Why Engage in Open Pedagogy?

The purpose of this chapter is to engage readers with open pedagogy by exploring a plethora of examples as a way to support their choice to design, develop, and implement open pedagogical assignments and projects. We will also share a curated list of example projects and assignments. We will highlight how the 5Rs for open pedagogy (Respect, Reciprocate, Risk, Reach, Resist) proposed by Rajiv Jhangiani can guide our choices and approaches as we are deciding when, why, and how one might want to create an open pedagogy assignment or project.

As conceptualization of, and research around, open pedagogy continues to evolve, it is worth exploring the current evidence around the benefits of this approach. As Werth & Williams (2022, p. 1-2) ) state:

“Evidence suggests that Open Pedagogy leads to positive student outcomes, such as development of critical thinking skills, greater self-direction, and increased enjoyment of education (Dermody, 2019; Hegarty, 2015; Hilton et al., 2019; Tillinghast, 2020; Werth & Williams, 2021b; Wiley et al., 2017). Research also indicates that forms of Open Pedagogy may positively impact student engagement, help in building skills necessary for success at the college level, and enhance forms of motivation generally considered to be more beneficial (Werth & Williams, 2021a, b).”

Recognizing that more research is needed in a broad range of contexts to make these statements generalizable, this initial work indicates there is value for both students and faculty in this work. Providing the following examples, with context, through the lens of Rajiv Jhanginani’s values for open pedagogy, provides an avenue to expand the reach of open pedagogy to faculty and students who may not have considered this area before.

Exploring the Values for Open Pedagogy

There are a number of pathways or approaches for faculty and educators to consider as they are bringing open pedagogy into their teaching practice. Before we begin changing our pedagogy, curriculum, or assessments, it is helpful to have a values-based framework to support our decision-making. We suggest using Rajiv Jhangiani’s 5Rs for Open Pedagogy as a lens through which we ask questions, identify needs, and make design decisions that come with creating an open pedagogy project. One critical note — as Jhangiani reminds us, “these are personal, subjective, and contextual” and thus serve as a starting point rather than a strict rubric or ending point. One of the inclusive aspects of the open pedagogy movement is how this community has made space for multiple lenses or motivations for doing this work; finding your way “in” to this work is a critical aspect of open pedagogy. Learn more about the various lenses by listening to, watching, or reading the first 20 min of this talk from Will Cross.

In the section below, we’ve outlined the 5Rs by providing a defining statement from Rajiv Jhangiani and then offering questions to consider. Whether you are new to open pedagogy or have implemented projects in the past, these questions offer specific avenues for us to reflect and ground our decision-making. We suggest that you take time to review each value and consider the questions, keep some notes to track what’s coming up for you, and then approach the final reflection questions at the end of the section to support you as you engage with the values from Rajiv Jhangiani (2019).

Respect

“Open pedagogy without respect for agency is exploitation.”

(Jhangiani, 2019)

Questions to consider:

1. How will the project center respect for student voices? For other voices? Whose voices are missing?
2. How do we talk about, and make choices, that respect student agency and their decisions to engage in public scholarship or not? What does providing choice require from faculty? For example, will you need to create alternative assignments like allowing the student to not publish openly? How are your assessment strategies impacted by this choice?
3. As we are advocating for more open resources, how are we also respecting various forms of knowledge?  For example, if creating an oral history project, how will the project center respect for the tradition of oral histories and honoring people’s stories?
4. What’s the labor involved in this type of project – for faculty, students, community members, support staff, and beyond? What kind of labor is involved – mental and emotional, time, physical resources, etc.  How do those involved honor, appreciate and make the labor visible?

Reciprocate

“Practice good citizenship of the commons. Open pedagogy is about community.”

(Jhangiani, 2019)

Questions to consider:

1. How is the work of an open project reciprocal for those involved? For example, in can be essential to consider how to tell the story of a project to best support stakeholder’s needs for promotion, tenure, and annual evals. Also, consider how students tell the story and represent their work to support their goals.
2. How does the open project give back to the community?
3. What resources are available to compensate collaborators for their time and labor? For example, are there ways to access grants or other funds to pay students, community members and others involved in the project for the services, expertise, and labor.

Risk

“Open pedagogy involves vulnerabilities and risks that are not distributed evenly and that should not be ignored or glossed over.”

