Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Feminist Research Methods

Feminist Research Methods course goes so fast; this is its sixth week. When I reflect back to the beginning of the course, I find that I really learned many new concepts, skills and experiences.   
I learned that I as a researcher have to pay attention to my location/locations both within the research context and in broader social contexts in order to undertake ethical research, especially in collaborative research contexts. I learned that I have to be aware of how my own positions and interests are imposed at all stages of the research process-from the questions I ask to those I ignore, from whom I study to whom I ignore, from problem formation to analysis, representation, and writing- to produce less distorted of reality (Kirby, Greaves & Reid, 2006).  That is, who I am and where I am situated do make a difference to the knowledge I produce (Kirby et al.). Also, I learned that I as a researcher should recognize that I have multiple positionalities based on sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, disability, class, and age; I am a Christian, middle class, young and heterosexual woman. According to Sultana (2007), “recognizing and working with multiple positionalities of researchers and research participants that are constantly negotiated is needed in creating ethical relations, which should be encouraged and embraced in undertaking challenging but rewarding field research” (p. 383).
 Therefore, I need to openly and honestly recognize my locations and experiences and be aware of the influences that may shape what I hear and how I interpret.  I have to engage in continuous critical reflection or “reflexivity” in research, which involves “reflection on self, process, and representation, and critically examining power relations and politics in the research process and researcher accountability in data collection and interpretation” (Sultana, 2007, p. 376). In other words, I as a researcher have to reflect on how I am placed in power relations and how that influences methods, interpretations, and knowledge production. That is, reflexivity “can strengthen our commitment to conduct good research based on building relations of mutual respect and recognition” (Peake and Trotz, as cited in Sultana, 2007, p. 376). In addition, I learned that it is important that reflexivity occurs from the beginning to the end of the research process, not just adding it on at the beginning of the research.
In addition to checking my locations and engaging in reflexivity in research, I learned that I have to honestly and authentically represent the voices and the lived experiences of my research participants if I want to engage in collaborative research. I learned that I have to hear what others are saying; even it contravene my prior expectations or threatens my interests (Kiby, Greaves & Reid, 2006). Especially, when I choose to engage in social struggles with those who have been exploited and subjugated, I have to engage in what Fine (1994) calls “working the hyphen”, to tell more about myself and far more about “Othering”. Fundamentally, working the hyphen means creating occasions for me and my research participants to “discuss what is, and is not, ‘happening between’, within the negotiated relations of those story is being told, why, to whom, with what interpretation, and whose story is being shadowed, why, for whom, and with what consequence” (Fine, 1994, p. 135). 
References: 
Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In N.
Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (pp.130-155). London: Sage Publications.
Kirby, S., Greaves, L. & Reid, C. (2006). Experience research social change: Methods beyond
the mainstream. Second Edition. Canada:Broadview Press.
Sargeant, J., Mann, K., Vleuten, C. & Metsemakers, J. (2008, Jan.). “Directed” self-assessment:
practice and feedback within a social context. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Profession, 28(1), 47-54.
Sultana, F. (2007). Reflexivity, positionality and participatory ethics: Negotiating fieldwork
dilemmas in international research. Journal compilation © ACME Editorial Collective, 374-385.

