Produced with Scholar

Abstract

Education is in a state of flux – transitioning from traditional architectures and practices to new ecologies of teaching and learning influenced by the tremendous social and technological changes of our times. This course explores three pedagogical paradigms: “didactic”, “authentic” and “transformative” learning. It takes an historical perspective in order to define the contemporary dimensions of what we term “new learning”. It prepares participants to make purposeful choices and link particular theories/instructional approaches to individual and group learning goals.

Keywords

Education, Curriculum, Pedagogy

1. Being an Educator in "Interesting Times"

For the Participant

This Learning Module analyzes three pedagogical paradigms which we call "didactic", "authentic" and "transformative". It traces the ideas outlined in Chapters 1, 2 and 8 of New Learning, by Mary Kalantzis and Bill Cope.

Understanding these educational traditions matters as they are woven into everyday classroom practices. Many classrooms use a variety of these approaches. Educators should know the power of each, its historical and cultural purposes, when to deploy it, how it works when it does, and when it fails learners and society.

Video Mini-Lectures

Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017

Supporting Material

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: Find a contemporary text of political rhetoric or public policy that sets social objectives for education (a video, a quote from a written text etc.). Comment on the substance (or lack thereof!) in this text.

For the Instructor

2. What’s "New" about "New Learning?"

For the Participant

Video Mini-Lectures

Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017

Supporting Material

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: How have you experienced recent changes in the nature of education, either as a student, or a teacher, or both? Give an example. And/or speak autobiographically.

For the Instructor

3. Didactic Education: The Modern Past

For the Participant

Didactic pedagogy is relatively old, with roots as old as writing. However, it came to near-universal prominence as a mode of learning in the mass, institutionalized education that emerged almost everywhere in the world in the 19th and 20th centuries. The experience of didactic education is still common today, for a variety of social, cultural and, at times, practical reasons. Mass, institutionalized education allows parents to work while schools take care of children, imparting the basics of reading and writing. Perhaps more importantly, however, didactic teaching inculcates in children a sense of discipline and order. It has teachers and textbooks telling, learners absorbing what they are told, and when it comes to the test, students getting their lessons right or wrong. In the didactic classroom, the teacher establishes a pattern of relationships in which students learn to accept received facts and moral truths, comply with commands issued by the teacher and absorb the authoritative knowledge presented in the curriculum. In these classroom settings, students learn to get used to a balance of agency in which they are relatively powerless to make knowledge themselves or to act autonomously.

Video Mini-Lectures

Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017

Supporting Material

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: Parse an example of didactic pedagogy today. When is it appropriate? When is it anachronistic?

For the Instructor

4. Authentic Education: More Recent Times

For the Participant

Authentic pedagogy movements emerged in the 20th century, in part as a reaction to the culture of order and control characteristic of didactic education. The major principles of authentic education are that learners should take a more active part in their learning, and that this learning should be closely and practically connected to their life experiences. Authentic education is more child-centred, focusing on internalized understanding rather than formal repetition of the ‘right’ answers. But does it necessarily have the effect of changing a child’s life chances? Or is it at times overly ‘practical’, accepting that unequal life chances are inevitable? Authentic education’s critics argue that, all too often, it does not fulfil the promise of education.

Video Mini-Lectures

Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017

Supporting Material

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: Describe and analyze the features of an example of authentic pedagogy today.

For the Instructor

5. Transformative Education: New Learning

For the Participant

Transformative pedagogy focuses on the learner and learning. As such, it sets out deliberately to transform students’ life chances and play an active role in changing social conditions. It changes the balance of agency in learning relationships by encouraging learners to build their own knowledge in a supportive learning environment, to work with others in lateral knowledge-making relationships (peers, parents and community members), to negotiate local and global differences, and to extend the breadth and scope of their education beyond the walls of the traditional classroom.

Video Mini-Lectures

Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017
Media embedded January 17, 2017

Supporting Material

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: Describe and analyze an educational innovation. In what senses might it be called "transformative"?

