110. doi:10.1177/074171367802800202 Mizrahia, T., Kaufman, R., & Huss, E. (2017). Asymmetric learning in a short-term, macro oriented international students’ exchange: An exploratory study. Social Work Education, 36(8), 905–917. doi:1 0.1080/02615479.2017.1365830 Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating Online: Learning together in community. Jossey-Bass. Patterson, B. A. B., Munoz, L., Abrams, L., & Bass, C. (2015). Transformative Learning: A Case for using grounded theory as an assessment analytic. Teaching Theology and Religion, 18(4), 303–325. doi:10.1111/teth.12301 Peterson, P. M., & Helms, R. M. (2013). Internationalization revisited. Change, 45(2), 28–34. doi:10.1 080/00091383.2013.764261

307

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Rice, R., & Hausrath, Z. (2014). The necessity of teaching intercultural communication competence in a literacy class. Journal of College Literacy & Learning, 40, 19–34. Rosenbusch, K. H. (2014). Integrated approach to building intercultural competence. Learning and Performance Quarterly, 2(3), 2–16. Taylor, E. W. (2008). Transformative learning theory. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 119(119), 5–15. doi:10.1002/ace.301 van den Akker, J. (2018). Different ways of thinking and going about international education. The International Journal of Diversity in Education, 18(3 – 4), 25 – 32. Wang, J., Peyvandi, A., & Moghaddam, J. M. (2011). An empirical investigation of the factors influencing the effectiveness of short study abroad programs. International Journal of Education and Research, 6(2), 10–22. Xiao, J. (2018). Internationalization of higher education: Considerations for adult education. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 64(2), 202–207.

ADDITIONAL READING Banta, T. W., & Polomba, C. A. (2015). Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, And improving assessment in higher education (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass. Berry, G. R. (2012). Enhancing Effectiveness on Virtual Teams: Understanding Why Traditional Team Skills Are Insufficient. Journal of Business Communication, 48(2), 186–206. doi:10.1177/0021943610397270 Brewer, P. E. (2015). International Virtual Teams: Engineering Global Success. Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/9781118886465 Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach To designing college courses. Jossey-Bass. Gesteland, R. R. (2013). Cross-cultural business behavior: A guide for global management (5th ed.). Copenhagen Business School Press. Grinier, L., Herron, P. J., & White, S. (2015). Study abroad partnerships: Librarians, business faculty, and in-country facilitator develop an innovative experiential learning program. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 20(3), 189–208. doi:10.1080/08963568.2015.1046782 Grisham, T. W. (2010). International project management: Leadership in complex environments. John Wiley & Sons. Hargreaves, A., & Fink, D. (2004). The seven principles of sustainable leadership. Educational Leadership, 61, 8–13. Heizmann, H., & Liu, H. (2018). Becoming green, becoming leaders: Identity narratives in sustainability leadership development. Management Learning, 49(1), 40–58. doi:10.1177/1350507617725189

308

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

Hill, C. W. L., & Hult, G. T. M. (2019). International business: Competing in the global marketplace. New York, New York. McGraw Hill. Hundley, S. P., & Kahn, S. (2019). Trends in assessment: Ideas, opportunities, and issues in higher education. Stylus. Jang, S. (2017). Cultural brokerage and creative performance in multicultural teams. Organization Science, 28(6), 993–1009. doi:10.1287/orsc.2017.1162 Lane, H. W., & Maznevski, M. L. (2014). International management behavior: Global And sustainable leadership (7th ed.). John Wiley &Sons, LTD. Leonard, B. (2011). Managing virtual teams. HRMagazine, 56, 39–42. Maki, P. L. (Ed.). (2010). Coming to terms with student outcomes assessment: Faculty and administrators’ journeys to integrating assessment in their work and institutional culture. Stylus Publications. Meyer, E. (2014). The Culture Map: Breaking though the invisible boundaries of global business. Public Affairs. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2009). Assessing the online learner: Resources and strategies for faculty. Wiley & Sons. Reimers, F., Chopra, V., Chung, C., Higdon, J., & O’Donnell, E. (2016). Empowering global citizens: A world course. N Charleston. CreateSpace Independent Publishing. Roholt, R. V., & Fisher, C. (2015). Expect the Unexpected: International Short-Term Study Course Pedagogies and Practices. Journal of Social Work Education, 49(1), 48–65. doi:10.1080/10437797.20 13.755416 Schein, S. (2015). A new psychology for sustainability leadership: The hidden power of ecological worldviews. Greenleaf Publishing. Schnusenberg, O., de Jong, P., & Goel, L. (2012). Predicting study abroad intentions based on the Theory of planned behavior. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 10(3), 337–361. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2012.00350.x Small, E., Sharma, B. B., & Nikolova, S. (2015). A pilot study evaluating students’ interest in international social work education. Social Work Education, 34(4), 414–427. doi:10.1080/02615479.2015.1015979 Uber Crosse, C. (2002). Managing communication within virtual intercultural teams. Business Communication Quarterly, 65(4), 22–38. doi:10.1177/108056990206500404 Wang, J., Peyvandi, A., & Moghaddam, J. M. (2011, Fall). An empirical investigation of the factors influencing the effectiveness of short study abroad programs. International Journal of Education and Research, 6(2), 10–22.

309

 Challenging Traditional Programs for Providing International Educational Opportunities

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS 3D Virtual World: Technological platform, such as OpenQwaq, that simulates a real-world situation or place. Colonization: Allowing a dominant culture to overtake and subjugate those of another culture by imposing their worldview while discounting or negating those of another culture. Cross-Cultural: An event or interaction that occurs when those from two or more cultures interact to exchange ideas or engage in work that enhances their understandings of another culture other than their own. Culture: The lens through which a person views relationships, situations, social events, and interactions based on prevalent socio- economic and political environment. Graduate Certificate: A program of study designed to enhance knowledge and skill in a specific area or profession beyond that of a graduate degree. Project-Based Assessment: A type of assessment in which a student completes a multi-level task requiring the application of a set of skills and knowledge. Study Abroad Program: A specific course in which students travel to another country or continent to engage in study on site that otherwise could not be completed. Transformative Learning: A style of pedagogy in which a student’s current paradigm is challenged by an event or experience in which the existing paradigm is no longer valid, thus causing the student to alter or change paradigms accordingly. Virtual Team: A group or team of individuals engaging in collaborative work for a specific purpose through technological platforms and communications. Zoom: A web-based meeting platform designed to allow communication with video and audio.

310

311

Chapter 16

Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education Daniel Otieno Kenyatta University, Kenya

ABSTRACT This chapter focuses on evidence-based practices of virtual exchange in higher education (HE). The chapter opens with a discussion of exchange programs in HEIs. A cursory look at the nature of academic exchange programs reveals the traditional models involving faculty and student mobility programs between universities have been and continue to be the modus operandi of many higher education institutions (HEI). The discussion revolves around the application of this traditional approach and the benefits that have accrued. Later sections of the chapter shift the discussion to emerging models and discusses virtual exchange as the new paradigm in global academic exchanges. Various models of virtual exchange programs are discussed with a view of documenting evidence-based global practices. The chapter concludes with change and policy recommendations and suggestions for further reading.

INTRODUCTION The world is increasingly becoming globalised and interdependent (Stacey, 2007). The global culture is evolving dynamically and there is need for people to develop multicultural literacies to be able to understand and interact in the global multiplicity (Stacey, 2007). Due to the increasingly complex and dynamic world, the aims and goals of education are constantly changing depending on the unique global contexts. The vast amount of information available in the internet means that information can be accessed from any part of the globe at any time. The emerging global challenges such as intercultural conflicts, refugee crisis, migration and cultural misunderstandings can be dealt with in a more globalised and digitally connected multicultural world. Virtual Exchange is an appropriate medium in fostering intercultural dialogue and communication thus promoting global citizenship. The role of digitisation in creating greater multicultural understanding and cooperation cannot be underestimated. Through digitised DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch016

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

platforms, teachers can engage in social and technological change in education and address the societal challenges such as issues of gender, inclusivity and inequality. Technology has opened the space for developing a greater critical understanding and interdependence within the global economy. Teachers and students can engage in social and technological exchanges. For them to do this, they need to learn how to use technology in addressing the societal challenges such as social inequality (Dooly & Hauck, 2012), and develop better critical understanding of interdependence in a global context. Virtual exchanges are technology-enabled, sustained, people to people education programs (O’Dowd, 2018) that present an innovative way in which educational institutions and educators are transforming and internationalizing their classes. The development of virtual exchange in higher education is a phenomenon that is gaining prominence. The role of virtual educational exchanges in the era of internationalisation and globalisation is changing the course and practice of academic mobility in higher education. There is evidence from numerous research studies (Downing, Dyment, & Stone, 2019; Lin, Shie, & Holmes, 2017; Peiser, n.d.) to confirm that virtual exchange programs contribute to better achievement of educational outcomes, intercultural understanding, increased global integration and transdisciplinary transfer of knowledge and professional skills. (Stacey, 2007) explains that Virtual exchange projects “provide learners with opportunities to interact with one another through the multiple modes of communication that new technologies provide, to negotiate meaning and understanding, to collaborate on joint projects and work across differences in transnational teams, and to question the many assumptions they may have towards each other”, pg. 2. It is evident that virtual exchanges offer opportunities for students and faculty who do not have access to physical exchange programs. This comes at a lower cost than that of the physical exchange. Research from MIT has documented that virtual exchanges can increase empathy for other cultures and perspectives and develop the willingness to work collaboratively (Stacey, 2007). Universities are increasingly using virtual exchange networks and platforms to enhance quality of teaching, share research knowledge and increase international visibility. Despite the plethora of successful models of virtual exchange, there are inadequate attempts to systematically document them and provide an argument in favour of mainstreaming virtual exchange in Universities, particularly in Africa. While many Universities in North America and Europe have developed successful models, those in Africa have played a minimal role. Evidenced-based research reveal diverse strategies adopted by Universities in implementing virtual exchanges. Universities in Africa have not fully realised the economies of scale accruing from these models of collaborative educational partnerships. This is primarily the consequence of inadequate information and awareness about potential benefits, inadequate training of faculty and lack of infrastructural and institutional support. The purpose of this Chapter is to document evidence-based global practices with a view of providing an argument in favour of benchmarking, adopting standards for direction in policy formulation and advocacy. The Chapter analyses international virtual exchange across various countries in the world including UK, US, Canada, Germany and selected countries in Africa. This integrative review provides a sounding board for recommendations and policy reviews that will enhance future development of virtual exchange in higher education. The Chapter will contribute to the current discourse in the emerging sub-discipline of virtual exchange and spur the efforts towards entrenching of virtual exchange as a model for collaboration, knowledge transfer and economic development in Africa.

312

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

BACKGROUND Academic Exchange in Higher Education As we gradually progress towards a more globalized, digitized and interlinked international community, many Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the world are increasing their efforts towards academic exchange models for knowledge transfer, exchange of expertise, sharing experiences and developing intervarsity cohesiveness. The pursuit of internationalisation has made it mandatory for HEIs to increase their global presence and visibility (Barragán Codina & Leal López, 2013). Internationalization of higher education is the process of integrating an international, intercultural, and global dimension into the purpose, functions (teaching, research, and service), and delivery of higher education at the institutional and national levels. The processes of internationalisation, globalisation and academic exchanges are closely interrelated in roles and functions (Barragán Codina & Leal López, 2013). There are several avenues which have been used to achieve this purpose, such as international collaborations in research, faculty and student exchange programs, conferences and symposiums amongst others. Academic exchange programmes have been very effective in terms of internationalisation and developing a global stature for Universities around the world (Barragán Codina & Leal López, 2013). Academic exchange programmes whether physical or virtual has numerous benefits to the collaborating institutions. It is largely acceptable that participation in exchange programs improves the achievement of higher-level outcomes, motivation and multicultural competencies. International programs such as the Erasmus + have encouraged student exchange programs between Universities Europe and other regions of the World. Students choose to study abroad for a trimester and earn credits for their courses during the duration of their study abroad. This among other programmes have been the main thrust of educational reforms in Europe. Education reforms in Europe begun in Bologna, Italy, in 1999. Education Ministers in Europe met to establish the framework for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). This meeting set the stage for reforms that has been commonly referred to as the Bologna Process. One of the aims of this reforms was to increase international competitiveness and foster student and academic staff mobility within Europe. The reform processes made Germany to realign its education system with other European states in terms of degree qualifications and credit transfer system. Other European countries have also realigned their education systems since the commencement of the Bologna process. Of great importance to the reform processes has been the integration of Academic Exchange as a key component in Higher Education. There has been several developmental milestones, however, as (Stacey, 2007) reports, the full potential of academic exchanges has not been adequately harnessed. There are various models of exchange programs across the world but the focus of this chapter is on academic exchanges mainly in Europe and Africa. The German Academic Exchange Programme (DAAD) has been the most prominent organisation in promoting academic exchange between Germany and other countries. (The EVALUATE Group., 2019) reports that among the key reforms that these countries have embraced is the mainstreaming of Virtual Exchange as a model to develop intercultural understanding and a globalized citizenry. Several countries in Europe have implemented various models of Virtual Exchange. These include Poland, Spain, and Portugal among others. The European Commission has financed several virtual exchange projects. The Integrating Telecollaborative Networks in Higher Education (INTENT) was financed between 2011 and 2014 to achieve greater awareness of virtual exchange in university education. The Evidence-Validated