(Jhangiani, 2019)

Questions to consider:

1. Have you discussed and assessed the risk for educators to implement these pedagogical practices? For example, within institutions, a risk could be a lack of recognition from some departments about the value of open publishing/pedagogy compared to traditional publications and teaching strategies. This risk could also expand beyond a single institution depending on social-political contexts in which open projects are published.
2. Have you discussed and assessed the risk for students engaged in publishing openly? For example, students may feel risk related to the permanence of their work being in the public sphere and also the potential to be targeted online.
3. Have you discussed and assessed the risk related to content or stories that are being created and shared? For example, when publishing openly available oral histories, how do you build in choice for the storytellers and trust that those managing the project to engage in ethical story stewardship?
4. What are the possible strategies for mitigating risk when publishing openly? For example, would it provide some protection to use a collective project name to provide anonymity when publishing? Another way that could help to mitigate risk is by implementing multi-stage review processes that bring in diverse perspectives.
5. What will conversations about who holds power look like in a teaching setting? What context matters?
6. How do we create spaces in which we can all work toward respecting and understanding people’s varying capacities for risk? How do we acknowledge and honor that this capacity for risk may change over time?

Reach

“Involves having an impact that extends well beyond the classroom, a course, or a semester, beyond the artificial divides between formal and informal learners…”

(Jhangiani, 2019)

Questions to Consider:

1. How do we conceptualize the reach of a project? What audience and level of reach is appropriate for student learning, for the content, and to balance the risks?
2. Working with students, how do we articulate the reach of a project? This can support student motivation in many ways. It can also support our assessment of our project in order to make decisions for future iterations, gain funding and support, and more.
3. As open pedagogy expands, in what ways can you ground your project and teaching in the ethos and values of open pedagogy while not creating a “public” artifact? How do we consider the level of reach that creates a meaningful learning environment while balancing risks, scaffolding of long-term projects, student contributions of multiple semesters, and the needs of those involved in the project?

Resist

…“against forces that conspire to pit increasingly precarious faculty against increasingly precarious students. Resist against the commodification of learning. Resist against the neoliberal university. Resist being brokers for surveillance capitalism. Open pedagogy is not a panacea but it strives to be antiracist, democratizing, liberatory, and decolonized.”

(Jhangiani, 2019)

Questions to consider:

1. What structures or systems are you resisting when you engage in open pedagogical projects? How do we communicate this resistance to students?
2. How does providing student choice resist the oppressive power structures found in many educational settings?
3. As we imagine our open pedagogy projects, how do we broaden the concept of resistance? What do our individual and collective actions look like? For example, in a U.S. context we can reflect on the specific characteristics of our culture and learn from the work of Tema Okun to understand how we can build a culture that resists the tenets of white supremacy culture; we can also explore the ways to craft projects that are grounded with a social justice lens).
4. In what ways can we share our joy and hope — and the experiences of our students — that resist the structures that keep us disconnected from each other and ourselves?

Example Projects and Assignments

As we selected examples to share in this resource, our group intentionally curated examples that amplify faculty and student voices. We also wanted to provide some examples that give you a full picture of the process of implementing an open pedagogy project. When you are exploring the following examples, consider what you can learn from each project to bring into your own work.

In this first example project, you can watch, listen, or read about two projects by faculty from Oregon Coast Community College and Linn Benton Community College. As you explore this presentation (and the attached resources) consider how you are beginning to shape your understanding of the process of implementing or supporting an open pedagogy project.

Next, explore the following two open pedagogy projects, including presentations about the work as well as any provided materials.

Equity and Open Pedagogy

The creators of this toolkit are situated within a U.S. context — this is important to consider as you reflect on the role of equity work, liberatory practices, and social justice as a frame for your open work. Everyone must find their place in this work through reflection, connecting with community, and vulnerability. Bettina Love (2019) emphasizes that

“The time-consuming and serious critique and reflection of one’s sociocultural heritage — which includes identities related to race, ethnicity, family structure, sexuality, class, abilities, and religion — taken side by side with a critical analysis of racism, sexism, White supremacy, and Whiteness is the groundwork of co-conspirators […] This type of deep personal reflection is a must before taking up space in spaces that are trying to build, heal, and tear down all at the same time while never forgetting that joy is central to the work of freedom.”  Love, p. 119.

