Democratizing Higher Education Learning: A Case Study of Networked Classroom Research

Abstract

The Theory of On-line Democratized Learning explains the interactions between and among

Critical Thinking, Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Competencies,

Collaboration, and Camaraderie, also includes the concept of Empowerment, the space

from where the capacity to engage in democratic action emerges. This case study shares

the experience of participants in #seaccr, Southeast Alaska Collaborative Classroom

Research, an online open course that is the result of the combination of two graduate

courses. Participants became the providers, as well as the consumers, of knowledge.

Participants shared learning and expertise and acted as consultants and mentors to each

other thereby blurring the roles of teacher and learner. We analyzed participants’ blogs,

tweets, and other interactions to find examples Critical Thinking, Information and

Communications Technology (ICT) Competencies, Collaboration, and Camaraderie. As

analysis continued, we realized that Empowerment continued to emerge intersected with

other codes. As a result, a new theory of democratized on-line learning is developed.

Keywords: Democratized, Networked, Empowerment, Classroom Research

Introduction

This case study outlines the experience of participants in #seaccr, Southeast Alaska

Collaborative Classroom Research: a MOOC based on the bringing together of two existing

courses, Impact of Technology on Student Learning and Classroom Research. Both are

graduate level courses. To accomplish #seaccr we needed a limited number of powerful

and open tools that could assist students in building a collective. Blogs and tweeting

became the obvious choices. Using these two tools, students collaborated about processes

and products and made revisions based on peer, rather than instructor, feedback.

Classroom Research is required for our teacher candidates to complete their Masters of

Arts in Teaching (M.A.T.) degree or for in-service teachers completing an advanced

program of study in Math, Special Education, or Educational Technology. The Impact of

Technology on Student Learning is required for in-service teachers or training

professionals completing the Master of Education in Educational Technology and may be

taken as an elective in the Career and Technical Education Program. All our students are e-

learners, located in various locations throughout Alaska and beyond.

We base the analysis of this case study on Dewey’s (1916) ideas about

democracy and education, the skills and dispositions for democratic participation set out by

Cohen (2006), and a framework for 21st century skills (Vooght & Roblin, 2012).

Review of the Literature

Democracy and education

According to Dewey (1916), education should have both a purpose for the individual

student as well as a societal purpose. Therefore, educators are responsible for providing

students with personally relevant learning opportunities that are immediately valuable and

which ultimately enable students to contribute to society. Dewey would argue that to

accomplish these goals, students ought to have same power and responsibility for their

learning as their educators. In addition, a democratic experience with learning in schools

provides the background needed for later effective participation in a democratic society.

For Dewey, students should practice communication, collaboration, and critical reflection in

order to develop effective citizenship skills for a democracy (Dewey, 1916).

Cohen (2006) argues the goals of education need to be reframed to prioritize not

only academic learning, but also social, emotional, and ethical competencies. Cohen

suggests that social-emotional skills, knowledge, and dispositions provide the foundation

for participation in a democracy and improved quality of life. These social-emotional skills,

knowledge, and dispositions for democratic participation are:

The ability to listen to ourselves and others and the responsibility, or the inclination,

to respond to others in appropriate ways.

The ability to be critical and reflective and the appreciation of our existence as social

creatures that need others to survive and thrive.

The ability to be flexible problem-solvers and decision makers, including the ability

to resolve conflict in creative, nonviolent ways and an appreciation of and inclination

toward involvement with social justice.

Communicative abilities, e.g., being able to participate in discussions and argue

thoughtfully and the inclination to serve others and participate in acts of good will

Collaborative capacities, e.g., learning to compromise and work together toward a

common goal.

21st century skills

Vooght & Roblin (2012) conducted a meta-analysis of 21st century skills

frameworks and found that common components of these frameworks are communication,

collaboration, Information and Communications Technology (ICT) related competences,

and social and/or cultural awareness. Also included on most lists are creativity, critical

thinking and problem-solving, as well as generating relevant high quality products (Vooght

& Roblin, 2012). Teachers must master these 21st century skills if they are expected to

prepare their students for success in the knowledge economy. Participation in a knowledge

economy requires new skills and an advanced level of autonomy and decision-making

capability in order to quickly adapt to changing knowledge resulting from technological

advances and rapid obsolescence (Powell & Snellman, 2004). These societal and economic

factors challenge teacher preparation programs to recreate themselves and better prepare

teachers to meet the needs of the 21st Century (Wideen, 2013). Open learning

environments are recognized as one representation of learning structures appropriate to

the knowledge economy (Peters, 2010).