For the Instructor

6. Models of Pedagogy and Patterns of Curriculum

For the Participant

Chapter 8 of our New Learning book explores pedagogy and curriculum - the processes of mimesis in didactic pedagogy, processes of synthesis in authentic pedagogy, and reflexivity in transformative pedagogy. Following are some source materials addressing these ideas.

Mimesis: The Modern Past

Synthesis: More Recent Times

Reflexivity: New Learning

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: Describe and analyze the dynamics of learning in a curriculum practice that reflects "mimesis," "synthesis," "reflexivity," or a combination of these.

For the Instructor

7. Technology-Mediated Learning: Between Didactic and Transformative Pedagogy

For the Participant

Does technology-mediated learning necessarily change things? Consider the ideas in following two chapters, and also this community update.

Cope and Kalantzis, Assessment and Pedagogy in the Era of Machine-Mediated Learning
Cope and Kalantzis, Conceptualizing e-Learning

Comment: Mention a stand-out idea, or new thought prompted by this material. Use @Name to speak with others about their thoughts.

Make an Update: Parse an e-learning technology or practice. To what extent and in what ways does it reflect Didactic/Mimetic, Authentic/Synthetic, or Transformative/Reflexive Pedagogy?

For the Instructor

Peer Reviewed Work 1: Educational Theory

For the Participant

Take one of the theories or theoretical concepts introduced in this course. Look ahead into the learning module to get a sense of upcoming ideas—don’t feel constrained to explore concepts introduced early in the course. Or explore a related theory or concept of your own choosing that is relevant to the course themes. Convey in your introduction how your topic aligns with the course themes. Outline the theory or define the concept referring to the theoretical and research literature and illustrate the significance of the theory using examples of this concept at work in pedagogical practice.

A theory work should be 2000 words or more in length. Ideally it should include media such as images, diagrams, tables, embedded videos (either uploaded into CGScholar, or embedded from other sites), web links and other digital media. Be sure to source all material that is quoted or otherwise used and provide context on how the media applie to your work. Each work must have a references “element” or section, including references to at least five scholarly articles or books, plus any other necessary or relevant references, including websites and other media.

For doctoral students, this must be in the genre of a literature review with at least 10 scholarly sources. The learning module and the updates we will make when we send you a request to begin this project will provide resources on the genre of literature review. (See Work 1 Appendix)

If you are new to CGScholar, visit Section 3 in the Getting Started in Scholar learning module to find out how the Creator app works.

Knowledge Processes Rubric and Literature Review Checklist

 

For the Instructor

For new users of CGScholar, we recommend the Learning Module, Getting Started in CGScholar. We specifically recommend at this stage that the admin release the following updates as the project proceeds:

  • 3.1: Starting a Work in Creator
  • 3.2: Using the Creator Workspace
  • 3.3: Using the Structure Tool
  • 3.4: Submitting a Draft
  • 3.5: Offering Feedback
  • 3.6: Revising a Work for Publication

Peer Reviewed Work 1 Appendix: Literature Review (Doctoral)

For the Participant

The following information is an Appendix to the Work 1 Project: Educational Theory for Doctoral Students.

About the Literature Review Genre

The literature review should not merely be descriptive—it should be analytical and critical. However, at the same time it should be a fair representation of the perspectives and voices of a range of people across the field. What are the main issues arising for this issue, theme or topic? The main challenges to be addressed? The questions being asked by the intellectual and practical leaders in relation to this issue?

Sources

  • Include at least 10 scholarly sources.
  • 5 of these sources must be new to you (not used in previous courses, admin updates, your or your peers' updates, etc.).

Structure and Process

Use the Scholar Structure feature to organize your work.

