Pédagogie ouverte et pensée transdisciplinaire : établir des liens par le biais d'une self-study d’un artefact visuel
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.18357/otessaj.2021.1.1.4Mots-clés :
artefacts visuels, autodidacte, pédagogie ouverte, réflexion sur l'action, ressources éducatives libres, transdisciplinaire, connaissance professionnelle de la pratique, formation des enseignantsRésumé
L'examen des pratiques des formateurs d'enseignants par le biais de l'auto-évaluation (self-study) est bien établi et l'auto-évaluation s'aligne sur l'intérêt croissant pour les ressources éducatives libres (REL) et la pédagogie ouverte. Cette recherche a utilisé une méthode d'auto-évaluation d'un projet de REL en sciences, technologie, ingénierie, art et mathématiques (STEAM), Form and Function(s) : Sustainable Design meets Computational Thinking. Deux questions de recherche ont été posées : Comment les attributs de la pédagogie ouverte contribuent-ils à une position pédagogique transdisciplinaire pour les REL en STEAM ? Comment peut-on réaliser une self-study d’artefacts visuels en tant qu'amis critiques pour en examiner la valeur professionnelle et améliorer son auto-compréhension pédagogique ? La chercheuse a analysé les artefacts visuels des images créées et documentées qui ont soutenu le processus de ses interrogations sur le développement de programmes transdisciplinaires et la pédagogie ouverte. Les sites et les modalités des artefacts ont été questionnés et les réponses enregistrées à l'aide d'une méthodologie visuelle critique. La pensée transdisciplinaire de Klein (2008, 2018) et les huit attributs de la pédagogie ouverte de Hegarty (2015) encadrent les questionnements sur les images et les liens établis avec la théorisation du curriculum. L'auto-évaluation fournit des conclusions sur le rôle des artefacts visuels lors de la conceptualisation de la gestalt d'idées et de relations complexes. L'auto-étude fournit des suggestions pour les formateurs et chercheurs ouverts qui s'intéressent aux pratiques de processus curriculaires et pédagogiques transdisciplinaires et ouverts, et aux huit attributs de la pédagogie ouverte et au rôle de l'auto-réflexion critique.
Références
Adams, C., & Thompson, T. L. (2016). Researching a post-human world: Interviews with digital objects. Palgrave MacMillan.
Biox-Mansilla, V. (2017). Learning to synthesize: A cognitive-epistemological foundation for interdisciplinary learning. In R. Pacheco (Ed.), The oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 1-15). Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198733522.013.22
Blomgren, C. (2021, May 20). May 20, 2021 Update Form and Function(s). Blended and online learning and teaching multi-author blog. http://bolt.athabascau.ca/index.php/oer-projects/sustainable_computation/may-20-2021-update/
Bozkurt, A. (2019). From distance education to open and distance learning: A holistic evaluation of history, definitions, and theories. In S. Sisman-Ugur, & G. Kurubacak (Eds.), Handbook of research on learning in the age of transhumanism (pp. 252–273). IGI Global. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8431-5.ch016
Hamilton, M. L., & Pinnegar, S. (2013). A topography of collaboration: Methodology, identity and community in self-study of practice research. Studying Teacher Education, 9(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2013.771572 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2013.771572
Hauge, K. (2021). Self-study research: Challenges and opportunities in teacher education. In M. J. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96252
Hernández-Serrano (Ed.), Teacher education in the 21st century. IntechOpen. 10.5772/intechopen.96252
Hegarty, B. (2015). Attributes of open pedagogy: A model for using open educational resources. Educational Technology, 55(4), 3–13. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44430383
Hildebrand, D. (2018). John Dewey. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dewey/
Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. (2019). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social work research. Social Sciences, 8(9), 1–17. https://doi.org/doi:10.3390/socsci8090255 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8090255
Klein, J. T. (2008). Evaluation of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(2), S116–S123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2008.05.010
Klein, J. T. (2018). Learning in transdisciplinary collaborations: A conceptual vocabulary. In D. Fam, L. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93743-4_2
Neuhauser, & P. Gibbs (Eds.), Transdisciplinary theory, practice and education (pp. 11–23). Springer.
Loughran, J. J. (2004). A history and context of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices. In J. J. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6545-3
Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 7–39). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6545-3_1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6545-3_1
Loughran, J. J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices: Responding to the challenges, demands, and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487106296217 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487106296217
McLuhan, E., & McLuhan, M. (1992). Laws of Media: The New Science. University of Toronto Press.
McMurtry, A. (2013). Reframing interdisciplinary and interprofessional collaboration through the lens of collective and sociomaterial theories of learning. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 31, 75–98. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101033
Meierdirk, C. (2016). Is reflective practice an essential component of becoming a professional teacher? Reflective Practice, 17(3), 369–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2016.1169169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2016.1169169
Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(8), 1045–1053. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413513733 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800413513733
Rose, G. (2016). Visual methodologies (4th ed.). Sage.
Samaras, A. (2009). Explorations in using arts-based self-study methods. International Journal of Qualitative
Studies in Education, 23(6), 719–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390903426212 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390903426212
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Temple Smith.
Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Currency Doubleday.
Vanassche, E., & Kelchtermans, G. (2015). The state of the art in self-study of teacher education practices: A systematic literature review. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(4), 508–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.995712 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2014.995712
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Zwicky, J. (2019). The experience of meaning. McGill-Queen’s University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780773558502
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
(c) Tous droits réservés Connie Blomgren 2021
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
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.