Method

Participants

Our students are in-service and pre-service teachers as well as educational

technology professionals. In total, 31 students participated in the course. All the

participants provided consent for use of their data (blogs, tweets, email etc.). The twenty-

four students in the Classroom Research course consisted of six Elementary Master of Arts

in Teaching (M.A.T.) students, one M.Ed. Reading student, six M.Ed. Math students, and six

M.Ed. Technology students. The seven students in the Impact of Technology on Student

Learning course consisted of two Career and Technical Educator professionals taking the

course as an elective, and five M.Ed. Technology students. While participants in the

Educational Technology course were seasoned in-service teachers or training professionals,

many in the M.A.T. course only recently earned their teacher certification and completed

this course during their first year of teaching. Most of these students had never engaged in

a formalized research process. In general, M.A.T. students are in a transitional space in

which they evolve from teacher candidate to novice teacher. In our experience, being in

this space creates a state of disequilibrium (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958) for M.A.T. students on

both a professional and academic level. By contrast, most of the Educational Technology

students have completed at least one Action Research project and are entering a more

sophisticated level of research as district, university, or not for profit technology leaders.

Procedure

We had several goals as we designed the open online course. Because of the vast

distances between our students and us, the need for authentic engagement was vital.

According to Moore (1991) in distance learning, as physical distance increases, the need for

intentional strategies to create intentional structure for instructional dialogue also

increases: this is termed transactional distance. We wished to design a community that

proliferated to the extent that transactional distance was reduced or eliminated through

multiple paths to engagement and feedback. Further, we sought to encourage a more

authentic conversation that could perhaps endure beyond the bounded course

environment. We also wanted teachers think like scholars, using data and research to make

decisions, rather than relying only on experience and possibly spurious information.

To attempt to bridge the transactional distance we had experienced in siloed e-

learning experiences, and to try to create a learning environment that would endure

beyond the start and end dates of the course, we created a structure for a professional

learning network that invited students to communicate, collaborate, think critically, and

apply ICT skills, using popular social media tools. Rather than meeting a requirement in a

“walled garden” (e.g. “you have to respond to two discussion board posts”, or “go into this

working room and talk about methods for 30 minutes”) (England, 2010), dependency on

others and the need for peer support was built into the course design. Students would be

required to make choices about how, when, where and with whom they collaborated based

on their learning needs and interests.

There were risks involved in this design. We knew the students would find

themselves at the center of the learning space, responsible for their own learning and the

learning of others. From experience, we were aware this would be disconcerting to many

learners. Moreover, while the general process and expectations of the course were clearly

delineated, individual students would choose the way they engaged in the process (in terms

of choosing resources, level of interaction with the PLN, and technology tools.). We realized

this would put many students in a state of disequilibrium (Inhelder & Piaget, 1958) that

could be uncomfortable and challenging for them. Finally, students would be required to

develop and maintain a learning community on their own. We knew that technology would

be an obstacle for some students, therefore we attempted to keep the design quite

straightforward – mandating the use of blogs and of Twitter, but allowing all other tools in

an optional manner.

Another equally important goal was for students to develop a foundational

understanding of Classroom Research and the way that one creates, manages, and

completes one cycle of Action Research to benefit their practice. We provided source

documents and models to students to facilitate this understanding. In addition, we

encouraged students to share their own writing with each other. Finally, through the blogs,

students were required to locate supplemental resources and share with others to build the

foundational understanding of the practice, intents, and outcomes inherent within Action

Research.

We dubbed our open learning community #seaccr (Southeast Alaska Classroom

Research). We created the learning space in the open in the hope that students would

encounter a diversity of ideas and perspectives beyond those of the enrollees of the class.

We hoped that all students would find entry points for connection with others because of

the number of potential interactions that presented themselves. We hoped to continue our

own development as facilitators and contributors in an online environment different from

what either of us had experienced in the past.

Week 1

We kicked off the class with a synchronous WebEx videoconference. During the first

week of the class, we took pains to insure that students gained the basic skills necessary for

success in the class. We scheduled a WebEx meeting during which we went over the

syllabus for the class and demonstrated how to use WordPress to set up a blog, and Twitter

to communicate synchronously. During the WordPress demonstration, many students set

up their blogs, and learned to make a posting that directly posted to Twitter. They made

their first blog postings and asked questions. During the Twitter session, we demonstrated

the use of TweetDeck for organizing and following Twitter feeds, and shared some hints for

reducing spam and for further organization. The group discussed the purpose of Twitter in

the course, and practiced tweeting while the demonstration was going on. The mood of the

group ranged from slight panic, to cautiously optimistic when the session ended. We invited

students to tweet and practice prior to the scheduled twitter session. We designated Week

1’s Twitter Topic “Play Week”, and invited students to a Twitter “play date” in which we

asked students about our favorite television shows, favorite web sites, recipes, and hobbies.

We also invited students to ask any questions they wished to have answered.