One possible structure for the literature review might be as follows:

  1. Introduction: how this literature review ties into your experience and research Interests.
  2. The issue, topic or theme: why it is significant and what are the challenges being addressed, as reported by the literature. (You may also wish to structure your literature review around sub-themes, in which case, be sure you cover points 2-6 in each of your subthemes.)
  3. A synthesis of key concepts and theoretical frameworks, organized into themes, as reported by the literature: compare and contrast approaches.
  4. A synthesis of methodologies of research and application employed to address these issues, topics and themes; their strengths and weaknesses, as reported by the literature. (alternatively, these could be embedded into Section 3)
  5. A synthesis of main empirical findings and practical implications.(alternatively, these could be embedded into Section 3)
  6. Gaps in the literature; open questions and where further work is needed.
  7. Conclusion: where this issue is heading, the tasks ahead for people addressing this issue.
  8. References: list sources cited, Including any media (and also cite all media as captions to the media itself).

The Textual Features of the Genre, Literature Review

The literature review is a delicate play between the voices of the field, and the way you bring them together in a synthesis and interpretation. It will map out an issue, theme or topic, fairly representing varied voices, analyzing their differences, and critically interpreting the nuances.

Some questions to address in the literature review:

​By addressing them, apart from question 1, we mean based on what the literature conveys.

  1. What motivates your concern for this issue?
  2. As a body of work, what practical questions does this literature set out to address?
  3. What is the empirical range addresed in this issue, theme or topic?
  4. Who are the most influential and most cited thinkers?
  5. What are the main theories, interpretative frameworks, or paradigms which order knowledge when addressing this issue, theme or topic?
  6. What kinds of research methodology are used?
  7. What range of practices does this field spawn? What are its most exciting and promising areas of innovation?

References

  • Boote, David N. and Penny Beile. 2005. "Scholars before Researchers: On the Centrality of the Dissertation Literature Review in Research Preparation." Educational Researcher 34(6):3–15.
  • Galvan, Jose L. 2006. Writing a Literature Review: A Guide for Students of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Glendale CA: Pyrczak Publishing.
  • Machi, Lawrence A. and Brenda T. McEvoy. 2016. The Literature Review. Thousand Oaks CA: Corwin.

Web Tips

Here are some resources addressing the textual dynamics of a literature review:

References: On Academic Writing

You may also wish to take a moment to reflect on academic writing in general. Much academic writing is (frankly!) poor writing. Here are some readings and source books:

  • Strunk, William and E.B. White. 1979. Elements of Style. New York NY: Longman. (A classic!)
  • Sword, Helen. 2012. Stylish Academic Writing. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
  • The University of Chicago Press Editorial Staff. 2017. The Chicago Manual of Style. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. Online edition.
  • Coursera Academic Writing Course.

You cannot be too obsessive about style and textual consistency! Two requests:

  • Always proof everything you submit, including first drafts for peer review.
  • As a reviewer, always note typos and suggest textual revisions to peers using the annotations tool.

Peer Review Rubric and Annotation Codes

The review rubric is made up of two parts. First are the knowledge process domains, the second are specific to the iterature review.

Knowledge Processes Rubric and Literature Review Checklist

As you create your work, we strongly encourage you to review and align your work with the rubric and checklist.

As a reviewer, it is very important that you assist your authors by providing specific feedback on which work-specific checklist item(s) need attention. We also encourage you to self-reflect on your own work and how you address the following items before submitting your final work. Requirements that aren't addressed will cause the work to be returned by the instructor for additional revisions.

Checklist for the Literature Review

As you write and review a Literature Review, be aware of the following requirements, which are also outlined in the Rubric.