This movement needs the voices and experiences of a diverse community, and that requires all of us to consider where Open Pedagogy aligns with our current teaching/learning philosophies and disciplinary values, as well as identifying our own levels of comfort with risk. Creating a sense of belonging within the open movement must be envisioned and experienced as an active practice. Brené Brown defines belonging in her book Atlas of the Heart (2021), which is based on decades of social science research, as follows:

“We have to belong to ourselves as much as we need to belong to others. Any Belonging that asks us to betray ourselves is not true belonging. Any discussion of belonging has to start with acknowledging that love and belonging are irreducible needs for all people” (p.154). She goes on to say on page 159 that, “ We can never truly belong if we are betraying ourselves, our ideals, or our values in the process. That is why it’s a mistake to think that belonging is passive and simply about joining or ‘going along’ with others. It’s not. Belonging is a practice that requires us to be vulnerable, get uncomfortable, and learn how to be present with people without sacrificing who we are.”

Our intention in providing these resources is to build awareness and empower faculty, librarians, instructional designers, and anyone interested in the open movement to determine how equity and open fit within their own context. Depending on your specific context (within or outside of the US) it’s essential to consider the risks, responsibilities, and audience of your work. When developing the toolkit the creators wanted to build this resource as a “way in” for anyone interested in open pedagogy.

While learning about equity and open pedagogy you will be challenged and invited to engage in the vulnerable practice that’s presented in the definition of belonging above. Sean Michael Morris encourages us to consider the difference between inclusion and equity:

 “[…] the expectation of inclusion is that those included will adapt to the space made by those doing the including. See, even when we welcome marginalised people to our institutions, our classrooms, our conversations, we usually ask them to shuffle off enough of their identity as marginalised in order to adapt to the expectations we will inevitably have for them: which is not just to blend in, to practice respectability, but to preserve enough of their marginal identity to remain marked as ‘other’ (Morris, 2022).

When developing equitable practices within your own context we offer this framing, from Erin Okuno (2018), which can support our decision-making:

“Equity can never be about all, because with true equity we are laser-focused on the needs of those who are the farthest from justice. This is hard to do in a society that fundamentally believes in equal access, focuses on amassing privileges, and has racist practices and policies that uphold white privileges. Working towards racial equity is about looking at who is farthest from justice and reallocating resources and undoing barriers standing in the way of this.”

As we actively create spaces of belonging within the Open movement we can work toward the goal of moving beyond inclusion and toward equity and justice in our educational spaces.

Before diving into the current literature and work of open pedagogy, equity, and education, we must acknowledge, learn about, and honor the work of many scholars,  but in particular black feminist scholars and pedagogues, whose foundation of liberatory work came long before the Open movement as we know it.  Clinton-Lisell, Roberts-Crews, and Gwozod, share:

“[…]both open pedagogy and Black feminist pedagogy seek to challenge the role of both educators and students as well the utility of assignments (Roberts-Crews, 2022). As Omolade (1993) argued, Black feminist pedagogy advises educators to be more like guides or “consultants” in the education process, rather than controllers. Open pedagogy stems from the same impulse. Seiferle-Valencia (2020) argues how current efforts to create a more socially just open education is not entirely new and reflects a Black feminist pedagogy, among many other critical pedagogies. Black feminist pedagogical rhetoric is not only relevant to open education, but essential to conversations about open values, practices, and pedagogy.”

The resources provided in this toolkit will not provide a singular answer to the complex questions and challenges that stem from our efforts to dismantle systems of oppression — particularly within our own institutions — but they can give us language, theory, and guidance to come together and make progress.

• Whether you are beginning your journey or are well-versed in the relationship between equity and open pedagogy, one comprehensive resource is the paper from Cheng (2023). In this SPARC Leadership capstone project, her work provides an emphasis on how “using OER to promote equity has shifted from just cost savings to addressing the larger issue of decolonizing education and promoting social justice for marginalized students.”
• While there are many avenues to explore, reflect, and build our own praxis within open pedagogy, this resource from Every Learner Everywhere provides theoretical and practical information about equity and open pedagogy.

Equitable Practices for Faculty

While diving into the faculty experience of open pedagogy is not within the scope of this toolkit, it is critical to reflect on current conversations around inclusivity and equity for faculty as they do this work. One aspect to consider is the role of faculty evaluation and standing as they engage in open pedagogy projects with their students.