Week 2

In Week 2, we provided students with additional guided reflection questions,

watched for misunderstandings, and encouraged interaction. Students worked on

reviewing the literature for their topics and began compiling their annotated

bibliographies.

Week 3

Starting in Week 3 we emphasized the importance of students answering questions

asked by other students on Twitter, and we tried to move to the background a bit. The

more experienced Twitter users were helpful to the novices in understanding the purpose

of Twitter, and in supporting their experience. Students reported that they enjoyed this

experience a great deal, and they found this important to acclimating to the course. While

in the beginning, we facilitated these sessions, later students facilitated them as our Twitter

Hosts. We found that the student facilitated Twitter sessions were highly interactive - much

more than those facilitated by the instructors did. In Week three students also shared their

literature review with each other and with us for feedback. During this week students

continued work on their annotated bibliography and began designing their research

methodology.

Week 4

In Week 4, students submitted annotated bibliographies to us for feedback and we

returned them to students for revisions. We held an optional (but strongly encouraged)

synchronous WebEx videoconference to discuss and answer questions about students’

research proposals due the next week. We had our second student hosted Twitter session.

Week 5

Students posted their research proposal for feedback from their peers and us in

Week 5. Students continued to host the Twitter this week.

Week 6

This was a busy week with many questions about research design and data

collection and analysis. Students engaged in their research as they collected and analyzed

their data. We had a great student hosted Twitter session where we had much creative

problem solving around coming up with titles for each other’s’ projects.

Week 7

Week Seven wrapped up the course. We held a focus group through WebEx and

students shared their project presentations.

Data sources

Data sources include student created blogs, student and faculty tweets, audio data

from focus groups, archives of WebEx video conferences, and course related emails. We

discussed our impressions and interpretations as researcher participants during the course,

after the course ended, and during the analysis of participant data. These discussions form

the basis of reflexivity. Reflexivity is an awareness of the researcher's contribution to the

construction of meanings throughout the research process and an acknowledgment of the

impossibility of remaining 'outside of' one's subject matter while conducting research

(Patton, 2001).

The bulk of participant data comes from student blogs and responses to the blogs of

others. We harvested the blogs of all the students participating in the class, and comments

made to those blogs for each of the seven weeks of blogs required for the course. These

groups of blog postings organized week by week became our primary documents for

analysis. We collected participant tweets from our twice-weekly Twitter sessions and

organized them by participant and week. At the end of the course, we invited students to

participate in a focus group. We asked the following questions:

What do you think collaboration looks like in a professional learning network?

How easy is it to communicate with others as you engage in this course structure?

Are your colleagues accessible? Are they responsive?

Was this class easy or hard? Why or why not?

What does it look like to fail or to succeed in this class?

We also invited students to ask any questions they wished to have answered.

Some students choose to give unsolicited feedback to us about the course and their

experience in emails and tweets. We use these quotes for their value as exemplar

statements to support other data. These groups of blog postings, tweets, and other input

organized week by week became our primary documents for analysis.

Analysis

ATLAS.ti is a workbench for the qualitative analysis of data. It offers a variety of

tools for accomplishing the tasks associated with any systematic approach to qualitative

data. Through use of the ATLAS.ti tool, we were able to code data, view different

possibilities for relationships among codes, and examine options for meaning making

through several semantic lenses. To prepare data for ATLAS.ti analysis, we developed

codes we would use to organize the blog quotes. From a methodological standpoint, using

ATLASti codes serve a variety of purposes. Codes capture meaning in the data and are

classification devices at different levels of abstraction to create sets of related information

units for the purpose of comparison. We analyzed data based on criteria for democratic

learning.

After an initial review of Dewey’s (1916), Cohen’s (2006), and Vooght & Roblin’s

(2012) criteria, we grouped similar ideas from their criteria into categories. Then we

established category integrity through inter-rater agreement. We combined the skills laid

out by Dewey (1916), Cohen (2006), and Vooght & Roblin (2012), and created our

categories for content analysis coding. The codes we developed as criteria for content

analysis of quotes are: Collaboration, Critical Thinking, ICT Competencies, and Camaraderie.

We measured Communication by the presence of appropriate, effective student interactions

on Blogs and Twitter. Data for ICT Competency is also represented by student’s successful

use of technology and tools. We did not collect quotes for the code High Quality Products

represented by students’ Classroom Research Projects. While we did not initially code for

Empowerment, when we discovered a large number of quotes that fit into this category, we

re-ran the analysis including this code. Figure 1 represents the skills for democratic

learning from Dewey’s (1916), Cohen’s (2006), and Vooght & Roblin’s (2012) criteria and

how our criteria relates to theirs.