  1. Have you grouped your sources by topic or theory/methods/findings/gaps, or are you describing each source individually? In a literature review it is best to build a case with selected sources by grouping them thematically so that you can analyze, compare and contrast the theories, and that policies and practices in the field you are studying. It should not feel like a continuation of an annotated bibliography where you describe one work at a time.
  2. Are your ‘claims’ backed up by reference to the literature? Given that you are presenting what the literature says about a field of study, not what you think or believe, you must cite those authors that actually make and provide the research, ideas, practices etc. Are all the key ideas, findings and trends presented backed up by multiple sources? Your presentation of a field of scholarship/study in a literature review must be supported by multiple sources to demonstrate the trends, findings or key issues that you have discovered in the literature. You need to make sure that you are aware of the debates and counter arguments associated with your topic as well.
  3. Are the voice or voices of the literature coming through? Check and see that your voice does not dominate. Your voice/opinion is represented by your journey of discovery – the sources you have selected and your analysis of them, including gaps in the literature that you have discovered – not by claims you make – all claims must be cited. “Experiential” in the knowledge processes rubric does not mean that you must bring in your experience and voice throughout the work, but rather provide context to the topic, mainly in the introduction.
  4. Are you demonstrating what you have learned and not what you know? A literature review does not demonstrate what you know but what you have learned.
  5. Have you referenced and synthesized the findings of at least 10 sources? Are these scholarly sources?
  6. Have you identified the gaps in the literature? What work needs to be done? Remember, this is not gaps in the topic (that should have been captured earlier in your literature review), but rather what is missing from the literature that you reviewed? What angles, approaches, demographics, etc. haven't been addressed sufficiently?
  7. What media has been included? Do include tables, infographics, videos—but be sure to source them and demonstrate their relevance by connecting to them in the nearby text.

Responding to the Knowledge Process Rubric​ when creating and reviewing a Liiterature Review

​The Knowledge Processes Rubric is not meant to create secctions for your work. Nor is it intended that each section of your work address every Rubric item. Here are just a few examples:

  • Experiential: The author can explain in the introduction or in a preface why this topic matters to them, their experience with the topic, etc. The main body of the Literature Review should be void of the author's voice and experience
  • Critical Analysis: This does not mean that you are stating where you feel a topic is good or bad. You must rely on the literature to make those claims. Cite what the literature is saying about the good and the bad of your topic; the challenges and benefits, etc. The gaps in the literature is another opportunity to demonstrate critical analysis. In this case it is your voice and you are conveying where you feel the literature is lacking in this topic (not where the topic is lacking)
  • Application: Within a Literature Review this doesn't mean that you are describing what you have applied, but rather how your topic has been applied, as reported by the literature. The premise for each research study addressed in the articles selected are good examples and will surface as you provide evidence of a given claim.
  • Innovation: Are you exploring an innovative topic? Does the literature you have cited address innovative ideas? Does your identification of gaps in the literature bring to light innovative solutions or research opportunities?

 

Ask any questions or share suggestions in the comments area.

For the Instructor

Peer Reviewed Work 2A: Case Study

For the Participant

Write a case study of an innovative learning practice—a method, a resource or a technology, for instance. This could be a reflection practice you have already used, or a new or unfamiliar practice which you would like to explore. Analyze an educational practice, or an ensemble of practices, as applied in a clearly specified a learning context. Use theory concepts introduced in this course. We encourage you to use theory concepts defined by members of the group in their published Work 1, with references and links to the published works of the other course participants.

Word limit: at least 2000 words

Media: Include images, diagrams, infographics, tables, embedded videos, (either uploaded into CGScholar, or embedded from other sites), web links, PDFs, datasets or other digital media. Be sure to caption media sources and connect them explicitly with the text, with an introduction before and discussion afterwards.

References: Include a References “element” or section with at least five scholarly articles or books that you have used and referred to in the text, and all the added media, plus any other necessary or relevant references, including websites.

Rubric: The educational practice rubric is the same as for Work 1, against which others will review your work, and against which you will do your self-review at the completion of your final draft.

Knowledge Processes Rubric

 

For the Instructor

Peer Reviewed Work 2B: Design a Learning Module

For the Participant

Create a learning module in CGScholar which demonstrates how you would translate some of the ideas and principles of this course into practice. A learning module is a hybrid work which crosses the legacy educational practices of lesson plan, syllabus and textbook.

Unlike a lesson plan which is mainly written for a teacher’s design purposes, a learning module has both teacher and learner sides. On the left side of the screen you speak to learners in “classroom discourse,” however in the case of the learning module, in a dialogical mode, rather like social media. On the right side of the screen, you speak to other teachers in the professional discourse of the curriculum and pedagogy. Unlike a syllabus, a learning module contains content as well as an outline of coverage. And unlike a textbook which typically summarizes and transmit content that learners are to consume and remember, a learning module curates a variety of web content (links, embedded media etc.) and establishes a dialogue with and between learners which positions them as active seekers and producers of knowledge.


