Learning to share: Pedagogy, open learning, and the sharing economy

an article by Lindsey ‘Luka’ Carfagna (Thomas Edison State University, USA) published in The Sociological Review Volume 66 Issue 2 (March 2018)

Abstract

The sharing economy is fertile sociological ground for studying important themes like labor, exchange, consumption, and inequality, as well as larger political-economic trends that are reflective of this post-recession era.

The multifaceted research agenda of the sharing economy can provide lessons around many themes relevant to sociologists, but what does the sharing economy teach to those who participate in it? What is learned from the sharing economy and how do participants learn it?

In this article, the author explores the pedagogic elements of one case study within the sharing economy: open learning. Drawing from 51 interviews with 34 participants and roughly 300 hours of participant observation, the study uses Bernstein’s theory of pedagogic discourse to ask how open learners learn to share.

The author argues that an ethos of communalism and cooperativism dominated moral discourse for learners and regulated social order. Entrepreneurialism was learned through a flexible sociality, where participants contributed to each other’s learning as a means of validating and legitimizing that learning.

The need to contribute or give back was taken for granted by participants, who felt compelled to give their own expertise or labor to the commons after taking something from it.

This study depicts a tension between a neoliberal entrepreneurial frame and a communalist, cooperativist frame that is also present within the larger sharing economy. The author suggests that a similar pedagogic approach that asks how participants learn to share could be developed in the larger sharing economy in order to better understand learning and economic relations as two sides of the same coin in contemporary capitalism.

Full text (PDF 19pp)

---

‘To tweet or not to tweet?’ A comparison of academics’ and students’ usage of Twitter in academic contexts

an article by Charles G. Knight and Linda K. Kaye (Edge Hill University, Ormskirk, UK) published in Innovations in Education and Teaching International Volume 53 Issue 2 (2016)

Abstract

The emergence of social media as a new channel for communication and collaboration has led educators to hope that they may enhance the student experience and provide a pedagogical tool within Higher Education (HE). This paper explores academics’ and undergraduates’ usage of Twitter within a post-92 university. It argues that the observed disparity of usage between academics and undergraduates can be attributed to a number of factors.

Namely, academics’ perceived use of the platform for enhancing reputation is an implied acknowledgement of the importance of research within HE and the increasingly public engagement agenda. Additionally, academics’ limited usage of Twitter to support practical-based issues may be explained by issues relating to accountability of information through non-official channels. Moreover, students made greater use of Twitter for the passive reception of information rather than participation in learning activities. The implications of these issues will be discussed in reference to the study findings.

Full text (HTML)

---

Informed choice? How the United Kingdom’s key information set fails to represent pedagogy to potential students

an article by Helen Barefoot (Learning and Teaching Innovation Centre, University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, UK) and Martin Oliver and Harvey Mellar (London Knowledge Lab, UCL Institute of Education, London, UK) published in Quality in Higher Education Volume 22 Issue 1 (2016)

Abstract

This paper explores the ways in which information about course pedagogy has been represented to potential students through national descriptors and specifications such as the United Kingdom’s Key Information Set. It examines the extent to which such descriptors provide helpful information about pedagogy, for example innovative uses of technology.

The paper starts by exploring the wider context within which these descriptors have been developed, including a comparison of similar descriptions internationally. This is followed by a comparative analysis, in which two courses (one single honours undergraduate degree, one Massive Open Online Course) are classified and compared. This serves to illustrate the blind spots in classifications such as the Key Information Set.

The paper concludes by arguing that further work is needed to develop classification schemes that both address explicitly the interests of potential students and are able to represent the pedagogic decisions that differentiate teaching in contemporary higher education.

---

Inter-professional education and the idea of an educated public

an article by Richard Anthony Davies (Independent Scholar, Leicester, UK) published in Journal of Vocational Education & Training Volume 65 Issue 2 (June 2013)

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a concern to re-negotiate the relationships been individual professionals working with the same people.

So, for example, healthcare staff are expected to coordinate their activities and ‘work together’. The end point is a collaborating together as a team of professionals often located in the same place. This demand for inter-professional working (IPW) has seen the rise of higher education programmes of study in IPW, now deemed an essential part of undergraduate education for these professional groups. The rationale is laudable, IPW ought to enhance the experience of the client and ultimately improve their outcomes. The two questions I want to raise in this paper are as follows: is inter-professional education (IPE) possible in the sense of an education that seeks to enable IPW, and if it is what form should it take. In pursuing these questions, I seek parallels with MacIntyre’s (1987) ‘idea of an educated public’. In doing so, I argue for an account of IPE and working premised on the development of a limited ‘educated public’ of healthcare professionals. I conclude with a limited specification of what this means in practice.

---

The importance of teaching: pedagogical constraints and possibilities in working-class schools

an article by Ruth Lupton (Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School of Economics) and Amelia Hempel-Jorgensen (Institute of Education, University of London) published in Journal of Education Policy Volume 27 Issue 5 (September 2012)

Abstract

This paper starts from the propositions that (a) pedagogy is central to the achievement of socially just education and (b) there are existing pedagogical approaches that can contribute to more socially just outcomes.

Given the ostensible commitments of the current English Government to reducing educational inequality and to the importance of teaching, we set out to explore the conditions that would need to be put in place to enable these approaches to be developed and sustained consistently in disadvantaged schools in England.

We start by analysing classroom observation and interview data from four primary schools with contrasting socio-economic composition, highlighting the different pedagogical practices that emerge in working- and middle-class schools and also in working-class schools in different circumstances.

Interviews with pupils show the impact of these practices on learner identities. We then draw on a variety of literatures on school composition, markets, leadership and teacher identities to present an account of the ways in which these different pedagogies are consciously or unconsciously produced.

We point to systemic constraints:

• a mismatch between student demands and organisational capacity;
• teachers’ attitudes and professional identities; and
• performative pressures on school leaders.

All of these suggest the need for fundamental reforms to educational purposes and system architecture, rather than the naïve reliance on teacher agency to transform educational outcomes. Nevertheless, the current policy environment in England does offer some possibilities for action and we close the paper with some suggestions about ways in which capacity for more socially just pedagogy could be built within English schools.

---