Figure 1

Criteria Categories for On-line Democratic Learning

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

Co

llab

ora

tio

n

Cri

tica

l R

efle

ctio

n

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

C

om

mu

nic

atio

n

Rel

evan

t, h

igh

q

ual

ity

pro

du

cts

Co

llab

ora

tio

n

Cri

tica

l th

ink

ing

Pro

ble

m-

solv

ing,

Cre

ativ

ity

IC

T C

om

pet

ence

s

Serv

e; A

pp

reci

ate

nee

d t

o s

urv

ive

and

th

riv

e

Fle

xib

le, c

riti

cal,

& r

efle

ctiv

e p

rob

lem

so

lver

s &

dec

isio

n m

aker

s

Co

llab

ora

te, &

Res

olv

e co

nfl

ict

Lis

ten

, Res

po

nd

, & P

arti

cip

ate

Social-cultural

Awareness Social-cultural

Awareness So

cio

-cu

ltu

ral

Aw

aren

ess

Dew

ey, 1

91

6

Vo

ogh

t &

Ro

bli

n,

20

12

Co

hen

, 20

06

Soci

al J

ust

ice

Skills for Democratic Learning

Co

llab

ora

tio

n

Cam

arad

erie

Em

po

wer

men

t

ICT

Co

mp

eten

cies

Hig

h q

ual

ity

pro

du

cts

Co

mm

un

icat

ion

Cri

tica

l Th

ink

ing

Dem

ocr

atiz

ed

On

-lin

e L

earn

ing

Codes

Collaboration

Quotes coded as Collaboration are comprised of interactions that indicated students

were working with each other to find an answer, solve a problem, complete a task, or meet

a shared goal. According to Thomas & Brown (2011), a unique opportunity for networked

learning occurs in the “collective”, an organic community to which we choose to belong in

order to capitalize on, “people skills and talent that produces a result greater than the sum

of its parts” (The Emergence of the Collective, para. 4). Participation in the collective is vital

in order for belonging to be established. Those who wish to be a part of a collective are

members only in proportion to their participation in the organic community. There are

several ways one might establish belonging as a part of a collective. Blogs create a unique

opportunity to begin to contribute and participate in the collective, and studies

demonstrate that within classes blogging can lead to feelings of belonging and participation

(Garcia et al., 2013; Reeves & Gomm, 2012). In addition, learning communities based in

Twitter have been recognized as organic, naturally satisfying and authentic in terms of

professional development potential (Ross, 2013). Educators noted that back channeling

during Twitter could be highly effective for professional development (Toledo & Peters,

2013). Even younger students and their teachers report tweeting as effective for gaining

answers to questions, and receiving academic support (Cohen & Duchan, 2012).

Critical Thinking

Ennis (1991) provides us perhaps the best-known definition of critical thinking,

‘reasonable reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do’ (pp. 1–2).

We define Critical Thinking as disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-

minded, and informed by evidence. When the concept of critical thinking functions in

critical pedagogy, it includes the ability to recognize and overcome social injustice

(McLaren, 1994). Therefore, we include evidence of socio-cultural /multicultural

awareness or examples of a social justice perspective as Critical Thinking. We also include

independent problem solving and examples of creativity in this code. tem Dam & Volman

(2004) describe characteristics of instruction that facilitate critical thinking, the

development of students’ epistemological beliefs, active learning, a problem-based

curriculum, and purposeful interaction between students.

Camaraderie

Professional learning communities are not about building camaraderie for

camaraderie’s sake. In this case, camaraderie evolved from collaboration on the processes

and products of the course and enhanced the empowerment individuals reported. We see

evidence of professional (educators), situational (the course) and intellectual (research

focused) camaraderie. Participants in #seaccr worked as a PLN engaging in a cycle of

questioning and product sharing that promoted all these facets of camaraderie. These

interactions, conducted with a spirit of support, loyalty, and friendship, we believe,

contributed to higher quality products. Quotes that demonstrated a spirit of support,

loyalty, and friendship we coded as Camaraderie.

Communication

Quotes coded as Communication include one-way and two-way communications

that directly relate to the processes or products required for the course that are

appropriate, effective student interactions on Blogs and Twitter. Communication might

include any of the other code sets.

Results

Grounded Theory Method

The systematic discovery of theory through the analysis of data led us to develop a

theory of democratized on-line learning. We collected student tweets and blogs,

categorized these quotes conceptually, and created codes for analysis. The resulting

analysis required an explanation for the appearance of Empowerment and what part this

phenomenon played in the #seaccr experience. Ideas about empowerment were not

present in other models and its prominence required and explanation. Figure 2 represents

the #seaccr experience based on the analysis of codes in ATLAS.ti.