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

What scaffold means


Scaffolding is a kind of help or support that enables learner to “solve a problem, carry out a task or achieve a goal which would be beyond his unassisted efforts” (Wood, Bruner & Ross, 1976, p. 90). As such, scaffolding could be "activities that help students develop the right mindset, engage students with the problem, divide activities into manageable tasks, and direct students' attention to essential aspects of the learning goals" (Ngeow & Kong, as cited in March, 2007, p. 6). This is to say that scaffolding implies integration of enriched learning resources to encourage student motivation and facilitate advanced thinking (March, 2007).
According to MacGregor and Lou (2006), there are four types of scaffolding: (1) Conceptual scaffolding which is guidance about what knowledge to consider such as using outlines and concept maps that assist the learner in deciding what to consider or to prioritize what is important, (2) Metacognitive scaffolding which is guidance about how to think during learning such as using a simple reminder to reflect on the goal or a problem solving model to help learners assess what they know and what to do as they learn, (3) Procedural scaffolding which is guidance about how to utilize available resources and tools such as using procedures, site navigation maps, textual charts, and graphic representations, and (4) Strategic scaffolding which is guidance about alternative approaches that might assist decision making. Also, Saye and Brush (2002) provide two types of scaffolds: Hard scaffolds, “static supports that can be anticipated and planned in advance based on typical student difficulties with a task” (p. 81); and Soft scaffolding, which “requires teachers to continuously diagnose the understandings of learners and provide timely support based on student responses” (p. 82). 
Saye and Brush (2002) provide great examples of how technology may be used to scaffold learners. They expect students to develop critical reasoning about ill-structured social problems. In doing so, they embedded hypermedia resources and scaffolding in a multimedia learning environment. They made hyperlinks directly from terms in introductory essays to related documents in the database; each highlighted term connected the user to a pertinent primary document, video clip, or interactive essay. Also, they used storyboard template that corresponded to the six slides that groups were expected to include in their presentations; each page guided students through a step in the process of constructing a persuasive, dialectical argument. Also, March (2007) expects students to develop authentic personal learning. In doing so, he used WebQuest that could scaffold student use of Web 2.0 environments by using social bookmarking, RSS feeds, Blog, Wiki, and WordPress to provide rich resources to authentic web sites that provide opportunities to access fertile resources.
In my own classroom, I will use class wiki to maximize students’ role in the curriculum design/development to shift control to the learners and take ownership of their learning and take risks understanding and applying their knowledge.  I will ask students to develop a textbook about web 2.0 technologies based on their interests and experiences with web 2.0 technologies. I expect students to think critically about articles and websites about web 2.0 technologies and evaluate their peers’ entries. In doing so, I will use the following scaffolds:
I will make hyperlink to examples of class wikis and will ask students to spend time exploring them in order to understand the characteristics of successful wiki projects before working to create their own wiki.
I will make hyperlinks to some Web 2.0 technologies to give students, who are not familiar with web 2.0 tools, some insights about what these technologies are.
I will make hyperlinks to sites that explain how to use wiki, such as how to create wiki page, how to edit wiki, how to add link or images, and so on.
I will make template to what I expect in their wiki pages about web 2.0 tools, such as the history of the tool, how it can be used, some lesson plans explaining how to use the tool in teaching.
I will prepare assessment rubric explaining what I expect from them in the process and outcomes. 
  References:
MacGregor, S. & Lou, Y. (2006). Web-based learning: How task scaffolding and Web Site
design support knowledge acquisition. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, I-11.
March, T. (2007). Revisiting WebQuests in a Web 2 World: How developments in technology
and pedagogy combine to scaffold personal learning. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 15, 1-17
Saye, J. & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in
multimedia-supported learning environments. ETR&D, 50(3), 77–96.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal
Psychology Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.

Saturday, April 9, 2011

Open Textbook


Open educational resources are any electronic resources avail­able at little or no cost that can be used for teaching, learning, or research; such materials are generally released under a Creative Commons or similar license that supports open or nearly open use of the content; they can include textbooks, course readings, and other learning content; simulations, games, and other learning ap­plications; syllabi, quizzes, and assessment tools; and virtually any other material that can be used for educational purposes (7 Things You Should Know about Open Educational Resources, 2010)
I believe that open educational resources are great features that the Internet provides for instructors, especially for instructors in less-developed countries; that is, open educational resources allow instructors access to timely materials to support their teaching—materials that would otherwise never be available to them. Especially, some materials resources can be modified, remixed, and redistributed, or they may only be used in their original form (7 Things You Should Know about Open Educational Resources, 2010)
One of open education resources is open textbook which have emerged as a result of raising textbook price. Open textbooks are high-quality college texts offered online under a license that allows free digital access and low-cost print options; students can read the full text free online, download a printable PDF, or purchase a hard copy at a fraction of the cost of traditional books, and instructors can tailor the text to better fit a course by removing unneeded chapters or adding new material (Open Textbooks, 2011).
Sometimes open texts are developed by teams of authors, illustrators, editors, and publishers who are paid by academic departments or supported through grants, developed by authors and other creators who might believe that publication may enhance their careers, or by these individuals may receive financial compensation through sales of printed copies (7 Things You Should Know about Open Textbook Publishing, 2010)
Some of open textbook sites:
References:
7 Things You Should Know about Open Educational Resources. (2010). http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7061.pdf
7 Things You Should Know about Open Textbook Publishing. (2010). http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ELI7070.pdf

