Hi all. Finally coming out of tenure crisis coma here. Falling behind has been an interesting reminder of where many of our students are coming from. Lol. As I fell behind I could feel the pressure of being overwhelmed by new material I hadn’t had a chance to properly digest step by step. So I decided to focus on one thing, the “From OER to Open Pedagogy: Harnessing the Power of Open” article, which seemed very substantive and something I could sink my teeth into. 

I like a lot of the questions they raise. They are selling the possibilities and potential of open pedagogy without overselling it, including lots of questions about the limits of what open pedagogy can do. Some of the potential of open pedagogy I like so far include: no textbook, possibility for increased student input/engagement, possibility for enactment of Freirean ideas/practices, and self-grading (lol). I hear Jason on his concern about platitudinous references to Freire and student empowerment, but I also do very much like the idea that I could learn new tactics/strategies for actually getting to the Freirean goals that many of us are motivated by: student participation and engagement and creative learning, rather than rote memorization, “banking method”, etc.

The question they raise, and the article Jason referenced asking whether the “rhetoric matches the reality” is an interesting concern. It’ll be interesting to see where I end up on this question, as I “learn by doing” open pedagogy. A couple questions I have so far, after reflecting on the article’s examples of open pedagogy (making a Wikipedia entry, creating your own textbook or course or student education video) are : to what extent is this exploitative? I.e., getting the students to “do the work”? I guess my question going forward is, will this model be more like prisoners making license plates or PPE for pennies in prison, or more like Rupaul’s drag race, where contestants create creative content, get experience in competition and performance, free publicity and exposure of their art, and even, maybe, a cash prize? 

The second question I have is, is the approach of open pedagogy more about learning content or tech skills (critical digital literacy)? Don’t get me wrong, I think tech skills like this are valuable – maybe even more so for students like ours coming from financially challenged families and communities that may not have access to the latest software programs, skills, etc. I myself kind of wandered into being a Tech Fellow at the Grad Center (mostly bc I needed more funding and the fellowship paid well), but I learned a lot of skills along the way, particularly for someone who didn’t see themselves as particularly tech savvy up to that point. Through learning by doing, I did actually learn a lot that has helped me through the years, including in the classroom. In fact, going further back in time, one of the most valuable classes I took in high school was my typewriting class! Randomly selected (I think – can’t really remember if the selection was intentional or not), typewriting has saved me innumerable hours (including, in fact, right now, as I am quickly able to record my thoughts with a coming deadline), that others, who never took typewriting, cannot do. In fact, I am a little shocked at how many academic writers, who do countless hours of writing, struggle to type with a hunt-and-peck approach. 

At the same time, I can’t help but question Rosa and Robison’s references to writing essays as being “disposable” or “pointless busywork”. Maybe I’m a delusional academic or Freirean, but I do very much want to believe – and try to set up – a system where student work involves grappling with ideas. In such a way that this grappling, such as low-stakes weekly reflections on readings and higher stakes thought papers, stimulate important activity in the brain and create lasting connections with ideas. Unlike cramming factoids for the multiple choice test, to be flushed out afterward, I try to get students engaged with ideas – even if only a few – maybe even only one! (if it’s really good). Ideas they can carry with them into their future and use in their lives. Whether they ever re-read their paper or give a crap about keeping it (or whether it becomes the seed for something they go on to publish or work with) isn’t something I have a lot of control over. But I am hesitant to look at writing (and the close and concentrated reading that goes with it) as “disposable”. My last question has to do with the limits of the idea of “learning by doing”. I do have a soft spot for conceptual learning. Can learning by doing really teach concepts? Beyond tech skill concepts? Or utopian/futuristic tech skill concepts? I really don’t know yet, but maybe I’ll learn by doing  (or not, lol).  Finally, I have to say I like the idea of using open pedagogy as a way to “rethink our courses”. Making teaching creative, like learning, seems important. Open pedagogy’s focus on creativity seems very valuable in itself, a slightly different emphasis than simply “learning by doing”, which could involve making PPE in prison. How to ensure a mixture of creativity and conceptual thinking sounds like an interesting challenge. 

My three draft assignments are:

An infographic on an SDG target

An SDG-themed revision of my American Government What’s Your Problem Letter

A revised version of the final assignment for my linked POL-SOC class

I think I’m most happy with the infographic assignment, although that could well be because it’s brand new, and I haven’t seen its roadtest with actual students yet! I’ll work on revising them throughout the summer, before posting them to CUNY OER.

I am thankful to Jason for sharing his work with me. In our respective responses to one another’s assignments, we both recognized that there are some interesting similarities between our assignments which I found to be very instructive. 