Figure 2

The #seaccr Experience Based on the Analysis of Codes in ATLASti

At the center of the #seaccr experience is Critical Thinking. Communication has a

direct effect on Critical Thinking. This makes sense because tweeting, blogging, responding

to blogs, submitting work to a portfolio system, joining Web-Ex sessions, and designing and

writing an APA style research project all required Critical Thinking by students. Also

contributing to Critical Thinking are ICT Competencies and Collaboration. Collaboration is

part of a larger, iterative process where Collaboration is a cause of both Camaraderie and

Empowerment which are associated with each other. The power of this iterative process

feeds back into Critical Thinking and with the ICT Competencies and Communication,

contributes to the High Quality Products we see in this case.

Figure 3 shows the number of codes found across all seven weeks of participant

blogging.

Figure 3

Number of Codes Found Across All Seven Weeks of Participant Blogging

Week

1

Week

2

Week

3

Week

4

Week

5

Week

6

Week

7

Totals:

Collaboration 47 84 99 53 71 61 78 493

Camaraderie 22 18 32 20 31 25 26 174

Critical Thinking 19 20 28 30 45 35 40 217

Empowerment 30 18 12 8 17 11 13 109

Totals: 118 140 171 111 164 132 157 993

Quotes coded Collaboration occurred 493 times, quotes coded Camaraderie

occurred 174 times, Critical Thinking 217 times, and quotes coded Empowerment 109

times. The chart below is a representation of the course experience based on the

occurrences quotes for each code. Quotes for Collaboration peak in Week 3 as students

completed their literature reviews, then taper off as they engaged in data collection and

analysis. Camaraderie ebbs and flows closely following Empowerment. Critical Thinking

peaks in Week 5 as students presented their research proposals to the PLN for feedback.

Quotes for Empowerment peak in Week 1 and are likely because of ‘Play Week’ and

students developing efficacy around Twitter, blogs, and LiveText.

Learning processes, which we capture as quotes and in codes, do not occur in

isolation. When developing our model of Democratized On-line Learning, we also wanted

to examine the co-occurrence of codes (Figure 4) and quotes to better capture the

integrated learning processes.

Figure 4

Code Co-occurrences

Collaboration Camaraderie Communication Critical Thinking

Empowerment

Collaboration 40 250 47 26

Camaraderie 59 7 12

Communication 115 44

Critical Thinking 7

Empowerment

Communication and Collaboration are strongly associated, and this makes sense.

The act of collaborating also requires the act of communication. Also strongly associated

are Communication and Critical Thinking. In the context on an on-line, networked course,

this is essential and we are pleased to see it played out in the data. Next, in terms of

strength of association are Communication and Camaraderie, and an association between

Critical Thinking and Collaboration. Then we see the interplay of Collaboration and

Camaraderie and Communication and Empowerment. Finally, we see the association

between Collaboration and Empowerment and Critical Thinking and Camaraderie.

Figure 5 visualizes the ebb and flow of codes week to week and the association of

codes to each other.

Figure 5

Code Occurrences in Student Blogs by Week

Once again, you see the learning processes working together and the strength of

those interactions. This chart also presents a visual of how learning processes and the

interactions of those processes changes over time and in relation to the focus of the course

that week. It was striking to note the dip in all coded comments in Week 4. While

expectations were the same from this week to all others, apparently some difference

occurred. This was the week that students submitted Annotated Bibliographies to us, and

we provided feedback. With the exception of the final project, this was the only project that

was assessed solely by the instructors of the course. The significant dip in occurrence of all

codes this week seems to indicate the way that students shifted from a student-centered

environment back into a teacher-centered environment. Then, in Week 5, activity resumed

and increased as students reviewed each other’s proposals and provided feedback.

Collaboration, Critical Thinking, Camaraderie

To provide some depth of understanding of the meaning behind our codes, we

present some exemplar quotes for codes Collaboration, Critical Thinking, and Camaraderie

in Table 1.

Table 1

Quotes Exemplifying Codes

Code Exemplar Quotes

Collaboration:

“Thank you for the time to review my paper.

I love the feedback.”

“In the end, when the paper is complete it

will represent more than just a completed

action research paper it will also represent

the importance of collaboration.”

“Within the process, we collect data and

think about what patterns emerge. We

confer with those in our PLN to see if our

thinking makes sense.”

“Most importantly, I gained a partner to help

me with this project. She was as excited as I

am… and has sights on making this project

useful enough to warrant presenting at

ASTE this winter!”

Critical Thinking:

“After reading everybody’s comments I

realized I had some tweaking to do on my

question. (name redacted) pointed out that

my verbage of ‘dig deeper’ was too vague

and open-ended and that it needed

something a little more Bloom’s-esque”.

“What I have begun thinking about is the

amount of literacy I am actually using in

classroom, and my answer is, “Not enough”.