• While the Values for open (which were discussed previously) offer questions for us to consider around risk and reciprocity, the DOERS3 collaborative has operationalized some of those questions in this matrix for promotion and tenure as it relates to open work.
• In her 2022 keynote address at “Open Texas 2022” Jasmine Roberts-Crews connects the role of labor, the Open movement, and equity that is supportive to our understanding of how the values of open pedagogy ground our decision making.
• Finally, listen to the following episode featuring Chevella Pittman and Thomas J. Tobin, and consider more broadly how the work of making faculty spaces more equitable and inclusive is critical for creating inclusive teaching spaces.

Equitable Practices with Students

As educators begin considering a specific course, training, or learning environment to integrate open pedagogy one place to begin is to consider who your students are. While this is also a traditional component of most needs assessment and instructional design models, approaching this work through the lens of Jhangiani’s 5Rs can be instrumental in the design of our open projects and assignments. If your students are creating openly licensed material, what risk is involved? What about students’ experiences will support this work and what might make it challenging? How do you learn more about your students?  Where are your learners in terms of experience with the content, strategies, and tools that are required for a project? How have you attended to the various ways in which power structures show up in our classrooms — why might this matter for an open pedagogy project?

• When considering the student perspective and experience when engaging in open pedagogical practices, Pearce et. al. (2002) provides not only firsthand stories, but also a framework for us to consider student and faculty experiences.
• As with any project or assignment, faculty want to consider how to best scaffold the experience for students (or with students). If you’re not familiar with instructional scaffolding, here’s a reading that provides an overview. When designing an open pedagogy project, an example of scaffolding may include providing student instruction about what is a Creative Commons license and low-stakes opportunities for students to discuss and consider how to license their work.
• You can also consider how the UDL (Universal Design for Learning) Guidelines can improve equity in our courses. Other resources that can support the design, development, and implementation of open pedagogy projects include the ACE Framework from Plymouth State, the OEN Student toolkit, and Equitable CITE Pedagogy.
• For more details and templates for designing an open pedagogy project, this Open Pedagogy Fellowship Pressbook is an excellent resource.

Finally, a critical component in an open pedagogy project is building or maintaining trust with our students or learners. Often open projects lead us into the waters of needing to let go of certain ways of being as a teacher — how you address academic integrity while encouraging students to adapt and adopt and remix open work. Exploring issues of creators’ rights and licensing (often in partnership with library colleagues), and ensuring that we are truly hearing our students, making space for their voices, and believing their experiences. These resources can provide a starting place to develop your own materials and practices that balance creators’ rights and academic integrity while centering trust in open practices. In Chapter Three, you’ll find templates and examples for working with students on open pedagogy projects.

References

Brown, B. (2021). Atlas of the Heart: Mapping Meaningful Connection and the Language of Human Experience. Random House.

Cheng, Sam, “Leveraging OER and Open Pedagogy to Promote EDI in the Classroom” (2023). Publications and Scholarship. 26. https://source.sheridancollege.ca/lls_publ/26

Clinton-Lisell, V., Roberts-Crews, J., Gwozdz, L. (2023). SCOPE of open education: A new framework for research. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 24(4), 135-153. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v24i4.7356

Jhangiani, R. (2019, April 11). 5Rs for Open Pedagogy. https://thatpsychprof.com/5rs-for-open-pedagogy/

Love, Bettina L. 2019. We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom.

Morris, S.M. (2022, August 10). Opening Doors with Open Pedagogy: Access, Imagination, and Student Engagement. Critical Pedagogy, Learning Design, Justice & Imagination. https://www.seanmichaelmorris.com/opening-doors-with-open-pedagogy-access-imagination-and-student-engagement/

Okuno, E. (2018, November 16). Equity doesn’t mean all. Fakequity. https://fakequity.com/2018/11/16/equity-doesnt-mean-all/

Pearce, L., Lin Hanick, S. L., Hofer, A. R., Townsend, L., & Willi Hooper, M. (2022). Your Discomfort Is Valid: Big Feelings and Open Pedagogy. Retrieved from https://academicworks.cuny.edu/lg_pubs/173/.

Werth, E. & Williams, K. (2022). The why of open pedagogy: a value-first conceptualization for enhancing instructor praxis. Smart Learning Environments. 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00191-0