Your learning module should:
1. Have a Learning Objectives section that addresses the following:
* How your learning module applies the ideas and principles of this course into practice.
* Your experience with the content area and whether this is new material or material that is being transformed and a summary of what has been done to transform the material.*

Scholarly references to justify the need for the approach you are taking.

2. Have an Intended Learning Outcomes section that addresses the following:
*Your target learners, including assumptions about prior learning
*Curriculum standards, if applicable
*Clear rationale in terms of learning objectives, expressed both to the learner (member side) and teacher (admin side)
* Anticipated duration to complete the module, and material requirements
3. Include at least 6 updates, each of which on the left side includes at least some curated media and a comment request that will prompt rich dialogue among students, and on the right side speaks to teachers about the underlying pedagogical rationale, possible supplementary resources, teaching suggestions, and standards mapping.
4. Include at least one peer reviewed project, with peer assessment rubric.
5. Include at least one information or knowledge survey or assessment.
6. Demonstrate pedagogical coherence and completeness. Optionally, learning module creators could use the Learning by Design pedagogy, described here.
7. Be well-formatted in terms of the learning module two column format and heading structure.
8. Include citations for all media and other curated content throughout the work (below each image and video).
9. Include a references section of all sources and media used throughout the work.
10. Include a Work Icon (About this Work – Info – Work Icon).

Examples

For model K-12 learning modules, visit the Literacies and Learning by Design collections in the Scholar Bookstore. For model college and higher education learning modules, visit the Higher Education collection. For a selection of learning modules created by participants in the Learning Design and Leadership program, visit that collection. You may also view the Learning Modules community.  For instructions on how to create a Learning Module in Scholar, visit section 5 of the Getting Started in CGScholar learning module.

Review Rubric

Following is the peer review rubric for the learning module, against which others will review your work, and against which you will do your self-review at the completion of your final draft. You can view this rubric while you draft your work at Creator => Feedback => Reviews => Rubric. The rubric explores four main knowledge processes, the background and rationale for which is described in the papers at this page. If you want to use the L-by-D icons to mark activity types explicitly, you can copy and paste web icons located at this link.

LearningModuleRubric.pdf

 

For the Instructor

For new CGScholar who have not previously created a learning module we posting the following updates from Getting Started in CGScholar:

  • 5.1: Finding and Using Learning Modules
  • 5.2: Creating a Learning Module
  • 5.3: Designing a Survey
  • 5.4: Adding a Project and a Survey to a Learning Module

Peer Reviewed Work 2C: Evaluate Implementation of a Learning Module

For the Participant

Create an evaluation plan and evaluate a learning module as an educational intervention. This might be a learning module you have created in an earlier course in the program. For evaluation suggestions, visit section 6 of the Getting Started in Scholar learning module. Revise the learning module in light of the evaluation results, and discuss these revisions. Be sure to link to the revised learning module in your evaluation study. (Request republication of the revised version before linking.)

This plan should address the following elements:

  1. Background and Context, including citing the literature
  2. Problem/Needs Statement
  3. Evaluation Purpose and Audience
  4. Evaluation Goals and Objectives
  5. Evaluation Questions
  6. Evaluation Criteria
  7. Evaluation Design
  8. Data Collection Plan and how the data collection will answer the evaluation questions
  9. Evaluation Personnel and Roles
  10. Timeline
  11. Dissemination Plan
  12. References

Evaluation Findings

Share your evaluation findings while addressing the following:

  1. How do you want them to present their findings?? Do you have a sample of what you are looking for?
  2. Copies of data collection instruments used

Rubric:​ In addition to the requirements outlined above, create and review work according to the following rubric.

Knowledge Processes Rubric

 

For the Instructor