I need to be reading and writing more

frequently with my students than I currently

am.”

“I am thinking, how do we maintain

excellence as we innovate?”

“My thoughts have changed a lot since I took

the time to read and try to understand the

literacy standards.”

Camaraderie:

“It was really nice to introduce ourselves

and find out just how far apart, yet close

together we all are.”

“Sometimes just having another person say,

‘yeah, that sounds like a great idea! run with

it!’ is all we need.”

“We are all educators in some way and

connected by our willingness to teach our

“I felt quite a bit of camaraderie from my

peers as we fumble at the beginning of this

class together.”

students.”

ICT Competencies

While some students learned to use a wide variety of ICT prior to #seaccr, as they

developed PLNs outside of the program. Only a few students had used these tools for

graduate level coursework. Other students, depending on when they had taken their

foundational courses and in which program they studied, had not learned to tweet, blog or

make a screencast prior to their #seaccr experience. They learned these skills for the first

time in the context of Classroom Research.

Students gained new ICT competencies such as the ability to manage multiple logins

and communication paths. They learned to manage their online identities, to curate

information for use by others, and to influence the learning of others through their PLN

strategically. Finally, students demonstrated dispositions related to collegiality and

support for their expanding network, and social awareness of their responsibility to assist

their colleagues as they navigated the learning experience. Comments from students

illustrate their learning: “I think the Twitter sessions are good, I do find it a fun way to

communicate, collaborate and learn.” and “After six weeks of Tweeting and blogging, I’m

converted.” Many students reported that Twitter sessions, while offered as optional, were

essential for their learning exemplified by these comments: “I must repeat what I wrote last

week! I know the Twitter sessions say, ‘Optional’ but they are the bulk of my learning in

this class.” and “Interesting to hear about the Twitter sessions - I agree as well they're

where a lot of new learning happens for me and also the interaction gives me a lot of

impetus to ‘do more’. These responses further support the necessity for development of

ICT Competencies as part of the experience and the importance of these competencies for

empowerment, the development of content knowledge, and ultimately the necessity of this

element in the Democratic On-line Learning Model. We also noted that competitiveness

arose as students gave feedback to others. Much of this occurred because of participation in

the Twitter sessions. Some students set high expectations for themselves, and these

expectations became public; other students then challenged themselves to meet or exceed

their colleagues’ performance. We also noted that as students blogged their work and

thoughts in this very public way, some students did more self-assessment and reflection,

and demonstrated more motivation than was evidenced in postings for the more closed

environment of the discussion board.

High Quality Products

A High Quality Product in this case was a Classroom Research project that met the

criteria for the ‘Exceeds’ elements: “The final paper is complete and is in APA format. The

paper is relevant and insightful. The research supports the improvement of professional

teaching practice and can be applied to other teaching and learning situations”, from the

rubric provided students for this course. Student products focused on improving their

professional practice and enhancing learning among their students. Projects included

topics such as how to integrate technology as a differentiation tool; implementing the new

core literacy standards with Alaska Native students; classroom environments for ELL

students; and multi-level math instruction in multi-grade classrooms. These products

demonstrated that students examined and analyzed problems with a critical eye, then

addressed them in relevant and creative ways. Moreover, student products were of a high

quality: much higher than in previous sections of the course that we presented through our

university’s content management system. We believe this occurred because students had to

make an intentional effort to engage with the PLN: there was no lecture and no text to rely

on.

We believe student performance was enhanced because students had to make an

intentional effort to engage with the PLN: there was no lecture and no text to rely on.

Importantly, the professional learning network in this case was authentic. Students made

choices about how, when, where and with whom they collaborated based on their learning

needs and interests.

Empowerment

As we reviewed quotes, created codes, and re-read quotes for coding, we discovered

a particular set of quotes that did not quite fit into our established categories. These quotes

made special reference to a new skill the individual had learned, new knowledge they had

gained, or an idea that they could apply their new skills and learning. These quotes also

demonstrate the individual is in the process of increasing their efficacy and capacity to

make choices and take positive action.

A student shared, “Pretty exciting to enter the new world. Interacting with a host of

teachers and educators, my new PLN (rather than PLC) is proving to be eye opening. I am

excited to learn from and to share my knowledge with my PLN.” Others added, “I have

learned to be open to learn something new.” “This class pushed me to learn new things!”

and “Steep learning curve, but still climbing!” Also, “I found the entire process so

enlightening but the end result was even more eye opening. To see it all written out and

direct quotes to back it up. Wow, very cool class Anne!”

We also received feedback about feelings of empowerment beyond the parameters

of the course, “I’m also not as afraid of the social media tech as I once was, and though my

students may not use it now they will in the future” and “I am feeling more confident in my

ability to differentiate instruction”.