313

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

Online Learning through Virtual Exchange (EVOLVE) aimed at promoting virtual exchange across all subjects areas in higher education (The EVALUATE Group., 2019). Academic exchanges in the African continent has been very limited and has been in the form of staff and student physical mobility programs. Staff and students move to partner universities for short periods of time and share experiences in their new working environments. The European Union has been supporting the Intra-Africa Academic Mobility Scheme which supports higher education cooperation between countries in Africa. This scheme aims to promote sustainable development and ultimately contribute to poverty reduction. This will hopefully be achieved by increasing the availability of trained and qualified high-level professional manpower in Africa. The Association of African Universities has given priority to these exchange programmes as expressed in their websites. The AAU has promoted Staff Exchange among various institutions, based on its regional integration initiatives. These initiatives serve the purpose of making scarce expertise available to fill in gaps in its member institutions. The staff exchange programme has also promoted interchange and co-operation among universities. International faculty from the US have visited Universities in African countries and shared their knowledge, expertise and experience in teaching and research. At regional levels, the Inter-University Council of East Africa (IUCEA), Association of West African Universities (AWAU), Southern African Regional Universities Association (SARUA) have mainstreamed academic exchange and collaborations in their programs. These have been the traditional models of academic exchange and which have delivered tremendous benefits for participating institutions and their respective governments.

Virtual Exchange Virtual Exchange (VE) is the emerging model of academic exchange that is supplementing the traditional models of staff and student mobility programmes. In the last thirty years, the models used in virtual exchange have evolved in diverse contexts and areas of education (O’Dowd, 2018). As a result of this, the terminologies used have varied depending on the context and the pedagogical approaches used by the practitioners. The concept has been referred to using various terminologies such as telecollaboration, online intercultural exchange, virtual exchange, internet-mediated intercultural foreign language education, globally networked learning environments and teletandem (O’Dowd, 2018). Despite the different terms used, the concept of virtual exchange is fundamentally the same in its diverse contexts of usage. The earlier uses of virtual exchange came from the field of foreign language teaching where the term telecollaboration was frequent, however, virtual exchange is increasingly gaining currency and has become the standard when referring to programs involving online collaborations and exchange of knowledge, experiences and expertise. (O’Dowd, 2018) defines virtual exchange as “the engagement of groups of learners in extended periods of online intercultural interaction and collaboration with partners from other cultural contexts or geographical locations as an integrated part of their educational programmes and under the guidance of educators and/or expert facilitators”. Pg. 5. Regional integration has been an important aspect of economic, social and political development in Europe, Africa, South America, the Caribbean, Southeast Asia and the Arab world. Virtual Exchange programmes are building blocks towards the realisation of this broad vision. The learning of foreign languages has increased globally thus reflecting the shifts in the geopolitical and economic priorities (Lin et al., 2017). There are several studies which have shown the positive impact of using computer-mediated teaching and learning of foreign languages. Telecollaborative exchanges and intercultural approaches have been very instrumental in achieving this. 314

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

Apart from creating intercultural awareness, virtual exchange promotes intercultural communication and participants are able to use language to negotiate meaning and clarify misconceptions between cultures as reported by (Lin et al., 2017) in a study involving participants form UK and Taiwan. Students participating in this project were able to express some of the cultural stereotyping which were then clarified through discussions and negotiated meaning. Portalla and Chen (2010) define intercultural communication (ICC) as, “an individual’s ability to achieve their communication goal while effectively and appropriately utilizing communication behaviors to negotiate between the different identities present within a culturally diverse environment” p.21. They developed an instrument to measure ICC and identified six dimensions of intercultural competencies. These include behavioral flexibility, interaction relaxation, interaction management and message skills, identity maintenance, and interactant respect (Portalla & Chen, 2010). Behavioral flexibility is the ability to respond to various communication demands in different contexts. Interaction relaxation is the absence of anxiety or apprehension in the interaction with others. Interaction management refers to the ability to express oneself and understand one another when communication with people from different cultures while interactant respect is the recognition of the reciprocal and independent nature of interaction. It refers to the ability to establish relationships through interactions (Portalla & Chen, 2010). These competencies are essential for successful dialogue and negotiating meaning and understanding in a virtual exchange environment which involves individuals from diverse socio-cultural backgrounds.

VIRTUAL EXCHANGE IN HIGHER EDUCATION Virtual Exchange in Europe In Europe there are concerted efforts towards investment in various models of virtual exchange. In primary and secondary education the eTwinning platform has been set up to support school staff and allow them to communicate, collaborate and develop projects. As a virtual community of practice it has been hugely successful, with over 170,000 registered teachers, and over 90,000 registered schools (Education for Change, 2013). This is a platform for teachers, students and educators to collaborate on projects and exchange ideas. Despite the existence of these programs, higher education in Europe still places a large premium on promoting physical mobility between students and faculty (Stacey, 2007). Some forms of exchange involve virtual mobility which refers to virtual exchange but also to forms of eLearning where there is no interaction between the participants. It is important to use these online platforms to foster intercultural dialogue and understanding, however, some of them have been used to proliferate racially motivated violence by extremist groups. Universities have a role to develop sustainable models of online communication to address such tensions (Stacey, 2007). Although virtual exchanges have mainly been used to develop competencies in foreign language where teams learn the language of each other, they have evolved and merged with more complex multilateral projects. The development of open, collaborative and relational Web 2.0 technologies and the Internet- based 2.0 environments and tools offer great opportunities for collaboration and participation in Telecollaboration 2.0 (Helm & Guth, 2010).These tools present opportunities for collaboration in knowledge construction and understanding of diverse cultures and practices. The possibilities go beyond the initial use in the teaching of languages and recent times have witnessed usage in science and social studies education.

315

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

Erasmus + Virtual Exchange programme Virtual exchanges have become the contemporary models for collaborative knowledge construction and communities of practice. The European Commission established the Erasmus + Virtual Exchange programme in 2018. Through this programme, young people engage in technology enabled online learning programmes facilitated by a trained facilitator, where they learn intercultural communication and address topical issues affecting the World today. The programme connects youth in Europe and South Mediterranean to engage in multicultural learning. Virtual Exchange is uniquely placed to expand the reach and scope of traditional intercultural learning programmes. The EU has set to increase the number of youth participating in the Erasmus programme to 12 million in the period 2012 -2027. The modern world and workplace require the ability to communicate multi-culturally in digital spaces. Through the Erasmus + Virtual Exchange, young people are provided with opportunity to engage in intercultural dialogue involving countries in Europe and their counterparts in MENA (Middle East and Northern Africa) countries (Hessel, 2016). Participating students have an opportunity to acquire digital literacy skills, learn about other cultures and languages through online discussions and dialogues. These programs are embedded in the courses of participating Universities and contribute towards the final credits students earn in their courses.

Virtual Exchange Models The European Commission has financed several Virtual Exchange projects. The Integrating Telecollaborative Networks in Higher Education (INTENT) project was financed to achieve awareness of virtual exchange in university education. The Evidence-Validated Online Learning through Virtual Exchange (EVOLVE) aims to promote virtual exchange across a variety of subject areas (The EVALUATE Group., 2019). The Evaluating and Upscaling Telecollaborative Teacher Education (EVALUATE) project gauged the impact of virtual exchange on teacher trainers. There were 25 virtual exchange projects involved with 1,018 students of teacher education. Findings from the project revealed that teacher education in Europe is faced with challenges of promoting inclusive approaches to education for all learners, learning foreign languages and developing active citizenship education. Teachers in the 21st century need to integrate online technologies into their classrooms. Out of the total number of students engaged in academic mobility in Europe, less than 5% come from education. Evidence from literature reveals that physical mobility does not automatically lead to the acquisition of intercultural competence and enhanced transnational identity. This coupled with the financial implications of physical mobility presents a justification for using the virtual exchange as a complementary approach to student mobility (The EVALUATE Group., 2019). The Education and Training 2020 Working Group on Schools Policy calls for European education systems to encourage more the use of more collaboration in classroom teaching. Teacher training institutions should engage teachers in networks and professional learning communities. The most widely used model in virtual exchange is the Progressive Exchange Model (PEM) which involves “three interrelated tasks which move from information exchange to comparing and analyzing cultural practices and finally to working on a collaborative product” (O’Dowd, 2017, p.40). The European Union defines Virtual exchange (VE) as a practice, supported by research, that consists of sustained, technology-enabled, people-to-people education programmes or activities in which constructive communication and interaction takes place between individuals or groups who are geographically 316

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

separated and/or from different cultural backgrounds, with the support of educators or facilitators (Jager, Nissen, Helm, Baroni, & Rousset, 2019). This model of education is emerging as an effective tool for transcending geographical boundaries, time and space limits in the delivery of educational programmes (Hessel, 2016). Several universities in Europe and around the world have incorporated virtual exchange in their teaching as way of exposing their students to international learning experiences. This approach is useful in linking up the policies of internationalisation at home and internationalisation of the university curriculum. However, the study by (Jager et al., 2019) established that virtual exchange is still little known in the education sectors. Among the first entrants in this field is State University of New York, whose Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) Center has become an important reference point for many other universities in the US, but also Europe (Jager et al., 2019). The development of virtual exchange at the University of Padova is another milestone that has presented various benefits. The various projects initiated at the University have presented students with the opportunity to develop digital literacies, and also enhance the university’s ‘internationalisation at home’(Stacey, 2007). The foreign language courses have presented bilingual exchanges with universities in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Austria, France, Spain, Hungary and Croatia. Some of the techniques used in this project include synchronous and asynchronous communication tools. Students work collaboratively in creating and describing images obtained from the web. They share in negotiation and decision-making through the available tools. In the course of the projects, they became aware of privacy, copyright rules and creative commons licensure arrangements. This virtual exchange arrangements have been a pre-exercise for physical exchanges for students enrolled in Erasmus exchange programs. It has enhanced physical mobility between students in the Netherlands, Italy and the US thus enrich their cultural and educational experiences. Soliya Connect Program is a multilateral online exchange involving students in the United States, Europe, the Middle East and North Africa. The program helps to create multilateral understanding through discussions between those in the Western and Arab/Muslim parts for the World. Participants engage in 2-hour online video-conference sessions led by a trained facilitator. The project enables participants to use multiple modes of communication and become effective intercultural communicators in online contexts. In doing so, they acquire digital literacies that are essential in the 21st century such as use of video, text chat and audio (Stacey, 2007). The author of this Chapter is a trained facilitator in the Soliya Connect program and has experienced the benefits of facilitating online dialogues successfully under both the Soliya and sharing perspectives models. The sharing perspectives program (http://www.sharingperspectivesfoundation.com) allows participants to share perspectives and learning about gender inequality in the media. Participants were asked to collaborate in the design of online surveys to gather data on different aspects of the European crisis. This program was designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice and was very useful in creating an online avenue for intercultural dialogue amongst the participants who engaged in video discussions. They learnt in collaborative teams and carried out joint online research. Another model of virtual exchange program is the unicollaboration. The main objective of this programme is to promote the development and integration of research and practice in telecollaboration and virtual exchange across all disciplines and subject areas in higher education. Teletandem Brasil – Línguas estrangeiras para todos (Rampazzo & Aranha, 2019) where students who want to learn a foreign language are enrolled. In one project based on this model, Brazilian students engaged in practice of Portuguese in pairs on a weekly basis using synchronous communication tools mainly skype. This project was based on tandem language learning model. The tandem language practice involves three principles. 317