In terms of assessment, I am intrigued by the fact that we are approaching rubrics from a similar place. Jason utilizes three different rubrics, one developed by the instructor, one by the class, and one for self-grading. I am examining ways that I can implement a similar model into my assignments. I appreciate Jason’s use of a self-grading component, which feels very “open.” I have used this in the past and frankly, in the transition to online learning, I neglected to use it. I find it quite useful in my performance classes, especially in scene work, so I look forward to bringing it back in the fall. Thanks to Jason for reminding me of this assessment tool.

Jason’s assignments are three assignments that are scaffolded in that one assignment leads to the next. They are very well conceived. The pedagogical approach is impressive, as is the academic rigor. I have never used Zines before and I feel under-qualified to use them in the classroom.  I find them not only interesting, but I also think they would translate well into the theatre classroom. Further, Jason’s use of Zines in his assignments has made me re-examine my own assignments in terms of their “openness.” While components like Wikipedia and found texts are open (which are components of my assignments), there are other components that feel more “closed” (published play scripts) than I would like. The openness in the pedagogical design of Jason’s work has shed light on that for me. Lastly, one of Jason’s assignments has a presentation component which reminded me of a presentation tool that I recently used for one of my online classes – VoiceThread. It allows students to upload recorded presentations and then the entire class and instructor can view them and comment on them within VoiceThread. It’s integrated in CUNY Academic Commons (which is how I utilized it) but apparently, CUNY just bought a subscription to integrate it into Blackboard. I just thought I would bring it up in the event it was useful for these assignments, or any of the assignments within our cohort.

There was some discussion about whether or not these scaffolded assignments are in fact three distinct assignments or just one very detailed, staged assignment. In reading the assignment guidelines, I think they feel like distinct assignments. Granted, yes, they do scaffold into one culminating assignment but each stage of the assignment, to me, has its own respective learning outcomes which, in my opinion, identifies it as a distinct assignment. Further, I feel that while the overarching goal is for each assignment to lead into the next, it seems that you could stop at the first or second assignment and they would still be worthy assessments. Curious how others feel about this in relationship to scaffolded assignments.

I look forward to revisiting my own assignments with this new perspective and additional pedagogical questions.

by Jason M. Leggett

Ryan identifies three clear learning outcomes for the assignments for fall 2020: 

Identify the various roles, positions, duties and considerations associated with modern theatrical practice and professional theatrical production.

Discuss and define the unique characteristics of the theatrical artform, as well as its place within American society and World Cultures.

Define and recognize major periods of theatrical history and their significance.

What I like about these outcomes is that there is a coherent whole with identifiable pieces. Theatrical history is on one end and the elements of structural history: roles, positions, duties, considerations, and characteristics can be broken down to help students see a progression and the social construction of history. 

One assignment provides exploration of global themes showing students a world beyond Broadway – Hollywood; The second allows for a personal choice and exploration of identity as a construct. The culminating assignment best represents the ideals we have discussed this semester about open pedagogy: 

In groups, students will research an under-explored figure from theatre history, review the corresponding Wikipedia entries and offer edits/additions to those entries.

Students will be placed into groups of 3-4 students.From a list provided by the professor, students will select a woman or non-binary theatre artist from theatre history whose Wikipedia entry is underwritten. Through online and textual research, students will identify one major theatrical contribution that has been omitted from the relevant Wikipedia entries and offer a new written passage for possible inclusion. Students will present the passage to class, along with appropriate secondary source citations, and determine if/how the passage should be added to the Wikipedia page for inclusion.

In reflection, we both examine a relationship between constructed identities and text as a representation of knowledge. I really like the kinesthetic elements in Ryan’s pieces and will try to introduce some of these into my own practice. The final trans-identity assignment provides opportunities for both rich personal exploration and dialogue with larger groups. We both utilze elements of actor network theory but in Ryan’s class students are asked to draft a script; I am intrigued by the possibilities. Ryan incorporates the theme of justice and global/diversity throughout the semester so I anticipate a wide range of narratives that reflect the positionality of our students. I appreciate that Ryan provides choice while also indicating what content is to be covered. I think this is a good balance between providing professional guidance (epistemology) and providing culturally relevant learning opportunities (pedagogy).

As a member college of AAC&U, Kingsborough has committed to diversity and global learning. As Senior Researcher Caryn Musil identiifies, “educating students for a global future is no longer elective.” The Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) has identified global knowledge, ethical commitments to individual and social responsibility, and intercultural skills as major components of a twenty-first-century liberal education. Recognizing that their graduates will work and live in an interdependent, highly diverse, fast-changing, and volatile world, an increasing number of colleges and universities are including global learning goals in their mission statements (Meacham and Gaff 2006). I think we have made progress this semester in thinking through how to reduce the gap between global learning as an ideal and the practice of it within the educational setting.