The data analysis also revealed a high number of shared quotes between

Camaraderie and Empowerment. We call this intersection of codes between camaraderie

and empowerment, ‘Cheerleading’. In an attempt to understand this relationship, and how

it manifested among participants, we selected quotes from the Twitter sessions that we

coded as both Camaraderie and Empowerment; examples of these are:

“Feeling very passionate about being a teacher tonight. Thanks everyone for a great

discussion.”

“Friends working together get things done!”

“When you need some motivation check out: http ://( redacted).”

“It seems like our projects are off to a great start!”

“That's awesome! Way to think outside the box.”

“I would just like to say I am really looking forward to some of the projects, as they

will be wonderful!”

Discussion

We accept the premise that teachers must master 21st century skills (Vooght &

Roblin, 2012) if they are expected in turn to prepare their students for success in a global

knowledge economy. Educators who completed the #seaccr experience have improved ICT

skills, developed a PLN, and improved their general knowledge about teaching and learning

through the classroom research process. We often think of community building and its

result, collaboration, as separate or parallel to academic learning. In this case, they two

were interwoven. Open learning environments like #seaccr, are recognized as one

representation of learning structures appropriate to the global knowledge economy

(Peters, 2010). These societal and economic factors challenge teacher preparation

programs to recreate themselves and better prepare teachers to meet the needs of the 21st

Century students (Wideen, 2013). However, these 21st century skills may not be enough.

Glaser (1985) notes that U.S. students lack higher-order thinking abilities even

though a democratic society requires people to think critically and Cohen (2006) argues the

goals of education need to balance academic learning with the competencies necessary for

democratic participation and good quality of life.

In today’s classroom, political and economic forces often drive teaching and learning.

Generally, teachers are not taught to recognize or combat these forces. The current climate

of inflexible curriculums and evaluations for students and teachers sometimes forces

teachers to neglect the types of school experiences that support the development of

democratic perspectives in their students. This will likely contradict teacher philosophies

about education; however, teachers may feel they have no choice but to comply.

Participation in a global knowledge economy requires new competencies, a high

level of autonomy and decision-making skill and the ability to adapt to changing rapidly

changing knowledge and technological advances (Powell & Snellman, 2004). Further, a

democratic experience with learning in schools (community, collaboration, and critical

reflection) provides the experiences needed for later effective participation in a democratic

society (Dewey, 1916). Dewey (1916) would argue that to accomplish these goals, students

ought to have same power and responsibility for their learning as their educators.

Educators are responsible, then, for providing students with relevant learning

opportunities that ultimately enable students to contribute to a democratic society.

Teachers in #seaccr became the providers, as well as consumers, of knowledge:

sharing learning and expertise, and blurring the roles of teacher and learner and as a result,

democratized the learning experience. Comments provided by the participants indicate

that when teachers learn in democratized environments they are better prepared to create

and facilitate democratized learning environments in their classrooms, helping their

students to gain the knowledge and skills to participate in a democracy.

It stands to reason that when a teacher becomes individually empowered around

their practice, they are likely to participate more directly in school based decision making

further democratizing these institutions as well. Empowerment of an individual or group

can result in a change in the distribution of power. Power structures in schools and other

educational institutions were not an explicit focus for us as facilitators or for the students in

the course. However, in the context of teaching, change in power structure has implications

for children, classrooms, schools, and the broader institution of education.

In the 1980’s, on the assumption that this increased decision-making power would

improve instruction and learning., teachers were “given” the authority to make decisions in

the classroom (Lichtenstein, et al., 1991 Similar efforts occurred during the same time

period, to imbue students with self-esteem, rather than provide them opportunities to

develop self-efficacy. These attempts at ‘empowering’ were mostly ineffective

(Lichtenstein, et al., 1991). Real empowerment must come from the individual and must

have a strong foundation in knowledge of their broader professional community,

knowledge of education policy, and knowledge of their subject area (Lichtenstein, et al.,

1991). The #seaccr experience provided the opportunity for participants to increase

knowledge in all these areas. Further, by including students in decisions about learning,

inquiry, and action, participants in #seaccr co-constructed and identified with the means

and messages of the classroom, leading to a feeling of empowerment (Cammarota & Fine,

2008).

As we examined our framework for Democratic Learning, we realized that

empowerment was a missing element. Our research indicates, however, that it is a very

important aspect of democratization. It is apparent that 21st century skills and the ability to

use, gain, and apply knowledge are essential in today’s world. However, if a teacher is not

empowered to use these skills and knowledge to effect change in their classrooms, 21st

century skills remain unused. Our, theory, On-line Democratized Learning, explains not

only the interactions between and among Critical Thinking, Information and

Communications Technology (ICT) Competencies, Collaboration, and Camaraderie, but also

includes the concept of Empowerment, the space from which the capacity to engage in

democratic action emerges.