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

These principles are separation of languages, autonomy and reciprocity (Rampazzo & Aranha, 2019). Under the principle of separation of languages, the duration where students have to make oral presentations is divided into two equal parts so that the participants have the same amount of time to practice the language they want. Under autonomy, the participants are free to define their own learning goals and the strategies they will use to reach those goals. The reciprocity principle entails students investing equal in their partners learning by playing the reverse roles of learner and tutor of their own language. There are interesting modalities that have developed such as the institutional integrated TeleTanDem (iiTTD) espoused by (Rampazzo & Aranha, 2019). In iiTTD, two universities establish a partnership and use teletandem teaching foreign language courses in each of the institutions. In this model, the participants meet at an appropriate time and environment such as a teletandem lab when practicing their language lessons. The respective professors are responsible for developing the activities and grading the students based on their performance in those activities. Although there has been an increasing interest in telecollaboration given the rapid developments in technological advances, communication tools and now a vast literature in the field very few initiatives combine telecollaboration and genre theories. Telecollaboration is commonly used to refer to practices that connect language learners in pedagogically interactional activities made possible by online communication tools (Konstantinidis, 2018). Institutional integrated teletandem (Aranha & Cavalari, 2015) involves two institutions getting into a partnership and the language professors integrate the practice into their course syllabi and pedagogical activities. Since telecollaboration is a blend of online and face-to-face learning environments, the task-based learning activities engage learners in working towards specific goals which they set for themselves. This is beneficial since it creates and add a component of self-directed learning. The face to face sessions involve professors meeting with their students to discuss learning progress and difficulties they may be encountering. Students also engage in reflective practice by maintaining a learning dairy where they write about their experiences, the obstacles they have encountered, the milestones they have achieved, and the learning strategies they have used in achieving them. Pre-learning and post assessment questionnaires are also administered to the students to establish the achievement of learning goals. The Virtual Patients (VPs) model was used in Romania and a comparison group of students in USA to teach medical diagnosis, therapeutic planning and diagnosis (Muntean, Calinici, Tigan, & Fors, 2013). Virtual Patients are Web-based Simulation of patient cases developed using simulation software called Web-SP. Cases were developed in Romania and USA. Students were required to work with the cases as if they were real cases. Researchers who studied the students enrolled in the course revealed no significant differences between the students’ performance on the Romanian vs. English version of VPs. Regarding the sets of cases developed in Romania and those developed in the USA, the researchers found a number of statistically significant differences in the students’ performance in those activity areas. The students did not differ significantly in their ability to correctly diagnosis Virtual Patients and develop a therapeutic plan (Muntean et al., 2013). This model is a unique approach in Virtual Exchange of knowledge in the teaching of medicine. Virtual Patients are used in teaching skills such as clinical reasoning and clinical decision making. They have also been used for teaching basic communication skills with patients (Muntean et al., 2013). This model promotes the understanding of socio-cultural issues and cultural differences in relation to matters to do with healthcare education. However, the development of quality VPs is time-consuming and expensive. The production costs are wide ranging and are associated with personnel, software or technical infrastructure (Muntean et al., 2013). The other challenge related to the difficulty of translating the cases into widely spoken languages of English, French and German.

318

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

Virtual Exchange models have also been used for interdisciplinary design education in engineering (Doerry, Klempous, Nikodem, & Paetzold, 2004). An interdisciplinary team developed a novel curriculum called the Global Engineering College (GEC). The aim of this programme was to address the geographic and temporal obstacles to joint international teamwork. Students in one institution were allowed to participate virtually in team design courses offered at another institution (Doerry et al., 2004). In this project students from Germany and Poland participated in a robotics design course offered at the University of Northern Arizona, USA. The project allowed students to acquire knowledge in international economics, inter-cultural teaming and working in distributed contexts. Virtual Student Exchange (VSX) is the cornerstone of the GEC process of ensuring undergraduate engineering are provide with international teaming experience. In this model students work in teams with their counterparts in Germany, Poland and America. The students were able to virtually share the resources from each of the participating Universities (North Arizona University - USA, Dresden College of Applied Sciences - Germany and University of Technology in Poland). Given that several major corporations such Boeing, Ford, Microsystems now rely on groupware technologies to support design and productions teams spread across different geographical areas, the VSX model becomes very useful in equipping the students with these skills. Some of the skills that students acquire through this model include communication, accessing designed artefacts, coordination and project management tools.

Virtual Exchange in Africa The development of virtual exchange in African Universities is still at an early stage. The focus of academic exchanges has mainly involved faculty mobility and inter-university student exchange programmes. The Association of African Universities is at the forefront of promoting inter-university staff and student exchange programmes. Despite these efforts, African higher education still faces unprecedented challenges in the 21st Century (Teferra & Altbach, 2004). These challenges range from providing quality education, research and the services needed for advancing the continent. In terms of use of infrastructural development, the Northern part of Africa is significantly different from sub-Saharan Africa. Countries such as Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Libya and Egypt have well-developed internet connectivity that allows delivery of virtual education. The same can be said about sub-Saharan countries like South Africa, Kenya, Botswana and Namibia. The main reasons for the slow progress in development within the higher education sector are inadequate funding and human resource capacity. The number of doctoral holders in Africa is significantly lower compared to Europe and America. This makes the delivery of education a problem. A significant number of the qualified faculty are not sufficiently digitally literate thus unable to use virtual technology to deliver instruction. A similar situation was reported by the Digital Economy and Society Index where 20-25% of students in Europe are taught by teachers who are not confident with the use of technology (The EVALUATE Group., 2019). So, the problem of insufficient levels of digital literacy is not unique to Africa alone. Africa has also suffered the brunt of brain drain by losing its highly skilled workforce to the developed world. Although the problem of brain drain has been a major challenge to higher education in Africa (Teferra & Altbach, 2004), scholars have suggested that virtual exchange can be a solution to this problem. Some of the reasons for the brain migration is the search for better working conditions and remuneration. Langa, (2018) has suggested that the concept of trans local academic engagement (TLAE) which is not limited to physical mobility is an alternative solution to brain drain. This model includes virtual exchange and sharing of knowledge through blended methods of delivery. Literature confirms 319

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

that virtual exchange makes it possible for multiple academic appointments where academic staff can take up academic appointments in multiple locations without the limitations of distance or physical locations. The effective use of information and communication technology and e-learning platforms can enhance multiple academic affiliations (MMAs) which provides an opportunity to curtail the negative consequences of brain flight from Africa (Langa, 2018). In MMAs scholars from Africa that are engaged outside the continent can continue to offer their expertise back home through virtual learning platforms. Those working within the continent can take up positions in Universities abroad. In the age of Web 4.0 (Langa, 2018) reports, it is possible to share resources such as laboratories, e-classrooms virtually. Various learning tools and technological resources such as Moodle, blogs, Facebook, wikis have changed the way classroom instruction is conducted. Technology has bridged the knowledge sharing gap between African Universities and those in other parts of the world. The unification of Africa is a priority agenda in the African Union Agenda 2063, which is Africa’s blueprint and master plan for transforming Africa into the global powerhouse of the future. Regarding regional, continental and global integration (Otieno, Lee, & Sehoole, 2015) reminisce that academic exchanges are instrumental in the achieving of this ideal. Despite the emphasis on global mobility as opposed to regional mobility, international education in Africa takes place across shared borders. Regional bodies such as the Inter-university council of East Africa have made significant efforts to promote regional academic mobility (Otieno et al., 2015). South Africa has emerged as the leading educational hub for students seeking education outside their home countries because of its relatively advanced and quality education system. The country has managed to attract students from other parts of the world including the USA.

Virtual Exchange and COVID-19 outbreak The outbreak of the Corona Virus Disease has impacted the education sectors across the world in a huge way. Schools and other educational institutions have experienced massive shutdowns as a result of the government-imposed regulations to combat the spread of the deadly virus. With these closures, schools have moved their learning to online platforms. China was the first to implement a hugely successful online teaching experiment where 270 million students have been moved to online platforms with 20 million faculty engaged in teaching at all levels of education. Other countries have also followed suit and moved to online learning. Virtual exchanges have become the new norm for faculty to engage in meetings and continue collaborating with each other. As more countries close their borders and stop international travel, virtual exchanges are becoming the alternative way to go. Several international conferences have cancelled the physical events and conducted teleconferences. Scholars are now attending virtual conferences using online we conferencing facilities.

BARRIERS TO VIRTUAL EXCHANGE Virtual Exchange is not an easy process. (Stacey, 2007) reports that at the University of Padova, the tremendous time commitments required for a virtual exchange programme is not fully recognized. There are also organisational challenges due to time differences, calendars and schedules as well as finding reliable partners. Other difficulties arise in terms of curriculum and assessments requirements. It is considerably difficult to offer credits to students participating in these exchange programmes. A survey conducted 320

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

of over 200 foreign language facilitators across 24 European countries in 2012 by (Helm, 2013) found similar challenges. Online facilitators are not fully aware of the tremendous time and workload requirements of these projects. They are not prepared technical to set up exchange projects and lack adequate didactic training. Due to the limited number of participants that can participate in a programme, it can only be offered as an optional component within a course. This makes students unwilling to participate even if they are awarded credits for participation. Experience at the University of Padova has revealed that students who choose to participate in virtual exchanges already have intercultural experience, whereas it is important to offer these experiences to those who have not had it before. The development of online courses and content for the virtual exchange programmes is a challenging task that requires considerable investment. The process of developing quality computer-assisted instruction materials is time and labour intensive, and therefore expensive (Muntean et al., 2013). Content developers need to dedicate long hours in designing the course platforms to ensure they are interactive and user-friendly. Most faculty are already overloaded with classes to teach, conduct research and engage in community service. Consequently very few are available and willing to give their time to virtual and technology enabled learning. Those willing to undertake these activities must be trained in the use of digital technology in delivering instruction. This is a real challenge given the digital divide that exists among faculty, especially in Africa. In developing countries of Africa and some parts of the Middles East, technological development is low compared to their counterparts in Europe and US. The implications are slow internet speeds and poor connectivity during online teaching and learning. This impacts negatively on the delivery of virtual exchange programs that are delivered both synchronously and asynchronously. The frequent interruptions during the sessions is irritating and discourages both the facilitators and participants. It makes the virtual learning experience less motivating and rewarding. Political correctness can be a barrier to dialogue during a virtual exchange process. The diversity of political alignments in the world today may condition some participants to try to be politically correct in order to avoid hurting the feelings of others or appear to be holding a different point of view which may hurt the other parties (Helm, 2013). However, this is a challenge that most trained facilitators would be able to address during a dialogue process. This is against the essence of good dialogue where conflict transformation as opposed to conflict resolution or management should be the focus of dialogue and agent of change (Helm, 2013). The literature reports that most tele collaboration projects tend to have students discussing ‘safe’ topics in order to avoid communication breakdown. Given that all virtual exchanges take place across different geographical boundaries and time zones, the challenge of synchronizing time schedules, language barriers and technological issues may hinder the process of a smooth dialogue. Participants working in groups may interpret assignments and task differently thus compromising the benefits of project-based learning (Jager et al., 2019). It is possible that participants may arrive late for a dialogue session due to inaccurate interpretation of time and changes occasioned by daylight saving time. There are differences between disciplines which go beyond the content areas. They cover the heart of teaching, research and student-faculty relationships (Green & Whitsed, 2015). This makes it difficult for university faculty to harmonize their course and teaching to come up with joint virtual exchange programs that enable their students to earn credits for the course units they are studying.

321

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

CONCLUSION This chapter discussed the concept of virtual exchange within the context of higher education. Various models of virtual exchange were also explained and the benefits that accrue from successful virtual exchange programmes. It also dealt with the challenges that may face a virtual exchange programme. Although there are a few challenges, the benefits of virtual exchange outweigh them. The European countries and their counterparts in the MENA (Middle-East and North Africa) region have successfully embraced the virtual exchange models in their internationalisation strategies, but those in sub- Saharan Africa have been left behind in the unfolding events. It is time for virtual exchange to be fully implemented across the board. Recent socio-political developments have highlighted the importance of intercultural tolerance and awareness in western countries (O’Dowd, 2019). For African countries, the insurgencies, inter-regional and ethnic conflicts can be solved by creating better understanding between regions and countries in conflict. Problems of ethnic origins can be solved or minimized by engaging the youth in educational programs that foster intercultural understanding. Virtual exchanges present a unique opportunity to achieve this vision. The policy experiment that was conducted by Erasmus + has documented the clear benefits that can be realised through these virtual exchanges (O’Dowd, 2017). Governments can review their education policies and adopt them to the European framework of virtual exchange. This can become a model for social and cultural transformation in Africa.

RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter recommends a review of policy frameworks to adopt virtual exchange as a key component to higher education curriculum. Virtual exchange can be an effective tool to teach intercultural competence, communication and good citizenry (Enders, 1998; Jager et al., 2019; O’Dowd, 2017, 2018). The advantage for those countries that are adopting the virtual exchange approach is that reinventing the wheel is not necessarily because there are successful models that can be adopted and tailored to meet the requirements based on specific contexts (Otieno et al., 2015; Hessel, 2016; O’Dowd, 2019). Universities in Africa need to benchmark with their European partners and develop collaborations in virtual exchange so that students can be exposed to international experiences in a manner like what is happening between Europe, USA and North Africa. It is necessarily to strengthen the regional collaborations between Universities in Africa, both from the same country and across national boundaries. Many universities have bold statements in their strategic plans about the value and place of internationalisation in their institution. When it comes to operationalizing internationalisation in teaching and learning, many scholars are worried because they say this is mere rhetoric that has not been effectively implemented (Green & Whitsed, 2015). Virtual exchange is a vital instrument that can enhance universities’ internationalisation agendas. This needs to be engrained in University strategic plans as a vital component of their internationalisation strategy.

SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH There is need for more studies to be done in Africa to document the existing cases of successful virtual exchange programs. The extant literature reveals the existence of virtual exchange in the teaching of 322

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

languages (Aranha & Cavalari, 2015; Helm, 2013; Hessel, 2016; Lin et al., 2017; O’Dowd, 2018; Peiser, n.d.; Rampazzo & Aranha, 2019), however, few studies have been done in other discipline areas (Abrahamse et al., 2015; Otieno et al., 2015; Verzella, 2018). There is need to conduct research on virtual exchange in other disciplines such as humanities and the social sciences. There is the opportunity to evaluate education polices within the regional governing bodies to establish the gaps in policy and chart a new path in strengthening virtual exchange as an internationalisation strategy in higher education. The Erasmus + policy experiment (Baroni et al., 2019) provides a suitable example of how policy change can impact on the practice of virtual exchanges. There is the opportunity to conduct research on virtual exchange in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and document how educational institutions have navigated the challenges occasioned by this pandemic.

REFERENCES Abrahamse, A., Johnson, M., Levinson, N., Medsker, L., Pearce, J. M., Quiroga, C., & Scipione, R. (2015). A Virtual Educational Exchange: A North–South Virtually Shared Class on Sustainable Development. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19(2), 140–159. doi:10.1177/1028315314540474 Aranha, S., & Cavalari, S. M. S. (2015). Institutional integrated teletandem: What have we been learning about writing and peer feedback? DELTA. Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, 31(3), 763–780. doi:10.1590/0102-445039175922916369 Baroni, A., Dooly, M., Garcés García, P., Guth, S., Hauck, M., Helm, F., … Rogaten, J. (2019). Evaluating the impact of virtual exchange on initial teacher education: a European policy experiment. doi:10.14705/ rpnet.2019.29.9782490057337 Barragán Codina, J., & Leal López, R. (2013). The importance of student mobility, academic exchange and internationalization of higher education for college students in a globalized world: The Mexican and Latin American case. Daena: International Journal of Good Conscience, 8(2), 48–63. Doerry, E., Klempous, R., Nikodem, J., & Paetzold, W. (2004). Virtual student exchange: Lessons learned in virtual international teaming in interdisciplinary design education. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training, ITHET 2004, 650–655. 10.1109/ITHET.2004.1358252 Dooly, M., & Hauck, M. (2012). Researching Multimodal Communicative Competence in Video and Audio Telecollaborative Encounters. Academic Press. Downing, J. J., Dyment, J. E., & Stone, C. (2019). Online initial teacher education in Australia: Affordances for pedagogy, practice and outcomes. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(5), 57–78. doi:10.14221/ajte.2018v44n5.4 Enders, J. (1998). Academic Staff Mobility in the European Community: The ERASMUS Experience. In Comparative Education Review (Vol. 42). Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/ stable/1188786?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

323

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

Green, W., & Whitsed, C. (2015). Introducing critical perspectives on internationalising the curriculum. Critical Perspectives on Internationalising the Curriculum in Disciplines: Reflective Narrative Accounts from Business. Education for Health, (May), 3–22. doi:10.1007/978-94-6300-085-7_1 Helm, F. (2013). A Dialogic Model for Telecollaboration. Bellaterra Journal of Teaching & Learning Language & Literature, 6(2), 28. doi:10.5565/rev/jtl3.522 Helm, F., & Guth, S. (2010). The multifarious goals of telecollaboration 2.0: Theoretical and practical implications. Telecollaboration 2.0: Language, Literacies and Intercultural Learning in the 21st Century, (May), 69–106. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Francesca_Helm/publication/277357372_The_Multifarious_Goals_of_Telecollaboration_2.0_Theoretical_and_Practical_Implications/links/5569a5ba08aec22683035954.pdf Hessel, G. (2016). The impact of participation in ERASMUS study abroad in the UK on students‟ overall English language proficiency, self-efficacy, English use anxiety and self-motivation to continue learning English: a mixed methods investigation. Academic Press. Jager, S., Nissen, E., Helm, F., Baroni, A., & Rousset, I. (2019). Virtual Exchange as Innovative Practice across Europe Awareness and Use in Higher Education. Retrieved from https://evolve-erasmus.eu/wpcontent/uploads/2019/03/Baseline-study-report-Final_Published_Incl_Survey.pdf Konstantinidis, A. (2018). Review of In this together: Teachers’ experiences with transnational, telecollaborative language learning projects. Language Learning & Technology, 22(3), 33–36. Langa, P. V. (2018). African Diaspora and its Multiple Academic Affiliations: Curtailing Brain Drain in African Higher Education through Translocal Academic Engagement. Journal of Higher Education in Africa / Revue de l’enseignement Supérieur En Afrique, 16, 51–76. doi:10.2307/26819628 Lin, W., Shie, & Holmes, J. (2017). Enhancing intercultural communicative competence through online foreign language exchange: Taiwanese students’ experiences. Academic Press. Muntean, V., Calinici, T., Tigan, S., & Fors, U. G. H. (2013). Language, culture and international exchange of virtual patients. BMC Medical Education, 13(1), 21. Advance online publication. doi:10.1186/14726920-13-21 PMID:23394453 O’Dowd, R. (2017). Exploring the Impact of Telecollaboration in Initial Teacher Education: The EVALUATE project. The EuroCALL Review, 25(2), 38. doi:10.4995/eurocall.2017.7636 O’Dowd, R. (2018). From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: State-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 1, 1–23. doi:10.14705/rpnet.2018.jve.1 O’Dowd, R. (2019). A transnational model of virtual exchange for global citizenship education. Language Teaching, 1–32. doi:10.1017/S0261444819000077 Otieno, D., Lee, J. J., & Sehoole, C. (2015). Regional, continental, and global mobility to an emerging economy: the case of South. In Source: Higher Education (Vol. 70). Academic Press. Peiser, G. (n.d.). Overcoming Barriers: Engaging younger students in an online intercultural exchange. Academic Press.

324

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

Portalla, T., & Chen, G.-M. (2010). The Development and Validation of the Intercultural Effectiveness Scale Citation/Publisher Attribution. In Intercultural Communication Studies (Vol. 19). Retrieved from https://web.uri.edu/iaics/files/02TamraPortallaGuo-MingChen.pdf Rampazzo, L., & Aranha, S. (2019). Telecollaboration and genres: a new perspective to understand language learning. Retrieved March 1, 2020, from Journal of Virtual Exchange website: https://www. mendeley.com/viewer/?fileId=0abf57df-bf5e-b2f1-39f9-464593356281&documentId=adda73fd-5463378c-b118-4f0ca4b97ec0 Stacey, J. (2007). From the Field. Immunity, 26(2), 131. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2007.02.006 PMID:21719360 Teferra, D., & Altbach, P. G. (2004). African Higher Education: Challenges for the 21st Century. In Higher Education (Vol. 47). Academic Press. The EVALUATE Group. (2019). Evaluating the impact of virtual exchange on initial teacher education: a European policy experiment. doi:10.14705/rpnet.2019.29.9782490057337 Verzella, M. (2018). Virtual Exchange between Cross-Cultural Teams : A Sustainable Path to the Internationalization of College Courses. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 11(3), 1–13.

ADDITIONAL READING Beelen, J., & Jones, E. (2015). Redefining internationalization at home. In A. Curaj, L. Matei, R. Pricopie, J. Salmi, & P. Scott (Eds.), The European higher education area: Between critical reflections and future policies (pp. 59–72). Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20877-0_5 Dooly, M. (2017). Telecollaboration. The Handbook of Technology and Second Language Teaching and Learning, 169. Duus, R., & Cooray, M. (2014). Together we innovate: Crosscultural teamwork through virtual platforms. Journal of Marketing Education, 36(3), 244–257. doi:10.1177/0273475314535783 Fuchs, C., Hauck, M., & Müller-Hartmann, A. (2012). Promoting learner autonomy through multiliteracy skills development in cross-institutional exchanges. Language Learning & Technology, 16(3), 82–102. Hauck, M. (2019). Learning and Teaching Languages in Technology-Mediated Environments: Why Modes and Meaning Making Matter. PhD thesis. The Open University. Hauck, M., & MacKinnon, T. (2016). A new approach to assessing online intercultural exchange. Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy. Practice, 4, 209. Helm, F. (2016). Facilitated dialogue in online intercultural exchange. Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy. Practice, 150–172. O’Dowd, R. (2013). Telecollaboration and CALL. In M. Thomas, H. Reindeers, & M. Warschauer (Eds.), Contemporary computer-assisted language learning (pp. 123–141). Bloomsbury Academic.

325

 Evidence-Based Virtual Exchange Models in Higher Education

O’Dowd, R. (2018). From telecollaboration to virtual exchange: state-of-the-art and the role of UNICollaboration in moving forward. Journal of Virtual Exchange, 1, 1-23. Research-publishing.net. doi:10.14705/ rpnet.2018.jve.1

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Intercultural Communication: Is the verbal and nonverbal interaction between people from different cultural backgrounds or orientations. Multiple Academic Affiliations: Is where academics or scholars are able to hold multiple academic positions in various academic institutions across different geographical regions. Tele Collaborations: Is a way of teaching language whereby educators engage students across diverse geographical zones in computer-mediated learning activities. Trans-Local Academic Engagements: Is where academics are engaged in academic pursuits in different educational institutions within the same geographical region or country. Virtual Exchange: Is where a group of learners are engaged in a long duration of online intercultural interaction and collaboration with partners from other cultural contexts or geographical locations as an integrated part of their educational programmes and under the guidance of educators and/or expert facilitators.

326

327

Chapter 17

Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives Ilhaam Abrahams Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa Lawrence Meda Zayed University, UAE Eunice N. Ivala Cape Peninsula University of Technology, South Africa

ABSTRACT Blended learning is one of the modalities used to enhance students’ learning experiences in the 21st century. South African educators who migrate to countries overseas have mixed feelings about their teaching using technology in schools. This chapter presents findings on implementation of blended learning in mathematics classrooms from the perspectives of two South African educators working in an international school in Saudi Arabia. The study was done using a qualitative case study within an interpretivist paradigm and it was guided by the technology acceptance model. Two South African educators teaching at an international school in Saudi Arabia were purposively selected to participate in the study. Data was collected using semi-structured interviews and document analysis. A significant contribution of the study was the development of a model which shows that perspectives of the educators on blended learning hinges on two entities: technology acceptance and educators’ self-efficacy.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch017

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

INTRODUCTION The year 2007 saw the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) establish an educational policy known as “the King Abdullah Public Education Development Project”, better known as the “Tatweer” project. This project was aimed at improving teaching and learning within the KSA through the implementation of educational technologies into classrooms (Tayan, 2017). Alyami (2014) described this project as an opportunity for schools to shift from traditional teaching and learning methods to an approach that incorporates blended learning. This has resulted in an increase in the use of technologies in and out of the classroom in Saudi Arabian schools (Alzahrani 2019). There is a growing number of teachers who are enhancing students’ learning experiences by using various technologies available in the country (Saudi Arabia). Alabbasi (2016) concurs that the use of technology in Saudi Arabia is transforming the lives of people including Saudi female teachers’ sense of agency. It is extremely important to discuss teachers’ perspectives about the use of technology in education as they are the ones who uses it to enhance students’ learning experiences in different ways. If a teacher has a negative attitude towards technology, he/she is likely to underutilize it and subsequently become a barrier to an institution’s goal of teaching children using technology. Cho and Littenberg-Tobias (2016) argue that it is important to understand teachers’ perceptions about teaching using technology. Such a study will help determine the extent to which they require support to maximise their abilities to teach using technologies. In this 21st century, teachers are expected to use a combination of online teaching and face to face classes. A combination of the two worlds (online and face to face teaching) is what is called blended learning. There is no single and universally accepted way of defining blended learning as it is defined differently by people to suite their different contexts. Blended learning may not look the same in every classroom (Pierce, 2017). Some people argue that any form of using technology in a classroom is blended learning. Others say a flipped classroom is a blended classroom. For the purpose of this research, blended learning is conceptualized as teaching using a combination of physical face to face classes and online teaching. This is consistent with Chew, Jones and Turner (2008) who contend that a combination of education (face-to-face) and educational technology gives blended learning. Graham (2006) viewed blended learning as having a combination of face-to-face physical classes and synchronous and asynchronous online teaching strategies. Similarly, Siyepu (2018) conceptualised the term as a systematic process of linking the worlds of traditional teaching and learning with educational technologies. Pierce (2017) echoed the same sentiments by postulating that blended learning is a combination of e-Learning alongside traditional classroom teaching and learning methods. Xakaza-Kumalo (2017) indicated that there are no universal approaches that an educator may take in implementing educational technologies in teaching and learning that would ensure learners’ academic success than blended learning. Dziuban, Graham, Moskal, Norberg and Sicilia (2018) argued that blended learning is fast becoming the standardised mode of teaching and subsequently contributes to improved learner academic success. Yushau (2006) concurred that the term blended learning had grown to represent an improved array of teaching and learning approaches where traditional teaching and learning methods were fused with educational technologies or online learning. Dlamini (2018, p. 1) argues that a study completed in 2015 showed that blended learning had improved student engagement by 69%, content retention by 39%, and test scores by 28%. Despite the recognition of blended learning for student success, Alahmari and Kyei-Blankson (2016) stated that the integration of educational technologies in the KSA teaching and learning was welcomed 328