Friday, April 8, 2011

Commercial Search Engines and Critical Literacy


Fabos (2004) explains how the Internet, like any media of communication, began with a promise to a great educational potential but quickly “succumbed to commercialism and the logic of capital markets” (p. ix). Search engines, for instance, are widely regarded as innovative and useful educational tools that enable students to find, use, share, and expand knowledge.  But, “the growing dependence on search engines has led to their increased commercialization” (p. 70), resulting in serving advertisers not users. According to Fabos, the advertiser pays the search engine to be associated with certain key words; the search company provides the sponsored links, which users click on; and users are driven to the sites of advertisers. Fabos further argues that some search engines sell top spaces to advertisers who pay for them, resulting in the increase of commercial sites at the top of search engine lists. These sites “clog up search engine lists with opinioned nonsense and are a main deterrent to students’ finding ‘quality’ information online” (p. 83).
However, a majority of students use search engines to find information. According to Fabos, “A study conducted by the Pew Internet and American Life Project in 2002 found 85% of students used an online search engine to find information” (p. 69). Indeed, as Fabos argues, many students trust the information they gather from search engines regardless of their quality and believe that what they read on the Information Highway must be fact. With students’ beliefs that what they find online is true, they are “clicking on a huge proportion of commercial webpages that have no bearing on their academic objectives” (p. 81).  What makes the situation worse is that students trust the many commercial websites visited via search engines. In fact, many students determine a website’s credibility based on the site’s design, no matter who the content provider is, and they believe that the first two pages of a search’s results list are most relevant (Fabos, 2004). As search engines become more commercialized, students will be accessing an increasingly limited array of information, not the “universe of knowledge”, resulting in a decrease in their research quality.
 One method to address this problem is to arm students with critical literacy skills (Fabos, 2004). Critical literacy, a critical attitude toward texts that questions the social, political, and economic conditions under which those texts are constructed (Freire, 2000), shows a great promise to help students to see a webpage as a product of a particular context within a particular political and economic framework (Fabos, 2004). In this view, critical teachers should help students to understand all information within a broader cultural context by enabling them to investigate “how political, economic, and social context shapes all texts, how all texts can be adapted for different social purposes, and how no text is neutral or necessarily of ‘high quality’ than another” (p. 95).  For example, students can engage in a discussion about “misinformation, mal-information, messed-up information, and mostly useless information to highlight and reflect upon the procedures and criteria by which people identify information as ‘mis’, ‘mal’, ‘messed-up’, or ‘mostly useless’”(p. 140). As a result, students “uncover how texts are never neutral, unbiased representations, but constructions specific to particular beliefs held at the time of their creation” (Beck, 2005, p. 394).  This critical understanding of technology, with which education must be infused, is one that sees in it a growing capacity for intervention in the world, one that must necessarily be subjected to the political and ethical test (Freire, 2004).  That is, the role of education is not to support the status quo in a society but to empower students to critically understand their world.  Freire (2005) argues that education is a political act; it should enable students to read not only the word but also the world-“the reading of text and of context” (p. 40) because those who fail to “make any concrete connections between what they have read and what is happening in the world, the country, or the local community” are slaves to the text (Yoo, 2007, p. 85).   
To achieve the foregoing goal, Fabos (2004) argues that teachers should approach assignments differently. She argues that the type of assignments is behind poor-quality students’ work; it is the fact-based assignments and the constant quest for objective information. That is, “fact-based assignments that lead to objective-style reports do little to help students understand more meaningful issues that directly or indirectly correspond to their social world” (p. 95). Therefore, Fabos suggests using assignments that ask students to work with multiple perspectives and opinions, not objective facts, to help them “understand the non-neutrality of all texts and regard the web as a place for opinions, not objective information, a place where the best developed arguments, not the slickest packaging, should gain their approval” (p. 146). With these kinds of assignments, students become active participants able to reflect on and construct meaning from texts and discourses, rather than being “passive meaning consumers”, by seeing  themselves "within the larger historical, political, cultural, and economic structures where [they] exist and to apply their critical awareness beyond the classroom” (Beck, 2005, p. 394).
On the other hand, to help students critically understand that webpage texts are filtered through economic, political, and social frameworks, teachers should first be political thinkers who are able to critically understand the economic, social, and political implications that shape a webpage text. In the other words, in order for students to become critical thinkers, their teachers first need to develop their own critical understanding and to be “able and willing to explore the social, moral, and political implications imbedded in particular texts in particular places and times” (Meller & Hatch, 2008, p. 331).  If teachers, as Fabos (2004) found from observing teachers and students at three schools within a well-wired district, embrace “search engines as the most effective and  trustworthy means of finding quality web content”(p. 115) ; if they believe that “the worldwide web is a library of facts, and search engines are the most logical pathways to these facts” (p. 103); and/or if they see the web as a neutral and “a decentralized medium that would remain essentially democratic, safe from commercial domination” (p. 117), then they will have few reasons to criticize such “neutral” tools. Therefore, teachers should first be critically aware of the commercial nature of search engines as profit-seeking corporations, aware of “the increasing difficulties of locating content that is not commercial or indirectly influenced by commercial interest” (p. 75), and aware of the “misleading motives of the Internet navigation tools they use and of the constant efforts among for-profit enterprise to bend the Internet toward their ends” (p. 75), then they will be concerned. Therefore, as Freire (2005) argues, teachers should be prepared politically, ethically, and professionally before engaging in a teaching practice to be able help students to think critically about economic, social, and political issues.
In sum, with the web being colonized by commercial interests and with students depending on and trusting commercial search engines, critical literacy become an essential and powerful tool to help students study any text from political, economic, and social frameworks. Therefore, fact-based assignments should change to opinion-based assignments that bring students into multiple perspectives and opinions. As a result, student can realize that a text is never neutral and always contains implicit assumptions on the part of the writer. But, in order for students to be critical thinkers, teachers should be political thinkers able to investigate economic, social and political issues. 
References:
Beck, A. (2005). A place for critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(5),
392-400.
Fabos, B. (2004). Wrong turn on the information superhighway: Education and the
Commercialization of the Internet. New York: Teacher College Press.
Freire, P. (2004). Pedagogy of indignation. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
Freire, P. (2005). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare teach. United States of
America: Westview Press.
Meller,W. & Hatch, J. (2008). Introductory critical literacy practices for urban pre-service
teachers. The New Educator, 4,330–348.
Yoo, S. (2007). Freirean legacies in popular education. Journal of Educational Policy, 4(2), 73-
94.