References

Cammarota, J., & Fine, M. (2008). Revolutionizing Education: Youth Participatory Action

Research in Motion. New York, NY: Routledge.

Cohen, A., & Duchan, G. (2012). The usage characteristics of Twitter in the learning

process. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 8(1), 149-163.

Cohen, J. (2006). Social, emotional, ethical, and academic education: Creating a climate for

learning, participation in democracy, and well-being. Harvard Educational Review,

76 (2), 201-237.

ten Dam, G, & Volman, M. (2004). Critical thinking as a citizenship competence: Teaching

strategies. Learning and Instruction, 14. 359-379.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: The Free Press.

England, A. (2010). Open content: From walled gardens to collaborative learning. Incite,

31 (1/2), 10.

Ennis, C. (1991). Discrete thinking skills in two teachers’ physical education classes. The

Elementary Journal, 91, 473–486.

Garcia, E., Brown, M., & Elbeltagi, I. (2013). Learning within a connectivist educational

collective blog model: A case study of UK higher education. Electronic Journal of e-

Learning, 11(3).

Glaser, E. M. (1985). Critical thinking: educating for responsible citizenship in a democracy.

National Forum, 65, 24–27.

Inhelder, B, & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking: From childhood to

adolescence. (A. Parsons & S. Milgram, Trans.) New York: Basic Books.

Lichtenstein, G., McLaughlin, M., Knudsen, J. (1991). Teacher empowerment and

professional knowledge. Consortium for Policy Research in Education, CPRE Research

Report Series RR-020.

McAuley A., Stewart B., Siemens, G. & Cormier, D. (2010). The MOOC model for digital

practice .Retrieved from:

https://oerknowledgecloud.org/sites/oerknowledgecloud.org/files/MOOC_Final_0.

pdf on July 1, 2013.

McLaren, P. (1994). Foreword: critical thinking as a political project. In S. Walters (Ed.),

Re-thinking reason: New perspectives in critical thinking (pp. 9–15). Albany: State

University of New York Press.

Moore, M. G. (1993). 2 Theory of transactional distance. Theoretical principles of distance

education, 22

Patton, M.Q. (2001) Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage.

Peters, M. (2010). Three forms of the knowledge economy: Learning, creativity and

openness. British Journal of Educational Studies, 58 (1), 67-88.

Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy. Annual Review of Sociology,

199-220.

Reeves, T., & Gomm, P. (2012). Blogging all over the world: Can blogs enhance student

engagement by creating a community of practice around a course? Cutting-edge

Technologies in Higher Education, 6. 47-72.

Ross, C. R. (2013). The use of Twitter in the creation of Educational Professional Learning

Opportunities. (Doctoral dissertation). Sam Houston State University, Huntsville,

Texas.

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: Learning as network-creation. Retrieved from

http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/networks.htm on January 27, 2014.

Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from

http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm on January 27, 2014.

Thomas, D. & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for

a world of constant change. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Toledo, C., & Peters, S. (2013). Educators’ perceptions of uses, constraints, and successful

practices of back channeling. in education, 16(1)

Vooght, J. & Roblin, N.P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for

21st century competencies: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of

Curriculum Studies, 44 (3). 299-321.

Wilbur, G. & Scott, R. (2013). Inside out, Outside in: Power and culture in a learning

community. Multicultural Perspectives, 15(3). 158-164.

Wideen, M. F. (Ed.). (2013). Changing Times in Teacher Education: Restructuring Or

Reconceptualising? New York: Routledge.

Acknowledgements

This [type: one of academic, feature, opinion] article was accepted for publication in the International HETL

Review (IHR) after a double-blind peer review involving ……..independent members of the IHR Board of

Reviewers and ….revision cycles. Accepting editor:

Suggested citation:

Author, 1., Author, 2., & Author, 3. (year). Title use sentence case. International HETL Review, Volume 3, Article

X, URL

Copyright [year] ……

The author(s) assert their right to be named as the sole author(s) of this article and to be granted copyright

privileges related to the article without infringing on any third party’s rights including copyright. The

author(s) assign to HETL Portal and to educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive license to use this

article for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright

statement is reproduced. The author(s) also grant a non-exclusive license to HETL Portal to publish this

article in full on the World Wide Web (prime sites and mirrors) and in electronic and/or printed form within

the HETL Review. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the author(s).

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and as such do not necessarily represent the

position(s) of other professionals or any institution. By publishing this article, the author(s) affirms that any

original research involving human participants conducted by the author(s) and described in the article was

carried out in accordance with all relevant and appropriate ethical guidelines, policies and regulations

concerning human research subjects and that where applicable a formal ethical approval was obtained.