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

with mixed reactions by educators. Some educators were eager to integrate educational technologies into their classrooms, with others not fully geared for the implementation because of factors such as ineffective training. Oyaid (2009) contends that to have educators successfully integrate educational technologies into their teaching, their pedagogical approaches may need to be altered. These changes may vary between educators based on their disposition to the use of technology. These personal dispositions affect the perspectives educators have regarding the implementation of educational technologies into their classes. As the KSA schools are in the process of evolving, the approach of blended learning is preferred as it is believed to increase efficiency, while allowing learners the opportunity to acquire modern learning skills (Bukhari, 2016). There is a dearth of scholarship regarding educators’ perspectives on the implementation of educational technologies in Saudi Arabian schools (Alahmari & Kyei-blankson, 2016), and specifically in mathematics classrooms. A lack of scholarship in the area of educational technology, particularly blended learning in the Saudi Arabian context, is what this paper seeks to contribute to. This paper presents perspectives on implementing blended learning in mathematics classrooms from two South African educators working in an international school in Saudi Arabia.

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Grant and Osanloo (2014) interpret a theoretical framework to be the foundation upon which knowledge is constructed for a research study. This means that a theoretical framework comprises of a theory (or theories) that supports how the researcher approaches the study in terms of epistemology, philosophy, methodology, and analysis. A study can be guided not only by a theory but also a model (Sokolowski, 2018, p. 6). This study used the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) as a theoretical framework. Huang and Liaw (2018) maintained that TAM has two principles: perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEOU) of technology. In other words, in its simplest conceptualisation, TAM “proposes that perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness predict the acceptance of information technology” (Ma & Liu, 2004, P. 59). Perceived usefulness is the extent to which a user feels implementing technology will better their performance (Davis, 1989), for example, whether the educator feels that using a smartboard betters the teaching and learning experience of learners as opposed to using a whiteboard. PEOU is when an educator is convinced that technology makes work easy and more efficient (Huang & Liaw, 2018). Masrom (2007) postulates that PEOU affects PU based on the principle that when one perceives something as easy to use, one would consequently feel that it is useful. TAM was selected for this study as it is one of the widely used and applied models of user acceptance and usage (Ma & Liu, 2004) in various educational institutions. This is relevant to this study where educators from South Africa are going to reflect on their experiences and perspectives about teaching using technology on blended learning. The model inter-relates the topic of technology usage and the perspectives of those making use of it. The model is also relevant to this study as teachers who use blended learning will have accepted technology use in their teaching. Accepting technology use in teaching regardless of challenges that it comes with is a vital component in the TAM model. PU is what drives many teachers to use technology. That component of TAM is very essential in this study as educators choose to blend their teaching because of the usefulness of technology when it comes to online learning. Davis (1986) postulates that TAM is

329

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

suitable for determining the extent to which technology is used and how people perceive its usefulness to achieve their goals.

METHOD The study in which findings are presented in this paper was done using a qualitative approach within an interpretive paradigm. A qualitative approach was chosen as it enables researchers to collect rich textual data (Creswell, 2008). In this case, the textual data was about educators’ perspectives of implementing blended learning in their teaching. An interpretive paradigm was preferred as it allowed participants’ perspectives to be analysed and interpreted (Creswell, 2012). An interpretive paradigm was also chosen as it is compatible with a qualitative approach. According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2017) a qualitative approach and interpretive paradigm are inseparable as they both seek to investigate people’s perspectives about a particular phenomenon. In support of that view, Lapan, Quartaroli and Riemer (2012) argue that every qualitative research has an interpretive perspective which focuses on uncovering participants’ experiences and understanding and interpreting meaning of a subject under investigation. The study was done as a case study of an international school in Saudi Arabia where two South African educators are teaching mathematics. A case study was selected for this study as it allowed researchers to gain an in-depth exploration of the educators’ perspectives (Yin, 2014). Cohen et al. (2017) contend that a case study is very specific. It helps researchers identify a specified number of participants, a particular setting, and situation, or event (Creswell & Poth, 2018; Creswell, 2015). In this study, a specified number of participants is two educators, setting is a school in Saudi Arabia and situation or event is teachers’ perspectives about blended learning. The school offers Grades K-12. As an international school, the curriculum used is an amended American curriculum whereby educators are encouraged to actively incorporate educational technologies into their teaching and learning of their students. Two South African educators teaching Grade 10 mathematics using blended learning at the school were purposively selected to participate in the study. Purposive sampling was selected as it allows information rich participants to be selected. Fraenkel, Wallen and Hyun (2015) contend that purposive sampling is suitable for a qualitative study as it is characterised by deliberate targeting of participants with information relevant to the research. Data was collected using semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis. Ethical clearance was sought from the school and district office in Saudi Arabia.

FINDINGS Educators Perspectives on Blended Learning The data indicated that the educators defined blended learning as a mixture of traditional and modern teaching methodologies. Educator 1 (E1) stated: Mixing learning styles to suit my lessons. I use the traditional whiteboard with working out calculations, for making notes or explanations but I also provide my leaners with additional support and information via electronic means by displaying presentations or 3D shapes or having the smartboard generate

330

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

graphs or to solve matrices. When the students purchase their textbooks, they are subscribed to the digital textbook which they use at home to go through the lessons before class and I will direct them to additional enrichment exercises in the digital book after the lesson. Similarly, Educator 2 (E2) explained blended learning as: Simultaneously using technology and regular teaching tools. In my class we use the learners’ textbooks and workbooks along with the smart interactive board. The learners have their textbooks on the desk and I will display something related to the lesson on the smartboard like a video, animation or interactive game where learners need to solve questions, select the correct answers or draw their graphs on the smartboard which will automatically synchronise to the shared OneDrive and update the lesson notes which will be available for the students online after the lesson. I also do calculations or explanations on the whiteboard in the same lesson. From these findings, the authors deduce that both educators shared the opinion that blended learning was when the worlds of traditional teaching and modern teaching methodologies are used simultaneously in a teaching situation. This is in agreement with Pierce (2017), who defined blended learning as the combination of E-Learning alongside traditional classroom teaching and learning methods. Similarly, Al-Sharqi, Hashim and Ahmed (2015) conceptualised blended learning as the harmonious integration of learning strategies through the combination of face-to-face interaction and ICT, allowing for a more enriched learning experiences. Furthermore, Schwuchow (2018) mentioned that blended learning in a class will take the form the educator feels comfortable with. Al Jaser (2017) highlighted a study conducted at the Princess Norah University in Saudi Arabia, where blended learning has taken the form of a flipped classroom. Sommer and Ritzhaupt (2018) described a flipped classroom as a learning situation where learners are given access to course content ahead of time so that when they get to class they are informed and ready to engage on the content. Findings of this study showed that the respondents selected to employ a flipped classroom approach to their blended learning. E1 explained: “When the students purchase their textbooks, they are subscribed to the digital textbook which they use at home to go through the lessons before class.” Similarly, E2 stated: The digital text book is a great help as students go through the chapters before the lesson because they get participation points on the Learning Management System (LMS) and that means the content is a little more familiar when I formally introduce topics in the class time. Data showed that the flipped classroom format was employed by these educators. Firstly, the educators have the learners peruse the chapters ahead of the lessons. When the learners arrive for the formal lesson to be taught, the educators capture their interest through digital means, for example playing a video, animation, or warm-up game via the interactive smartboard. Educator two (E2) explained how his lessons are flipped: Before the lesson, I will upload information linked to the topics we are covering. During the lesson will have the textbook exercises open on the smartboard and when students go to the board to work out their answers or if I add any additional notes, these inputs will be directly uploaded to the shared drive

331

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

which students will have access to, for revision, as soon as they check their devices. After the lesson I will upload information pertaining to the next lesson. Furthermore, the learners are encouraged to revisit the lesson as well as engage with the content provided for the next lesson out of the classroom.

Technology Acceptance Both educators reflected on how they had initially come from South African schools when describing the teaching technology and training being made available for them in Saudi Arabia. E1 felt that there was no real need for them to integrate the available technologies into their teaching in the South African school he worked in. Additionally, E1 stated that once he emigrated from South Africa to KSA, there was a greater need to integrate the teaching technologies made available and that he had to accept the technologies. Educator one (E1) stated: I really enjoy using technology to teach now. It makes things much easier, more manageable and content engaging especially for my Mathematics and Physical Science students. Initially, it was a big shock for me, coming from South Africa where there was one computer lab in the building with 20 computers that 48 students needed to share, unlike here in KSA where each student has a tablet, all classrooms have projectors with smart boards with Wi-Fi and you are expected to use these resources on a daily basis. Since being in KSA for the last 5 years, it has really shifted my opinion on using technology with my teaching. Back in SA the school would make the educators attend workshops where we would be shown how to use programs, but I would never pay attention. I took it for granted because I was at a poor school where the students outnumbered the resources and if I needed something done there was always a younger educator or one of my children I could ask to do these things for me. When I moved to KSA for the first time I was alone. I had to figure all these things out for myself. My livelihood depended on whether or not I was able to integrate these technologies into my classroom. I had to accept that I needed to use this technology in order to do my job successfully. Alharbi and Drew (2014) discussed TAM, in light of a study conducted at Shaqra University in Saudi Arabia, stating that an educator would deem a technological tool to be useful depending on the degree to which this technological tool would enhance their performance as an educator. In this instance, it was evident that E1 previously had little motivation to make use of the technology at the South African school. This educator previously felt that the use of the available educational technologies made no real difference to their teaching and therefore deemed the use of these technologies useless. Based on the TAM model, E1’s decision not to accept technology for teaching and learning was influenced by the fact that the educator viewed the technology as not needed. In contrast, when E1 emigrated to KSA there was a greater need to accept the technology as it was expected of him to integrate it in his teaching and learning of his learners. The educator expressed that he enjoyed using technology in his teaching and that the technology enhanced the lessons. This indicates that the educator viewed the use of technology as being useful. Along with the need to view a technological teaching tool as being useful, TAM takes into account how easy a technological tool is for the user. Moukali (2012) posits that when considering the acceptance of technology, TAM connects the perception of perceived usefulness of technology and the perceived 332

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

ease of use for a user. Educator two (E2) reiterated the points made by E1 regarding the implementation of technologies being useful to the teaching and learning of mathematics among other subjects. Furthermore, E2 highlighted that the use of these technologies was initially challenging but it had become easier to use with practice. Educator two (E2) reported: It was challenging at first, but with anything when you practice you do better. Being a South African educator, coming from a teaching environment where there was little to no blended teaching and learning or even incorporating any technology into lesson. I had to do quite a bit of learning on the job when I emigrated to KSA but that really allowed me the opportunity to discover things that were not taught in the workshops being offered by the school. Now I enjoy preparing my lessons, accessing the different functions on my smartboard and making my Mathematics and Computer Aided Drawing (CAD) lessons interactive and creating learning situations where students look forward to my lessons. For me a really motivating factor was that I have a family that I need to provide for back in SA, so I had to do what I could to make a success of working in KSA. I had to adapt my traditional teaching methods to the way teaching and learning takes place in KSA. Based on the above results it is once again evident that the educator had a necessity to accept the usefulness of the technology they were presented with, moreover, the educator expressed the fact that the technology has become easier to operate, manipulate, and implement. This supports Moukali’s (2012) explanation of TAM that if an educator perceives a technological tool as easy to implement, they would deem the technology to be useful and therefore the educator is more likely to accept and implement the technology.

