Co-Creation During a Course: A Critical Reflection on Opportunities for Co-Learning
Keywords:co-creation, co-design, co-learning, open pedagogy
Co-creation is an open practice where learners participate in decision-making about aspects of course design, which in our context has included various activities from course design to assessment decisions. After the OTESSA22 conference, this group of conference attendees reflected on co-creation practices and experiences in their respective post-secondary contexts. In this article we share reflections and challenges with co-creation as well as ideas to potentially overcome these challenges. This article, with examples shared from practice, serves as a starting point for ongoing dialogue about inclusive approaches to co-creation.
Barnacle, R. & Dall’Alba, G. (2017). Committed to learn: student engagement and care in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(7), 1326-1338. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1326879
Blau, I., & Shamir-Inbal, T. (2017). Re-designed flipped learning model in an academic course: The role of co-creation and co-regulation. Computers and Education, 115, 69–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.014
Bovill, C. & Woolmer, C. (2019). How conceptualisations of curriculum in higher education influence student-staff co-creation in and of the curriculum. Higher Education 78(3), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0349-8
Bovill, C. (2020a). Co-creating learning and teaching: Towards relational pedagogy in higher education. Critical Publishing. https://www.criticalpublishing.com/co-creating-learning-and-teaching
Bovill, C. (2020b). Co-creation in learning and teaching: The case for a whole-class approach in higher education. Higher Education, 79(6), 1023–1037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-019-00453-w
CAST (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. http://udlguidelines.cast.org
Chen, W., Sanderson, N.C., & Kessel, S. (2018). Making learning materials accessible in higher education - attitudes among technology faculty members. In Craddock, G., Doran, C. & McNutt, L. (Eds.), Transforming our world through design, diversity and education (pp. 87-97). ISO Press. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-923-2-87
Cook, D. A., & Artino, A. R. (2016). Motivation to learn: An overview of contemporary theories. Medical Education, 50(10), 997–1014. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13074
Deeley, S. J., & Bovill, C. (2017). Staff student partnership in assessment: Enhancing assessment literacy through democratic practices. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(3), 463–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2015.1126551
Doyle, E., Buckley P. & McCarthy, B. (2021). The impact of content co-creation on academic achievement, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(3), 494-507. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1782832
Groccia, J. E. (2018). What is student engagement? New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2018(154), 11-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20287
Killam, L. A., Camargo-Plazas, P., & Luctkar-Flude, M. (2023, in press). Learner-educator co-creation: A case for enhancing authentic assessment in nursing education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
Killam, L. A., Lock, M., & Luctkar-Flude, M. (2023, in press). Principles for equity-centered learner-educator co-creation: A reflection on practice and pedagogy. The Journal of Educational Innovation, Partnership, and Change.
Lerdpornkulrat, T., Koul, R., & Poondej, C. (2018). Relationship between perceptions of classroom climate and institutional goal structures and student motivation, engagement and intention to persist in college. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42(1), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2016.1206855
Locatis, C. & Al-Nuaim, H. (1999). Interactive technology and authoring tools: A historical review and analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(3), 63-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299634
MacKnight, C., & Balagopalan, S. (1989). An evaluation tool for measuring authoring system performance. Communications of the ACM, 32, 1231-1236. https://doi.org/10.1145/67933.67940
Marquart, M., & Verdooner, E. (2020). Strategy: Co-creating Classroom Community Agreements. The Journal of Faculty Development, 34(3), 87-88. http://proxy.lib.trentu.ca/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/strategy-co-creating-classroom-community/docview/2478112833/se-2
Novak, E., McDaniel, K., Daday, J., & Soyturk, I. (2022). Frustration in technology‐rich learning environments: A scale for assessing student frustration with e‐textbooks. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(2), 408–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13172
Ritter, S., & Blessing, S. B. (1998). Authoring tools for component-based learning environments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(1), 107-132. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0701_4
Valcarlos, M. M., Wolgemuth, J. R., Haraf, S., & Fisk, N. (2020). Anti-oppressive pedagogies in online learning: a critical review, Distance Education, 41(3), 345-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2020.1763783
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2023 Laura Killam, Lillian Chumbley, Susanna Kohonen, Jim Stauffer, Jess Mitchell
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors contributing to the OTESSA Journal agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This licence allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated.
Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the OTESSA Journal right of first publication.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the OTESSA Journal.