Utilisation of Technology When asked about the teaching and learning resources in their classes, E2 had this to say: “Smart board, Pearson digital textbook, YouTube, ClassEra, MS-office, presentation tool or laser pointer, data projector, tablets for learners, Wi-Fi enabled classroom, desktop computer, personal laptop and Khan Academy. We use the LMS and smartboard extensively.” From this results it is evident that the educators have well-resourced classrooms. When asked about how the LMS (ClassEra) works, E1 explained: It is a learner management system that allows for communication between the educator, students, parents or guardians and the principal. It is fully online. The educator will upload lessons, class announcements, additional information or slides connected to topics, monitor student behaviour with the points system, parents can track the progress of their kids with weekly reports that are generated from self-marking quizzes and we can set up class groups for the students to discuss work while we, as the educators, monitor the discussions. It is a really great system and it serves as a storage bank for our lessons. The above findings are in agreement with Alghamdi (2018), who indicated that technologies are selected for blended learning based on three factors, namely; the communication between learner and educator being direct and immediate, that the resources are cost effective, and that the need for continual teaching and learning is met. Additionally, with blended learning, E2 spoke about the smart interactive board, stating:

333

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

We use the smart board extensively; we have the board generate graphs, do calculations, play presentations, video and animations, display the textbook and make notes to slides to upload later or synchronise to the LMS. The smartboard is also an easy way of keeping the faster students busy with additional questions while I walk around assisting other students or checking if the students have any questions. The kids also enjoy it when I let them generate the graphs or writing their answers on the smartboard when we do final calculations. Alghamdi (2018) articulates that successful integration of smartboard technology can transform a learning space into an interactive and dynamic learning environment and enhances the classroom environment. This encourages learner participation and confidence building. E2 has accepted the available technology and was reaping the benefits of utilising the smartboard in the class. Both educators unequivocally stated that they enjoy being able to blend their lessons. When asked about the future of blended learning, E1 expressed: I do not see blended learning going away anytime soon. I think more educators will come on board with this method of teaching and I see younger educators coming up with better and more innovative methods of blending learning as a whole. Similarly, E2 stated: I know that program developers will improve on educational technologies and the educational systems will get better. Learning will be more accessible to more students and become even more cost effective. If we expose our students to these educational technologies, the students may be inspired to create the changes we are speaking about. The above findings show that both educators believed that blended learning will stand the test of time. Jonker, Marz and Voogt (2018) discussed educator identity in lieu of blended learning, indicating that there are a number of factors that affect an educator’s professional identity and in turn affects their stance on their utilising of blended learning in a classroom situation. One of the factors Jonker et al. (2018) put forward was that when educators experience a shift in educational contexts, this affects educators professional identity.

Educators’ Self-efficacy and Blended Learning When speaking about professional development, the educators expressed that the current school they were teaching at offered continuous, consistent, and relevant professional development. Educator one (EI) explained that the school provided training workshops for the facilitation of blended learning: “Fortunately, the school had a really great educator program that trains you on all of the systems and they have a designated person you can ask any questions if you have any problems.” Echoing the same sentiment, E2 stated: The school provided lots of training where the LMS, the smartboard and the textbook companies all sent a representative to the school to offer educators specialised training. The school even had someone

334

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

come in to show educators the best ways to set up their classrooms to gain maximum benefit from all of the technological resources. Alghamdi (2018) suggested that correct, sufficient and appropriate professional development positively impacts the teaching strategies of educators and their self-efficacy. On the point of self-efficacy, both E1 and E2 seemed to have self-belief and confidence in the training they received. Educator one (E1) felt equipped enough to make a success of implementing blended learning within the classroom: As a mathematics and physical science educator, my subjects are generally difficult for students to grasp. Had it not been for the extensive and regular training we have to do at school, I do not think I would be as confident as I am with implementing all these teaching technologies into my lessons or rather blending my lessons. In life if you have the right tools it is easy to be sure of what you are doing. For me, I needed the confidence boost because my subjects are so heavy and there is a big language barrier between myself and my students. Self-efficacy is conceptualised in this study as an individual’s belief that he/she can achieve specific goals in a particular area of performance (Lisbona, Palaci, Salanova & Frese 2018). Bandura (1977) concurs that self-efficacy has something to do with one’s judgement and belief that he/she can do something. It (self-efficacy) has something to do with a people’s intrinsic motivation and belief that they can achieve certain goals regardless of how difficult the task may be. It is essential to point that a person’s self-efficacy is boosted when he/she was trained to do something. This is in accordance with findings of this study where educators felt highly motivated and geared to experiment teaching mathematics using blended learning in Saudi Aribia. It was through educators’ self-efficacy that implementation of blended learning in mathematics was producing desirable results. Masitoh and Fitriyani (2018) argue that one of the main factors which makes students achieve greater results in Mathematics is self-efficacy. If students lack self-efficacy in challenging subjects like Mathematics, they are likely to perform poorly. When speaking about how comfortable the educators are with implementing blended learning into their lessons, E1 stated that blended learning was “something that is relatively easy to implement.” On the issue of seeking additional information, E1 admitted that they are always seeking new ways of improving their teaching and looking for better ways to implement what was being taught: I like to make use of the functions that allow me to be the best educator I can be. I am always looking at YouTube videos to see how I can improve my skills or tricks to better the way I use the systems. As every learner is different, so are the educators. This exposure to new teaching methodologies and tools, E2 not only felt confident in his/her ability to blend their lessons, but also inspired to seek additional professional development on his/her own. Educator two (E2) stated: I am currently doing some studies with the University of Cape Town. A Post Graduate Diploma in Emerging Educational Technologies. This course is really enhancing my work and how I conduct my lessons. I never thought I would be studying again at my age but this exposure to these teaching methodologies at school has opened my eyes.

335

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

Building on the work of Alamri, Aldahmash and Alsharif (2018) it was evident that these educators are taking full advantage of a professional development programme that not only encourages educators, but also inspires them to better themselves. It was evident that both E1 and E2 had engaged and embraced the blended learning style. These educators have become immersed in the blended learning approach and were actively seeking new and improved ways of teaching using educational technologies.

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION Framed on TAM, the study from which findings are presented in this paper was aimed at understanding educators’ perspectives of blended learning in mathematics at an international school in Saudi Arabia. The study found that educators generally view teaching using technology in a classroom as blended learning. This is different from other scholars’ views who say blended learning is about combining face to face and online learning (Chew et al., 2008; Siyepu 2018). A significant contribution emanating from the findings is a model on the educators’ perspectives on blended learning as shown on figure 1. Figure 1. Model of the Educators’ Perspectives on Blended Learning

The model shows that perspectives of the educators on blended learning impacts on two entities, namely: technology acceptance and educators’ self-efficacy and blended learning. When educators have adequate academic support and motivation, their perspective above implementation of blended learning will become positive. If they are given enough support and motivation, they accept teaching utilising technology and develop self-efficacy about blended learning which ultimately result in optimisation of technology and positive perceptions of blended learning. If educators are not supported nor motivated, they have negative views about using technology in general and blended learning in particular. It is recommended that in order to help teachers develop a positive perspective about using technology and maximising emerging technology in their teaching, there is a need for continuous professional development workshops, seminars and symposiums to be offered. Such teacher professional development

336

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

initiatives will help capacitate them about using different technologies and help obliterate their fears and worries. Training which educators get about teaching using various emerging technologies helps give them confidence to believe in themselves. When they develop such a belief in themselves, they will successfully implement blended learning into their classrooms. Thus, professional development and exposure to teaching technologies inspire and motivate educators to achieve more in teaching.

REFERENCES Al-Sharqi, L. M., Hashim, K., & Ahmed, P. S. (2015). Improving the Learning Environment at a University in Saudi Arabia: Identifying Factors That Impede or Motivate Learning. International Journal of Sciences, Basic and Applied Research, 19(2), 234–249. Alabbasi, D. O. (2016). The Experiences of Saudi Female Teachers Using Technology in Primary Schools in Saudi Arabia (PhD Thesis). University of Manchester. Alahmari, A., & Kyei-blankson, L. (2016). Adopting and Implementing an E-Learning System for Teaching and Learning in Saudi Public K-12 Schools: The Benefits, Challenges, and Concerns. World Journal on Educational Research, 3(1), 11–32. doi:10.22158/wjer.v3n1p11 Alamri, N. M., Aldahmash, A. H., & Alsharif, K. M. (2018). Emerging Trends in Research on Math Teacher Professional Development. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 91–106. doi:10.12973/ iji.2018.1137a Alharbi, S., & Drew, S. (2014). Using the Technology Acceptance Model in Understanding Academics’ Behavioural Intention to Use Learning Management Systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 5(1), 143–155. doi:10.14569/IJACSA.2014.050120 AlJaser, A. M. (2017). Effectiveness of Using Flipped Classroom Strategy in Academic Achievement and Self-Efficacy among Education Students of Princess Nourah bint Abdulrahman University. English Language Teaching, 10(4), 67. doi:10.5539/elt.v10n4p67 Alyami, R. H. (2014). Educational Reform in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Tatweer Schools as a Unit of Development. Literacy Information and Computer Education Journal, 5(2), 1424–1433. doi:10.20533/ licej.2040.2589.2014.0202 Alzahrani, S. M. (2019). Saudi Arabian High School Teachers’ Understanding and Implementation of Flipped Learning (PhD thesis). University of Toledo. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191 PMID:847061 Bukhari, E. G. (2016). Blended Learning Implementation in Secondary Education for Girls: Case Study Tatweer Project in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Academic Research and Reflection, 4(7), 25–39. Chew, E., Jones, N., & Turner, D. (2008). Critical Review of the Blended Learning Models Based on Maslow’s and Vygotsky’s Educational Theory’ in Hybrid Learning and Education. Springer Verlag Publ., doi:10.1007/978-3-540-85170-7_4

337

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

Cho, V., & Littenberg-Tobias, J. (2016). ‘Digital devices and teaching the whole student: Developing and validating an instrument to measure educators’ attitudes and beliefs’. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(4), 1–17. doi:10.100711423-016-9441-x Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Research Methods in Education. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315456539 Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational Research. Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Merrill Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage. Davis, F. D. (1986). A Technology Acceptance Model for Empirically Test- ing New End-user information Systems: Theory and Results (Doctoral Dissertation). MIT Sloan School of Management, Cambridge, MA. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339. doi:10.2307/249008 Dlamini, K. (2018). How the blended learning concept refines Education. Available at: https://lcibs. co.uk/how-the-blended-learning-concept-refines-education/ Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended learning: The new normal and emerging technologies. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 15(1), 1–16. doi:10.118641239-017-0087-5 Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2015). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. McGraw-Hill. Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions. The Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs. Pfeiffer Publ. Grant, C., & Osanloo, A. (2014). Understanding, Selecting, and Integrating a Theoretical Framework in Dissertation Research: Creating the Blueprint for Your “House”. Administrative Issues Journal Education Practice and Research, 12–26. Huang, H. M., & Liaw, S. S. (2018). An analysis of learners’ intentions toward virtual reality learning based on constructivist and technology acceptance approaches. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 19(1), 91–115. doi:10.19173/irrodl.v19i1.2503 Jonker, H., März, V., & Voogt, J. (2018). Teacher educators’ professional identity under construction: The transition from teaching face-to-face to a blended curriculum. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 120–133. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.016

338

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

Lapan, D. S., Quartaroli, T. M., & Riemer, J. F. (2012). Introduction to Qualitative Research. In S. D. Lapan, T. M. Quartaroli, & J. Riemer (Eds.), Qualitative Research. An Introduction to Methods and Designs (pp. 3–18). Josey-Bass. Lisbona, A., Palaci, F., Salanova, M., & Frese, M. (2018). The effects of work engagement and selfefficacy on personal initiative and performance. Psicothema, 30(1), 89–96. PMID:29363476 Ma, Q., & Liu, L. (2004). The Technology Acceptance Model: A Meta-Analysis of Empirical Findings. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 16(1), 59–72. doi:10.4018/joeuc.2004010104 Masitoh, L. F., & Fitriyani, H. (2018). Improving students’ mathematics self-efficacy through problem based learning. Malikussaleh Journal of Mathematics Learning, 1(1), 26–30. doi:10.29103/mjml.v1i1.679 Masrom, M. (2007). Technology Acceptance Model and E-learning. Technology (Elmsford, N.Y.), (May), 1–10. Moukali, K. H. (2012). Factors that affect faculty attitudes toward adoption of technology-rich blended learning (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of Kansas. Pierce, D. (2017). What effective blended learning looks like. THE Journal. Accessed 7 April 2020. https://thejournal.com/Articles/2017/01/11/What-Effective-Blended-Learning-Looks-Like.aspx?p=1 Schwuchow, B. (2018). Activity orientation in Engineering Education. In Research in Technology Education: International Approaches. Waxmann Verlag GmbH. Siyepu, S. W. (2018). Blended Learning in a Mathematics Classroom: A Focus in Khan Academy. ICMET 2018: 20th International Conference on Mathematics Education and Teachers Conference. Sokolowski, A. (2018). Scientific Inquiry in Mathematics - Theory and Practice: A STEM Perspective. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-89524-6 Sommer, M., & Ritzhaupt, A. (2018). Impact of the flipped classroom on learner achievement and satisfaction in an undergraduate technology literacy course. Journal of Information Technology Education, 17(1), 160–182. Tayan, B. M. (2017). The Saudi Tatweer Education Reforms: Implications of Neoliberal Thought to Saudi Education Policy. International Education Studies, 10(5), 61. doi:10.5539/ies.v10n5p61 Xakaza-kumalo, S. (2017). Pedagogical issues arising from the introduction of educational technology at two South African universities of technology: a comparative study (Unpublished DTech thesis). Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research Design and Methods (5th ed.). Sage. Yushau, B. (2006). The Effects of Blended E-Learning on Mathematics and Computer Attitudes in PreCalculus Algebra. Tmme, 3(2), 176–183.

339

 Implementing Blended Learning in Classrooms: Educators’ Perspectives

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Blended Learning: Teaching using a combination of both face-to-face classes and online. Educators: Teachers teaching in primary or secondary schools. Online Learning: Teaching using technologies synchronously and asynchronously. Perspectives: Educators’ views about teaching using technology. Technologies: Digital devices and internet connections which are used by teachers to enhance students’ learning experiences. Technology Acceptance: Accepting to teach using technology. Technology Utilisation: Using technology to enhance students’ learning experiences.

340

341

Chapter 18

Student Collaborative Learning Strategies:

A Logistic Regression Analysis Approach John Rugutt Illinois State University, USA Caroline Chemosit Lincoln College, USA

ABSTRACT The authors of this study utilized the logistic regression analysis using extreme student groups (top and bottom quartiles) defined by students’ collaborative learning scores to develop a model for predicting group membership of low and high levels of collaborative learning college students. The focus of the study was to identify characteristics of the learning environment that differentiate between high and low collaborative learning groups. Results of the logistic regression showed a statistically significant model that can be used to reliably predict student’s classification into low or high collaborative learning groups based on the selected institution and personal variables. The logistic regression model showed the lowest total percent correctly classified was at 98.1% while the highest total percent correctly classified was at 98.6%. Majority of the model variables made significant differences between the low and high collaborative learning groups. ANOVA results indicate significant group differences in all the predictor variables.

INTRODUCTION The world is experiencing a situation that has never been experienced in recent history due to the current Corona Virus (COVID-19) pandemic. Institutions of learning have been forced to device instructional formats that observe both the medical and government guidelines for limiting the spread of COVID-19 while at the same time ensuring that teaching and learning goes one. Different institutions are trying different instructional delivery methods and terms such as synchronous, asynchronous, hybrid, distance education, on-campus, off-campus, in-person have continued to dominate discussions in different instiDOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-4360-3.ch018

Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

tutions. This study looks at one form of teaching and learning that cuts across all forms of instructional delivery systems. In collaborative learning, the instructor’s role is to organize the groups and learning activities but then let the groups “assume the responsibility for learning” (Foote, 2001, p. 2). Collaborative learning is more than students working on group projects and according to Foote, successful facilitation of collaborative learning contains “clear interdependence among students, regular group self-evaluation, interpersonal behaviors that promote each member’s learning and success, individual accountability and personal responsibility and the frequent use of appropriate interpersonal and small group social skills” (Foote, 2001, p. 2). Baker and Campbell (2005) reported about students from a mathematics course who were placed into random groups and asked to develop mathematical proofs in response to difficult problems they were given. The researchers discovered that each group member played an important role in the learning of other members. One especially interesting observation was that students who didn’t know the material as well as others but kept the group focused and did not allow it to quit when it faced roadblocks were just as valuable to the group as those who knew the material well. On the other hand, they noted that the most confident student not being as knowledgeable as the other students can cause issues within the group (Baker & Campbell, 2005). Sibbernsen (2014) studied the impact of placing students in groups versus allowing them to work individually when applying a specific curriculum to an astronomy course. The authors discovered that although placing the students in groups had little quantitative impact on student performance, those students who were placed in groups were more likely to take on more challenging problems than those who worked individually (Sibbernsen, 2014). Based on this research, students’ confidence grows as they work with their peers. Higher levels of confidence can lead to higher levels of engagement and success. In addition to collaborative learning, a student’s relationship with his or her instructor is also a contributing factor to engagement in the classroom. Contact with faculty members can include both classoriented and non-class-oriented interactions. Non-class-oriented interactions might include students talking with faculty members about future academic or career plans, which shifts the relationship of the faculty member from an instructor to a mentor (Kuh, 2003). Christophel (1990) observed teacher immediacy behaviors - those behaviors that make others feel welcome and comfortable in the classroom - and their impact on student motivation and learning. Christophel determined these types of behaviors positively correlated with both student motivation and learning, suggesting the relationship between a teacher and student influences the student’s academic performance. Engagement in the classroom early in an academic career plays an especially important role in student success (McClenney & Arnsparger, 2012). Engagement in the classroom can come in many forms, including working with other students and developing a relationship with an instructor. A student’s engagement in the classroom and in the campus community can impact the student’s academic performance. Tucker (1999) observed that students who do not have a sense of belonging in their academic community are constantly aware of their isolation and this often leads to poor academic performance or attrition.

FRAMEWORK Collaborative learning in the classroom is when two or more students participate in learning activities together. During this time, students engage in discussions, learn to work cooperatively, and develop teamwork skills and communication. These skills are crucial in the real world and should be implemented 342

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

early in a child’s learning journey. The goal of this type of learning is to come up with a solution together, as a team since students depend on one another because of their unique knowledge and perspective (Kaendler, Wiedmann, Rummel & Spada, 2015). Without collaborative learning, students will not learn how to interact with one another. It is difficult to engage in collaborative learning effectively without positive peer relationships. Collaborative learning depends on the quality of student interaction and it is critical for the teacher to make student interaction a priority. When students are given opportunities to interact with their peers and build relationships, they will be able to learn from one another. In order for collaborative learning to enhance student learning, positive peer relationships need to be supported. While the relationship of a teacher and student is important, the question remains - What behaviors do these teachers who motivate and improve student learning portray? To address this question, Lowman (1994) examined student ratings of faculty to determine what traits well liked instructors possessed. Words like “enthusiastic,” “helpful,” and “concerned” were most often used to describe faculty with the highest rating. He further developed a standard to which the best instructors could aspire by engaging, motivating, and stimulating students (Lowman, 1994). Advancing the idea of instructors building a relationship with students, Benson, Cohen, and Buskist (2005) surveyed students in a psychology class to see if they had ever established a rapport with their instructor and, if so, whether it led to the student engaging in the class. The authors found that students who established some level of rapport or relationship with their instructors were far more likely to engage in positive behaviors such as attending class, studying materials outside of class time, and attending office hours (Benson, Cohen, & Buskist, 2005). Kuh (2003) supported this using data from the National Survey for Student Engagement (NSSE) when he wrote that students who often engage with faculty experience higher levels of satisfaction in their academic careers. This study sets out to investigate personal, in-class and out of class variables that differentiate the high and low levels collaborative students learning groups and thus student learning.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS The purpose of this study is two-fold: a) first to determine whether a model exists that significantly increased the researcher’s ability to accurately classify the low and high collaborative learning college students based upon selected personal and in-class and out of class variables [peer learning and motivation (PLMO), student faculty interaction (SFI), quality of instruction (QI), student engagement (ENG), collaborative learning strategies (CL) and quality of effort (QE)]; b) to contribute to the area of collaborative learning literature through an investigation of correlate and predictors of high collaborative learning group; and c) to answer the following research question: What personal and institutional characteristics of the learning environment differentiate between high and low collaborative learning groups?

PERTINENT PRIOR RESEARCH Collaborative Learning Tinto (1997), sought to determine the degree to which collaborative learning strategies enhanced student learning. Tinto’s study found that student perceptions of learning were greater in the collaborative learning community setting than in the more traditional learning settings. Further, the importance of student 343

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

involvement or engagement and quality of effort as a significant determinant of students’ educational outcomes is an important factor in predicting student academic achievement (Astin, 1984; Pace, 1984). “Active learning invites students to bring their life experiences into the learning process, reflect on their own and other perspectives as they expand their viewpoints, and apply new understanding to their own lives” (ACPA and NASPA, 1997, p. 3). Tinto’s (1997) study formed part of the foundation for the present study on collaborative learning. “Since 1960 more than 300 studies have compared the relative efficacy of cooperative, competitive, and individual learning on individual achievement in college and adult settings” (Morgan, 2003, p. 40). As demand increased for college graduates who were able to work effectively in teams, communicate electronically, solve open-ended problems, and think critically, a rekindling of interest in collaborative pedagogy at the college level took place. The 1990’s saw a renewed interest in investigating the area of cooperative or collaborative learning techniques, as seen by the work of Johnson and Johnson (1989), as well as Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (1998). Collaborative and cooperative have been used interchangeably in the literature (Bruffee, 1993; Gamson, 1994). If a distinction is made between cooperation and collaboration, then the distinction generally revolves around one issue - power structures. Gamson (1994) and Bruffee (1993) concur that cooperative learning is noncompetitive whereas collaboration, especially within true collaborative settings, takes the student and instructor into a new territory of learning. Collaborative learning does not require formal training and the primary emphasis is on group construction of meaning. Organized cooperative learning ventures, on the other hand, require students to be trained in assigned roles within the group and the emphasis is on group interaction and interdependence (Matthews, Cooper, Davidson & Hawkes, 1995). Brossert’s meta analysis of cooperative learning research notes this type of learning benefits students of all ages in all content areas for a wide variety of tasks including problem solving (as cited in Millis & Cottell, 1998). Cohen (1994) and Chizhik (1998) indicate an individual’s participation in collaborative tasks influences the amount of student learning that takes place. Further, because collaborative groups foster co-construction of ideas, a high level of verbal interaction takes place within these groups. The researchers found the development of well thought out explanations and/or detailed questions to be additional benefits, as a result of the groups’ processing of concepts. When collaborative learning and student relationships are combined, a classroom community is created. “We can’t overestimate the importance of classroom community for learning” (Webb & Engar, 2016). A strong sense of classroom community provides comfort for students and encourages risk taking. In their study, Webb and Engar sought to develop a hypothesis about relationships between collaborative learning and a classroom network, or community. They found a correlation between social interaction and collaborative activities (a game), which eliminated social isolation in class (Webb & Engar, 2016). Since the college classroom lies at the center of educational activity, it behooves the researcher to determine what kind of instructional experiences best serve students. Chizhik (1998) suggests collaborative group work can facilitate learning because students can express their thoughts and engage in high-level verbal interactions as they discuss pertinent subject matter with peers. Townsend and Wilton (2003) found a significant positive effect in the areas of mathematical self-concept and mathematics anxiety when students use collaborative learning strategies. While it is encouraging to discover some research supporting collaborative pedagogy for college students, little research has been done in using small groups with adult students. Brewer, Klein, and Mann (2003) research targeted the effect of small group learning on adult re-entry students. Their study 344

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

found that adult learners preferred small group practice over individual practice. Further, regarding students’ belief about the ability to learn, there was an interaction indicating that participants who worked in small groups favored such experience more than anyone who worked individually (Brewer, Klein, & Mann, 2003). Since collaborative learning may be particularly beneficial for the increasing number of nontraditional students, Lundberg (2003) study found that learning was enhanced when instructors provided collaborative pedagogy favoring student engagement and peer learning over the traditional direct instruction pedagogy. On a much smaller scale, Traver, Kaisher, and Diwan (2001) as well as Busch (1996), found older students felt group work assisted in their learning. Traver, Kaisher, and Diwan (2001) found positive student responses and proof of learning suggesting introduction of student collaboration positively affected learning in a molecular biochemistry course. Busch (1996) found similar results when collaborative pedagogy was applied to computer studies. Student satisfaction can be difficult to measure and can change from year to year, semester to semester, or even course to course. Astin (1993) surveyed students and discovered myriad factors - faculty interaction, peer groups, and socioeconomic status, among others - that have an impact on student satisfaction. Kuh and Shouping’s work (2001) specifically focused on the impact of student-faculty interaction on student satisfaction. The authors noted that as students’ progress into the later years of their academic careers, class sizes tend to shrink, and students find themselves almost exclusively in classes related to their majors. This provides opportunities for enhanced student-faculty interactions. The authors found that while more student-faculty interaction increased student satisfaction, this was only the case for students who were contributing an average to above-average level of effort toward their education (Kuh & Shouping, 2001). This study seeks to further the conversation about how collaborative learning and teacher-student relationships impact student satisfaction and ultimately, student engagement. Given the demographic changes in our society, it is incumbent upon instructors and institutions of higher learning to discern how to address the needs of an ever-divergent clientele. Literature is replete with studies of possibilities of collaborative pedagogy and student learning.

Student Engagement Student engagement has been defined as the quality of a student’s connection or involvement with the endeavor of schooling and hence with the people, activities, goals, values, and the place that compose it (Skinner, Kindermann, & Furrer, 2009). When looking at the questions asked to students in the current study, each of the questions assesses a student’s involvement and connection/understanding of the goals, activities, values, and expectations of the lessons taught in the classroom. A student’s involvement in each of the listed activities encompasses a measure of engagement. One of the primary elements of cooperative learning is student engagement and their ability to work together with other classroom peers. Mikami, Ruzek, Hafen, Gregory, and Allen (2017) state children with adverse peer experiences may have difficulty engaging with classroom participation and maintain negative self-concept. Mikami et al. also stated students with greater social bonds with classroom peers predicted to have positive behavioral engagement. Positive social bonds increase adaptive self-help skills which relates to peers seeking help or guidance from other classroom peers (Mikami et al., 2017). Creating an environment of positive peer relations is pivotal for successful cooperative learning experiences. Lack of peer relatedness affects a student’s ability to focus on the lesson content while a positive peer relatedness increases behavioral engagement (Mikami et al., 2017). Building social relations 345

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

among classmates improves peer relatedness which strengthens social connections. Saville et al. (2012) states students who engage in learning communities show more academic success than those who are less engages in the lesson content. According to Roorda (2011) there is a significant correlation between teacher-student relationships and student engagement. When discussing student engagement and classroom participation we must consider the types of relationships students have with one another and the teacher. Student engagement is an important factor for academic success in school. Archaic teaching styles dictated student engagement as reflected in a passive learning from a didactic teaching structure. Today schools are utilizing cooperative learning groups to enhance student engagement. Cooperative learning requires students to work together in a project with guidance from the classroom teacher. Cooperative learning enhances student-to-student interactions and reduces student-to-teacher engagement to increase performance and problem-solving skills (Saville, Lawrence, & Jakobsen 2012). Cooperative learning engages students in discussions and student supported learning through active engagement in lessons. When teachers and students build relationships with one another it leads to emotional security, which leads to engagement and ultimately achievement (Roorda, 2011). As the Charlotte Danielson model for teacher effectiveness and training hits these components throughout the growth rubric placing emphasis on student-centered learning and relationships within the classroom. Therefore, when instructional leaders ask how we can help teachers improve student classroom performance we must look at the relationships being built. Effective teachers build positive relationships that motivate students, allow them to express themselves and be involved thus leading to learning and achievement Furrer et al. (2014).

Peer Interaction According to Bass, Saldarriaga, and Santo (2016), interactions with peers also have a profound effect on children’s socio-emotional development. Specifically, these relationships provide a unique context for the fostering of fundamental cognitive, social, and emotional competencies of children. Social norms serve important functions for both individuals and groups. Exposure to different group norms has been shown to influence the prevalence of individual behaviors such as aggression; when children perceive that aggressive behaviors are normative, there tends to be an increase in their aggressive behavior. At the group level, social norms serve to support the functioning of a cohesive group. For this function to operate, it is necessary for groups to develop a social regulation mechanism or punishment for violating social norms (Salmivalli, Kaukiainen, & Lagerspetz, 2000). Consistent with evidence that children who display behaviors which violate social norms, particularly aggression, are less accepted by the peer group. When collaborative learning and student relationships are combined, a classroom community is created. “We can’t overestimate the importance of classroom community for learning” (Webb & Engar, 2016). A strong sense of classroom community provides comfort for students and encourages risk taking. In their study, Webb and Engar sought to develop a hypothesis about relationships between collaborative learning and a classroom network, or community. They found a correlation between social interaction and collaborative activities (a game), which eliminated social isolation in class (Webb & Engar, 2016). Current research exists to suggest that teacher praise and student behavior are linked. Often, when teachers effectively use praise in the context of the classroom, students are more motivated to adhere to classroom expectations with less disruptive and off-task behaviors (Floress, Jenkins, Reinke, & McKown, 2018). Furthermore, students who tend to have behavior problems often receive fewer praise statements compared to students without behavior problems (Floress, Jenkins, Reinke, & McKown, 2018). 346

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

METHODOLOGY Research Design This study utilized several research methodology elements. First, a survey research design was used to collect data from college students about college student teaching and learning environment. The study utilized cross-sectional survey research where variables studied at a specific point in time. Further, correlation was used as a research design as well as a framework for data analysis where variables were investigated to develop a logistic regression function for examining a classification model of low and high collaborative learning groups.

Measures Research is replete with a variety of self-reported measures that have been developed to examine student perception of learning environment and their own characteristics as learners. This study used measures contained in Student Assessment of Teaching and Learning (SATL) (Short-Form), first developed by Ellett, Culross, McMullen, and Rugutt, (1996), and later revised by Ellett, Loup, Culross, McMullen and Rugutt (1997). The measures used in this study included peer learning and motivation (PLMO), quality of teaching instruction (QI), collaborative learning strategies (CL), student engagement in learning (ENG), student-faculty interaction (SFI), peer interaction (PI) and quality of effort (QE). All these constructs assessed a wide variety of factors among college students and their Cronbach reliability coefficients are presented in Table 1. Also, see Appendix B for a complete list of the survey items comprising each construct. Table 1. Cronbach Alpha Reliability Coefficients Variable

Variable Description

Alpha Reliabilities

QI (14) *

Quality of Instruction

.94

CL (6)

Collaborative Learning

.88

QE (4)

Quality of Effort

.80

SFI (5)

Student-faculty Interaction

.89

PLMO (5)

Peer Learning and Motivation

.86

ENG (6)

Student Engagement

.93

PI (6)

Peer Interaction

.91

Note: * Number of items comprising measure

Sampling and Data Collection Procedures The sample for this study consisted of 1,600 students from several college classes at one large public university in the southern part of USA. During the semester, the sampled students took a variety of courses in such topic areas as accounting, curriculum and instruction, mathematics, natural science, social science, and humanities. The students represent a broad array of individuals, including traditional-aged,

347

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

Table 2. Multicollinearity Coefficients for Collaborative Learning Model Collinearity Statistics

Independent Variables

Tolerance

VIF

Quality of instruction

.40

2.52

Quality of effort

.83

1.21

Student-faculty interaction

.42

2.38

Peer learning and Motivation

.33

3.02

Student Engagement

.54

1.84

Peer Interaction

.45

2.23

nontraditional-aged, differing employment statuses, and gender. This sample was 40% male, 60% female; 60% not working full-time; 69% were traditional students while 31% were not. Descriptive characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 3.

Data Preparation Procedures and Statistical Techniques Once data had been collected, construction of various data files began before a variety of analyses were completed. One of the first steps to proper data screening is to ensure that the data is correct. The authors of the study checked out each person’s entry, range of data to assess for data entry mistakes, missing data and coding problems. The study composite variables (assumed to be continuous for this study) were examined for normality (normal curve, skewness, and kurtosis). Outliers, both univariate as well as multivariate were then checked by computing the Mahalanobis distance. The multiple regression was then run to allow for the Mahalanobis distance variable to be created for each student in the sample and the Explore feature in SPSS highlighted the extreme values or outliers. The χ2 critical value for the collaborative learning model was 24.322 with 7 degrees of freedom at p < .001. All cases above this number were assessed to check if retained or excluded had any impact in the results. There were 15 outliers in the data. Since there was a concern about the potential impact the outliers could have on the results, the data was run with and without to check if the outliers had any influence on the results. This was found that with or without the outliers the results did not change significantly, and outliers were kept in the data. The data was also assessed for multicollinearity to assess if there were variables that were highly correlated or a near duplicate of another. Standard multiple regression was performed to obtain the collinearity statistics. There was no variable that was removed based on multicollinearity. Table 2 below shows that multicollinearity was not an issue as the tolerance exceeds 0.1 for all the independent variables, and the variance inflation factors (VIF) are less than 10.

Statistical Techniques The analyses completed for this study included: 1) descriptive statistical analyses of selected demographic and instrument items as well as composite variables; 2) factor analyses of the instrument subscales (QI, PI, ENG, PLMO, QE, CL and SFI); 3) internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha) reliability analyses of instrument subscales; 4) One-way analysis of variance; and 5) logistic regression analysis to examine

348

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

the relative contribution and combination of variables explaining group membership to low and high collaborative learning groups. The authors of this study utilized the logistic regression analysis using extreme student groups (top and bottom quartiles) defined by students’ collaborative learning scores to develop a model that best predicts group membership of the low and high levels of collaborative college students. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a model exists that significantly increased the researcher’s ability to accurately classify the low and high collaborative learning students based upon selected institution and personal variables (such as peer interaction (PI), peer learning and student motivation (PLMO), student faculty interaction (SFI), quality of instruction (QI), student engagement in learning (ENG) and quality of effort (QE) with a sample of 1600 undergraduate students in a large public university in the south of the country.

Results Descriptive Statistics This sample was 38.3% male, 60.2% female; 39.6% worked full time while 59.7% did not work full time. Of the total study participants, 67.5% were traditional while 30.9% were non-traditional aged students (see Table 3).

Table 3. Demographic Distributions of the Study Sample Variable

N*

Percent (%)

Gender   Male

613

38.30

  Female

963

60.20

Work full time   Yes

634

39.60

  No

955

59.70

73

4.60

Do you take classes   Day Only   Evening Only

388

24.30

  Day and Evening

1112

69.50

350

21.90

Age   18-20   21-25

730

45.60

  26-30

176

11.00

  31 Up

318

19.90

Note: * Total for each demographic variable may not add up to 1600 due to non-responses

349

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

Correlational Analysis The correlation coefficients were computed among the seven study variables (peer learning and motivation, quality of instruction, quality of effort, peer interaction, student-faculty interaction, student engagement, and collaborative learning). The results of the correlational analyses presented in Table 4 show that all the 21 out of 21 correlations were all positive, statistically significant and were greater than or equal to .20. The correlations of quality of effort with the other study variables tended to be lower. Further, students who related more with other students tended to be more engaged in their learning, interacted more with their faculty, and were more active in collaborative learning activities. In general, the results suggest that students who collaborated with others tended to also relate more with other students and their teachers and were more engaged in learning. The bivariate correlation between student-faculty interaction and peer interaction, r (1572) = .44, p < .001) suggest that when teachers build a positive rapport with their students, students are more willing to be active participants in class discussion. Complete results of these analyses are summarized in Table 4. Table 4. Correlations among the Seven Study Variables (N = 1572) PLMOa

QI

QE

PLMO

1

QI

.75**

1

QE

.24**

.31*

1

PI

.57**

.22**

.20**

PI

SFI

ENG

CL

1

SFI

.37**

.58**

.36**

.44*

1

ENG

.46**

.28**

.24**

.45**

.49**

1

CL

.46**

.29**

.24**

.70**

.53**

.53**

1

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) a PLMO – Peer Learning and Motivation; QI – Quality of Instruction; QE – Quality of Effort; PI – Peer Interaction; SFI – Student-faculty Instruction; ENG – Student Engagement; CL – Collaborative Learning

One-Way Analysis of Variance Analysis The objective of the logistic regression model was to establish whether a model existed that significantly increased the researcher’s ability to accurately explain the patterning of logistic regression analysis weights. The logistic regression technique was found to be appropriate since the dependent variable, collaborative learning groups (low and high) is a dichotomous variable created from the collaborative learning composite variable. The model examined included six predictors which provided the researcher with a model that was both substantively and statistically significant. The logistic regression model aimed at maximizing the researcher’s ability to correctly classify participants on the collaborative learning variable, defined as whether the subjects in the study fell in the high collaborative learning group. The first step in examining the logistic regression model was to compare the group means on each of the independent variables. This information is presented in Table 5. The one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure was used to compare the two groups (low and high collaborative learning group).

350

 Student Collaborative Learning Strategies

Of the 6 variables on which comparisons were made using One-way ANOVA, the groups were found to be statistically different on all 6 variables (QI, QE, SFI, PLMO, PI, ENG). Table 5 presents the One-way ANOVA results of the logistic regression variable means, F-ratio, and probabilities associated with each variable by collaborative learning status.

Logistic Regression Model Table 5. One-Way Analysis of Variance of Discriminating Variable Means in the Logistic Regression Model by Collaborative Learning Group Status Discriminating Variable

Group

F-ratio

p

Group: Low

Group: High

n = 470

n = 431

QI

38.73

44.14

140.63